ORDER : Satyen Vaidya, J. All these writ petitions involve common question of law and facts, therefore, are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission (for short ‘SSC’) issued Advertisement No. 33-2/2017, (for short advertisement) dated 16.09.2017 inviting online applications from eligible candidates for the different category of posts including 205 posts of Female Health Worker (on contract basis) in the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Himachal Pradesh against Post Code 651. 3. Prescribed minimum educational and other qualifications for the post of Female Health Worker was as under: - i. Should be a Matric with Science/Higher Secondary Part-1 pass or its equivalent from a recognized Board/Institution. ii. Should possess one and half years training certificate as Female Health Worker from a recognized Institute. 4. In response to the Advertisement, many such candidates applied for the post of Female Health Worker, who did not possess requisite one & half year training certificate as Female Health Worker. They instead were equipped either with a decree in B.Sc. Nursing or Diploma in General Nursing and Midwifery (in short ‘GNM’). 5. It is worth noticing at this stage that prior to issuance of advertisement, there were a large number of precedents by way of judgments passed by this Court whereby the courses of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM were held to be higher in qualification than one & half year certificate course for the Female Health Worker. In CWP No. 7164 of 2012, titled as Kiran Gautam vs. State of H.P. and another, decided on 6th December, 2012, this Court while deciding the identical issue held as under:- “…..There is no dispute that the petitioner has passed nursing and midwife course which contains those requirements required for the selection to the post of Female Health Worker and she is in fact better qualified to hold that post…...” 6. Similarly, in CWP No. 4515 of 2014 titled as Chandni Jaswal vs. State of H.P and others decided on 30th June, 2014 while deciding the identical controversy it was held as under:- “……...It is not in dispute that the petitioner has obtained three years’ diploma in GNM (General Nursing and Midwifery). GNM is higher qualification. Similarly, in CWP No. 4515 of 2014 titled as Chandni Jaswal vs. State of H.P and others decided on 30th June, 2014 while deciding the identical controversy it was held as under:- “……...It is not in dispute that the petitioner has obtained three years’ diploma in GNM (General Nursing and Midwifery). GNM is higher qualification. Since the petitioner is in possession of higher qualification, she is fully eligible for the post of Female Health Worker…..” These judgments were followed in number of subsequent cases and a few of these are CWP No. 4628 of 2014 titled as Kiran Bala vs. State of H.P and another, decided on 03.07.2014, CWP No. 4630 of 2014 titled as Sunita Devi vs. State of H.P, decided on 03.07.2014, CWP No. 4440 of 2014 titled as Pooja Sharma vs. State of H.P. and another, decided on 31.07.2014 and CWP No. 4445 of 2014 titled as Apsara Kumari vs. State of H.P and another decided on 31.07.2014. 7. It is equally worth noticing that in all these judgments, neither the employer department nor the recruiting agency (SSC), had disputed the fact that the courses in B.Sc Nursing or GNM were higher in qualification than one & half year certificate course for Female Health Worker. These judgments attained finality and the petitioners therein were appointed as Female Health Workers. 8. Understandably, in this background, candidate with B.Sc. Nursing or GNM submitted their applications in response to advertisement. Some of them qualified written test and also participated in evaluation process/counselling. 9. Number of the candidates with B.Sc Nursing or GNM, by way of different Original Applications, approached the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal on the premise that they had qualified the written examination held by the SCC in pursuance to the advertisement and had also participated in the subsequent evaluation process but were apprehensive that their candidature might be rejected on the ground that they were not possessing one-&-half year certificate course for the Female Health Worker. These petitions came to be registered as O.A.(M)Nos. 800, 840, 801, 2834, 411, 384, 457, 422, 500, 495, 434, 1142, 1145, 627, 526 of 2019. All these Original Applications were allowed by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal vide separate orders by holding as under: - “5. These petitions came to be registered as O.A.(M)Nos. 800, 840, 801, 2834, 411, 384, 457, 422, 500, 495, 434, 1142, 1145, 627, 526 of 2019. All these Original Applications were allowed by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal vide separate orders by holding as under: - “5. However, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the respective cases of the applicants are squarely covered under the judgments dated 6th December, 2012, Annexure A-5, in CWP No. 7164 of 2012-G, Kiran Gautam Versus State of HP and another, and 30.06.2014, Annexure A-6, in CWP No. 4515 of 2014-A, Chandni Jaswal Versus State of H.P. & Anr., rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh, and order dated 21st November, 2016 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 6089 of 2016, Ruchi Rani Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. 6. The learned Additional Advocate General/Standing Counsel state on behalf of the respondents that subject to verification of records, if it is found that the applicants are similarly situate as the petitioners/applicant in the aforesaid Writ Petitions/OA, their cases shall be considered accordingly. 