JUDGMENT Prashant Kumar Chorasiya is before this Court, assailing the validity of the order dated 31.1.2017 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ - A No.39109 of 2016 (Prashant Kumar Chourasiya vs. State of U.P. and Anr.), wherein the learned Single Judge has proceeded to turn down the request of petitioner's appointment for entertaining his candidature to be valid for offering appointment for the post of Assistant Accountant. The factual background of the case in brief is that pursuant to the advertisement in question the petitioner appellant applied for consideration of his candidature for the post of Assistant Accountant. The minimum qualification prescribed for Assistant Accountant was that the candidate must be a Graduate in Commerce and must possess Computer 'O' Level Diploma issued by the DOEACC now called NIELIT. The petitioner admittedly has to his credit Computer Diploma issued by DOEACC which is 'CHM-O Level' that is to say that Diploma in Computer Hardware Maintenance but not Diploma in Computer 'O' Level. The authorities concerned in their wisdom have stated that the petitioner was not fulfilling the requisite criteria for appointment to the post of Assistant Accountant. At this juncture, the petitioner has come to this Court with the grievance that his candidature in question should be accepted for the simple reason that he possesses Computer 'O' Level Diploma issued by the DOEACC and on the basis of fulfilment of criteria he could not be non-suited. Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, counsel for the petitioner has contended that the learned Single Judge posed totally wrong question, accordingly the answer arrived is also wrong, whereas once the requirement in the advertisement was that the candidature must be a Graduate in Commerce and must possess Computer 'O' Level Diploma issued by the DOEACC and the petitioner admittedly was having Diploma issued by DOEACC which was CHM-O Level that is Diploma in Computer Hardware Maintenance, then he could not be non-suited and therefore, inference drawn by the learned Single Judge is absolutely wrong. On the other hand, countering the said submission, Sri Ayank Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents contended that once the petitioner was not at all fulfilling the requisite eligibility criteria provided for and CHM-O Level Diploma issued by DOEACC was altogether different than Diploma in Computer 'O' Level issued by DOEACC was the requirement for offering appointment to the said post then in such a situation, this Court should not intervene in the matter and the view taken by the learned Single Judge be affirmed. We have proceeded to peruse the advertisement in question and the advertisement clearly reflects that the minimum eligibility criteria prescribed for offering appointment as Assistant Accountant was that the candidate must be a Graduate in Commerce and must possess Computer 'O' Level Diploma issued by the DOEACC now called NIELIT. The petitioner admittedly has not got to his credit Computer 'O' Level Diploma issued by the DOEACC but contrarily to he has got his credit CHM-O Level Diploma issued by DOEACC. Once there is material distinction in between Diploma in Computer 'O' Level issued by DOEACC and 'CHM-O Level Diploma' issued by DOEACC, then certainly in our considered opinion, the petitioner was not having the requisite eligibility criteria. Fixation of eligibility criteria is the domain of employer and Courts have no authority to go into the issue of equivalence. In view of this, once a conscious decision has already been taken by the authority concerned that the petitioner was not having the requisite eligibility criteria for offering appointment as Assistant Accountant, then in exercise of authority of judicial review we cannot intrench upon the field of eligibility by proceeding to enlarge the field of eligibility. In view of the above, the special appeal sans merit and it is accordingly, dismissed.