Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
M. Srinivasan – Appellant
Versus
The Corporation of Chennai, Represented by its Commissioner, Chennai & Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 3239 of 2012
Decided On : 24-07-2023
Educational Qualification - Promotion Dispute - G.O.Ms.No.107 P&AR (M) Department, G.O.Ms.No.116 P&AR (M) Department - Writ Petition dismissed
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to set aside the order of the first respondent and to direct the promotion to the post of Licence Inspector. The dispute arose due to the petitioner's educational qualification and his exclusion from the promotion panel.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's degree obtained through Open University did not meet the educational qualification criteria as per government orders and Supreme Court decisions. The court also noted that the petitioner had been promoted to other posts based on merits and seniority.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's exclusion from the promotion panel due to his educational qualification not meeting the prescribed criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on G.O.Ms.No.107 P&AR (M) Department, G.O.Ms.No.116 P&AR (M) Department, and Supreme Court decisions to uphold the exclusion of the petitioner from the promotion panel based on his educational qualification.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed by the court, and no costs were awarded to the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer:Writ Petition is filed, under the Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records ending with the order of 1st respondent made in proceedings Po.Thu.Na.Ka.No.E.5/24801, dated 30.12.2011 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to promote the petitioner to the post of License Inspector in the place above M.Santhanam, the 2nd respondent herein.)
1. Seeking the Writ Petition of Certiorarified Mandamus to set aside the order of the first respondent dated 13.12.2011 and to direct the first respondent to promote the petitioner to the post of Licence Inspector in the place above the second respondent-Santhanam.
2. The service matrix that are required for the determination is that the petitioner was first appointed as Office Assistant in Greater Chennai Corporation and joined duty on 01.03.1984. Subsequently, he was promoted as Junior Assistant with effect from 17.06.1995 and transferred to the post of Tax Collector with effect from 28.03.1996 the post of Junior Assistant and Tax Collector are with equal Grade Pay of Rs.2400/-
3. During the panel year 2009, his name was not included in the panel. Consequently, the second respondent was promoted and hence the Writ Petition.
4. The sum and substance of the submissions found in the counter of the contesting first respondent is that the petitioner had possessed B.A Degree obtained directly without passing 10th standard and +2 standard examination namely 10th - 12th - UG - PG). For the above reasons, petitioner name was not included in the panel for the year 2011 (crucial date 01.03.2011) to the post of Licence Inspector.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
6. From the records produced by the first respondent-Chennai Corporation is that as per the Bye-laws 2009 in force during the year 2011 the Graduate Tax Collectors with 12 years of service, Non- Graduate Assistants with 12 years of service, and Graduate Assistants are eligible for promotion to the post of Licence Inspector with scale of pay Rs.9300-34800+GP 4200 in the ratio of 1:1:3 respectively. The writ petitioner possessed B.A Degree obtained directly without passing 10th standard and +2 standard examination (i.e. 10th - 12th - UG - PG). Though the petitioner has completed eligible years of service in the post of Tax Collector and passed requisite departmental tests for promotion as Licence Inspector his degree could not be recognized for the above promotion.
7. From the typed set of papers, I find that the petitioner had completed Pre-Foundation Course through Open University without passing 10th standard and Government Order in force during the year 2010, the petitioner was not promoted to the post of Licence Inspector for the year 2010. Consequently, his name was not included in the panel for the year 2011 to the post of Licence Inspector.
8. In Government letter vide Letter No.33448/M/2010-4, Personnel & Administrative Reforms (PER.R) Department, dated 03.12.2010, the Government have issued following clarifications:
(i) A degree awarded by the Open Universities after passing Pre- Foundation Course and two year Foundation Course through Open University cannot be recognised a degree as per University Grants Commission norms for the purpose of employment/promotion in Public Services, since such Pre-Foundation Course and 2 year Foundation Course are not contemplated in the University Grants Commission Regulations.
(ii) Therefore, those who obtained a degree under Open University System after passing the Pre-Foundation Course and two year Foundation course without passing 10th standard and +2 examination, do not satisfy the conditions laid in G.O(Ms)No.107, P&AR (M) Department, dated:18.08.2009 which is in consonance with orders of Supreme Court of India. Even the Government have clarified that the degree obtained after passing
The central legal point established in the judgment is that educational qualifications prescribed by government orders and upheld by Supreme Court decisions are crucial for promotions in public servi....
The validity of promotions in light of Government Orders and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
An employee must possess the requisite qualifications at the time of publication of a promotion panel, and subsequent disqualification is grounds for exclusion.
The court held that educational qualifications for promotions in public services must strictly adhere to G.O.107, invalidating prior recognitions of foundational courses when petitioners failed to ch....
Promotion eligibility requires strict adherence to qualifications as per regulations; subsequent qualifications do not retroactively affect eligibility.
The completion of the course prior to the judgment in Annamalai University case made the petitioner eligible for the Special Officer post, and principles of promissory estoppel, legitimate expectatio....
Degrees obtained from Open University are invalid for public employments, as per the Government Order and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