7. In view of the above, the original application is disposed of in terms of the aforementioned judgments/order with a direction to the respondents/competent authority(s) that subject to the above verification and on finding the applicants to be similarly situate as above, benefit of the said judgments/order, if the same have attained finality/implemented, shall also be extended to them as per law, within twenty days from today, after affording an opportunity of being heard to them.” It goes without saying that in all these orders, the Ld. Tribunal specifically recorded the stand of the State to the effect that the candidature of the applicants in OAs, would be considered in accordance with judicial precedents, noticed in the orders and in case it was found that the said applicants were similarly situated as the petitioners in cases noticed as the precedents, their cases would be considered accordingly. 10. In all the above noted judgments/orders either passed by this Court or the Ld. Tribunal, the State had categorically admitted that the qualification of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM was higher than the one & half year training certificate as Female Health Worker. In addition, it had also not refused to grant benefit of appointment to the post of Female Health Worker to those persons who had higher qualification of B.Sc. Tribunal, the State had categorically admitted that the qualification of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM was higher than the one & half year training certificate as Female Health Worker. In addition, it had also not refused to grant benefit of appointment to the post of Female Health Worker to those persons who had higher qualification of B.Sc. Nursing or GNM. The State, however, in its wisdom has subsequently assailed the above noted orders passed by the Ld. Tribunal by way of CWP Nos. 3238, 3466, 3467, 3468, 3905, 3908, 3911, 3913, 3914, 3915, 3921, 3922, 3927, 3932 and 3933 of 2019, which are presently being considered. 11. Another writ petition being CWP No. 3476 of 2021 titled Bimla Devi and another vs. State of H.P and others also came to be filed before this Court on 18.10.2021 on the same grounds as raised by the petitioners in Original Applications, noted above, before the Ld. Tribunal. 12. Some of the candidates possessing one & half year training certificate as Female Health Worker, who had applied in pursuance to the advertisement, also filed separate Original Application (M) No. 800 of 2018 before the Ld. Tribunal, on the premise that only those candidates who possess essential qualification as per Advertisement were eligible to be considered for the post of Female Health Worker and not the candidates having B.Sc. Nursing or GNM as qualification. As a matter of fact, challenge was laid to the action of SSC whereby the applications of the candidates only with B.Sc. Nursing or GNM were accepted. Accordingly, the prayers were made in the said Original Application. After closure of the Tribunal, the Original Application (M) No. 800 of 2018 stood transferred to this Court and has been registered as CWPOA No. 5598 of 2020. Another CWP No. 1423 of 2020 came to be filed before this Court titled Meena Kumari vs. State of H.P and others with almost same cause of action and reliefs as in CWPOA No. 5598 of 2020. An additional challenge in this petition was to a Notification dated 10.04.2020 issued by the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Himachal Pradesh seeking to employ persons against the different cadres including that of Female Health Worker on outsource basis. 13. An additional challenge in this petition was to a Notification dated 10.04.2020 issued by the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Himachal Pradesh seeking to employ persons against the different cadres including that of Female Health Worker on outsource basis. 13. Now the questions that commonly arise for determination in all above noted petitions are as under: - i) Whether the State, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is justified in changing its stand? (ii) Whether the candidates with B.Sc Nursing or GNM as qualification are entitled to be considered for the post of Female Health Worker in pursuance to the Advertisement ? 14. As noticed above, the State in the writ petitions filed against the orders of Ld. Tribunal has taken the stand that candidates possessing B.Sc. Nursing or GNM are eligible for the post of Staff Nurse. The categories of Female Health Worker and Staff Nurse are altogether different having separate Recruitment and Promotion Rules, seniority and different channels of promotion. Even the nature of duties performed by both the categories are different. The role of Multipurpose Health Worker (Female) is on the preventive side by providing preventive services at the grass root level of the Health Sub Centres, whereas the role of the Staff Nurses primarily is on treatment side having postings at the minimum level of Primary Health Centres. 15. State has also placed on record communication dated 04.9.2019 addressed by the Additional Chief Secretary Health, Government of Himachal Pradesh to the Director, Health Services conveying its decision to the effect that the judgment in Kiran Gautam’s case was not examined in consultation with the Law Department. Since the judgment in Kiran Gautam’s case had already been implemented along with some other identical cases, therefore, those could not be agitated at a belated stage. The persons who had already been granted appointment by implementing the judgment in Kiran Gautam’s case would have a strong case to agitate in the Court. However, the Department was of the opinion that other cases decided by Ld. Tribunal were liable to be agitated in view of law laid down in Jyoti K.K. vs. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 5 SCC 596 and in Civil Appeal Nos. 11853-11854 of 2018 titled as Zahoor Ahmad Rather and others etc. vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others etc. 16. Tribunal were liable to be agitated in view of law laid down in Jyoti K.K. vs. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 5 SCC 596 and in Civil Appeal Nos. 11853-11854 of 2018 titled as Zahoor Ahmad Rather and others etc. vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others etc. 16. It appears that the decision of the State, to change its stand was based upon its understanding of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jyoti K.K. vs. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 5 SCC 596 and in Civil Appeal Nos. 11853-11854 of 2018 titled as Zahoor Ahmad Rather and others etc. vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others etc. It is, however, not coming forth either from the contents of the petitions filed by the State or communication dated 04.09.2019 relied upon by it as to whether there was any conscious consideration on the applicability of the ratio of aforesaid judgments to the facts of the cases in hand? Such an exercise, in our view, does not appear to have taken place. We are constrained to observe so because there is no utterance from State on the binding effect of various judgments passed by this Court on the same subject and in the identical fact situations. The State also appears to have not considered that as a model employer, should it have adopted different stances for different set of people in the similar circumstances and also the legal implication of its earlier concessions/ admissions made before the court/ tribunal. 17. In Jyoti K.K. vs Kerala Public Service Commission (2015) 5 SCC 596, Rule10(a) (ii) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules 1956 was considered which reads as under:- “10. (a) (ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in these Rules or in the Special Rules, the qualifications recognized by executive orders or standing orders of Government as equivalent to a qualification specified for a post in the Special Rules and such of those higher qualifications which presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for the post shall also be sufficient for the post.” (emphasis supplied) 18. Their Lordships in paras 7 and 8 of the judgment passed in Jyoti K.K. were pleased to hold as under: - “7. Their Lordships in paras 7 and 8 of the judgment passed in Jyoti K.K. were pleased to hold as under: - “7. It is no doubt true, as stated by the High Court that when a qualification has been set out under the relevant Rules, the same cannot be in any manner whittled down and a different qualification cannot be adopted. The High Court is also justified in stating that the higher qualification must clearly indicate or presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for that post in order to attract that part of the Rule to the effect that such of those higher qualifications which presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualifications prescribed for the post shall also be sufficient for the post. If a person has acquired higher qualifications in the same Faculty, such qualifications can certainly be stated to presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualifications prescribed for the post. In this case it may not be necessary to seek far.” “8. Under the relevant Rules, for the post of Assistant Engineer, degree in Electrical Engineering of Kerala University or other equivalent qualification recognised or equivalent thereto has been prescribed. For a higher post when a direct recruitment has to be held, the qualification that has to be obtained, obviously gives an indication that such qualification is definitely higher qualification than what is prescribed for the lower post, namely, the post of Sub- Engineer. In that view of the matter the qualification of degree in Electrical Engineering presupposes the acquisition of the lower qualification of diploma in that subject prescribed for the post, shall be considered to be sufficient for that post.” 19. It was thus noted by their Lordships that there was no exclusion of candidates who possessed a higher qualification. 20. In Zahoor Ahmad’s case, Hon’ble Supreme Court after taking into consideration the facts of that case and also the judgments passed on the issue has held that the higher qualification in the said case did not include the lower qualification and as such, the persons with higher qualification were held not eligible for the post to which the specific requirement or lower qualification was there. 21. 21. In the facts of the present case, the State though has made submissions that nature of duties for the cadre of Nurses as well as Female Health Workers is different, but it has no-where been said that the nature of duties enjoined upon the Nurses does not include the nature of duties of Female Health Workers or in other words the curriculum of B.Sc Nursing or GNM did not include that of one & half years certificate course for the Female Health Worker. There is nothing on record to show that any special training is imparted to Female Health Workers. Even in Jyoti K.K, it was held that the higher qualification which pre-supposes the acquisition of lower qualification could not be excluded from consideration. Though the findings to this effect by the Hon’ble Supreme Court was based on a specific rule of Public Service Commission concerned, yet its application in the facts of present cases cannot be said to be untenable. We have also given our due consideration to the extracts of office manual prescribing duties of Female Health Worker as well as the Nurses and we have not been able to satisfy ourselves as to on what count, the State envisages that duties of Nurses will not include the duties of Female Health Workers. 22. Another important fact, which for the reasons best known to the State, has not been brought to our notice is that the Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Staff Nurse (Class-III Non-Gazetted) framed by the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Himachal Pradesh prescribes method of recruitment to the said post by different modes including 45% by direct recruitment, 45% by direct recruitment on batchwise basis and 10% by promotion. The feeder cadre eligible for the promotion is of Female Health Worker subject to possessing of educational qualification as prescribed for direct recruitment against Column No. 7(a)(i) of R&P rules for staff nurses with five years regular service or regular combined with continuous ad-hoc service rendered, if any, in the grade. Notably, Column No. 7(a) (I) of above noted rules prescribes essential qualification as 10+2 preferably with Science from the recognized Board of School Education. Notably, Column No. 7(a) (I) of above noted rules prescribes essential qualification as 10+2 preferably with Science from the recognized Board of School Education. Thus, a Female Health Worker having passed 10+2 examination from a recognized Board of School Education and having served as Female Health Worker for five years as regular employee or regular combined with continuous ad-hoc service is eligible to be promoted as Staff Nurse. Thus, it is clear that if a Female Health Worker without having undergone 1½ year certificate course and only with 10+2 and five years experience at her back, can be promoted as Staff Nurse, then how it lies in the mouth of the State to say that the nature of duties for both the cadres is different. 23. Almost an identical proposition has been considered and decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Puneet Sharma and others vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another etc. 2021(5) Scale 468 . In that case, the question was whether a degree in Electrical Engineering/Electrical and Electronics Engineering was technically higher qualification than a Diploma in that discipline and, whether the degree holder were eligible for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) under the relevant recruitment rules. By taking into consideration various judgments pronounced by the Apex Court on the issue or related thereto including in Jyoti K.K and Zahoor Ahmed’s cases, their Lordships have been pleased to hold that the degree holder though had higher qualification, their qualification included the lower prescribed qualification for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) and thus were entitled to participate and to be considered for appointment on the said post. In Puneet Sharma’s case also, the Junior Engineer (Electrical) was entitled to be promoted as Assistant Engineer as one of the feeder categories to the quota of promotional post. In para 32 of the said judgment, it has been held as under: - “32. The latter (2) conclusively establishes that what the rule making authority undoubtedly had in mind was that degree holders too could compete for the position of JEs as individuals holding equivalent or higher qualifications. If such interpretation were not given, there would be no meaning in the 5% sub-quota set apart for those who were degree holders before joining as Junior Engineers - in terms of the recruitment rules as existing.” 24. If such interpretation were not given, there would be no meaning in the 5% sub-quota set apart for those who were degree holders before joining as Junior Engineers - in terms of the recruitment rules as existing.” 24. On analysis, we find that the facts involved in the bunch of cases under consideration before this Court substantially resembles the facts in Puneet Sharma’s case, therefore, applying the ratio of said judgment, we have no hesitation to hold that the candidates with B.Sc Nursing or GNM have to succeed and are eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Female Health Worker advertised vide Advertisement No. 33-2/2017 dated 16.9.2017 by the SSC, in case they find place in merit list of candidates against their respective category. It is also held that State is not justified in changing its stand in the given facts of the case. Questions (i) and (ii) framed herein above are answered accordingly. 25. We deem it necessary to observe that the proposition “higher qualification will include lower qualification” cannot be applied universally as an indefeasible rule, it will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each individual case. 26. Accordingly, Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3238, 3466, 3467, 3468, 3905, 3908, 3911, 3913, 3914, 3915, 3921, 3922, 3927, 3932 and 3933 of 2019, 3476 of 2021 and CWPOA 5598 of 2020 are dismissed. In view of dismissal of these petitions and also the directions, we propose to issue hereinafter; prayers made in CWP No. 1423 of 2020 and CWP No. 3476 of 2021 have been rendered infructuous. 27. We accordingly direct the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission to declare the result of successful candidates in pursuance to Advertisement No. 33-2/2017 by considering the candidates, with B.Sc. Nursing or GNM, as eligible for the post of Female Health Worker in the Department of Health and Family Welfare in addition to the candidates having essential qualifications as per advertisement. We further direct the SSC to make recommendations to the Government of Himachal Pradesh for appointment to the post of Female Health Workers in respect of successful candidates within a period of four weeks from today. 28. All the above noted petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any, with no orders as to costs.