SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3813

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, M. JOTHIRAMAN, JJ.
D. Elangovan - Appellant
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal - Respondent
W.P. Nos. 28402 of 2019, 1737 of 2020, W.M.P. Nos. 28094, 28095 of 2019, 2022 of 2020
Decided On : 10-01-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Balan Haridas, V. Ajayakumar
For the Respondents: R. Syed Mustafa, B. Rabu Manohar, M. Mahamani, S. Pajani Radja, P.R. Gopinathan

The court establishes that diplomas issued by deemed universities through distance education are not valid for promotions unless recognized by relevant authorities, reaffirming the requirement for AICTE approval.

Headnote:(A) Central Administrative Tribunal Act - The validity of diplomas obtained through distance education is questioned in relation to promotion eligibility in public service. (Paras 2, 4, 16)

(B) Recruitment Rules - The petitioners were denied promotion as the diplomas were not recognized by relevant educational authorities, contrary to stipulations in recruitment rules. (Paras 2, 16)

(C) Prior Judicial Precedents - Court relied on previous rulings affirming that diplomas from deemed universities require AICTE recognition for promotion eligibility. (Paras 14, 15)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, employed in the Electricity Department, claimed eligibility for promotion to the post of Tester based on diplomas obtained through distance education, which the respondents rejected as not valid under relevant recruitment rules.

Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision, confirming that the diplomas acquired were not recognized and thus did not fulfill promotion criteria according to the recruitment rules.

Issues: The main issues included the validity of diplomas obtained through distance education and its recognition status in relation to promotion eligibility.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that diplomas from deemed universities without AICTE approval are not considered equivalent to degrees from recognized institutions, reaffirming previous judgments on the subject. (Paras 14, 16)

Result: Writ Petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of promotion dispute (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioners argue diploma validity (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. adoption of prior arguments for wp.no.1737 (Para 6)
4. respondents challenge diploma validity (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
5. regulatory memorandums affecting qualifications (Para 10)
6. court's consideration of past rulings (Para 11 , 12)
7. court's reasoning on diploma recognition (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
8. dismissal of writ petitions (Para 17 , 18)

ORDER :

1. Under assail is the order dated 25.04.2019 in OA.Nos.925 of 2015 and order dated 27.08.2019 in in RA.No.19 of 2019 in OA.No.925 of 2015 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench (WP.No.28402 of 2019) and order dated 25.04.2019 in OA.No.325 of 2016 (WP.No.1737 of 2020). The unsuccessful applicants before the Tribunal have preferred the writ petitions before this Court.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are working in various capacities in the Electricity Department and the next promotion for them, as per the recruitment rules is the post of Tester. According to the recruitment rules, the petitioners should possess 5 years of service and should have passed Diploma from a recognised University. The petitioners have passed Diploma in Electrical Engineering (DEE) through Distance Education mode from a deemed University. However, the respondents had denied promotion to the petitioners on the ground that the Diploma possessed by the petitioners are not valid and cannot be accepted. Therefore, the petitioners have preferred OA.Nos. 925 of 2015 and 325 of 2016. The Tribunal dismissed the above OAs vide order dated 25.04.2019.

3. Mr.Balan Haridoss, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in WP.No.28402 of 2019 would submit that the petitioners possessed the prescribed Diploma qualification and they are eligible to be appointed as Testers. There is no specific rule requiring the qualification to be obtained in a regular course. In the absence of such specific stipulation, the petitioners are qualified to be appointed as Testor. The Diploma obtained from the deemed University stands automatically regularised for the purpose of employment, as per the letter of Ministry of Human Resources Development Dated 28.01.2004. He would submit that the course adopted by the deemed University have post facto approval granted by the UGC through Distance Education mode. To strengthen his contentions, the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (i) Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Limited v. Rabi Sankar Patro and others , 2018 (1) SCC 468 (ii) Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Limited v. Rabi Sankar Patro and others , 2018 (2) SCC 298 (iii) Order in Civil Appeal No. 872 of 2018 dated 25.01.2018, State of Madya Pradesh and others v. Alok Tripathi and others and (iv) Order in Civil Appeal No. 3697-3698 of 2018 dated 16.02.2018, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Registrar v. The Chairman and Managing Director Transmission Corporation of Telangana Ltd. and others . He would further drew the attention of this Court to a letter sent by the UGC dated 14.10.2013 to all the Indian Universities, wherein it has been stated at Paragraph No.6 as follows:

“Accordingly, the Degrees/Diplomas/Certificates awarded for programmes conducted by the ODL institutions, recognized by DEC (erstwhile) and UGC, in conformity with UGC Notification on specification of Degrees should be treated as equivalent to the corresponding awards of the Degree/ Diploma/Certificate of the traditional Universities/ Institutions in the country.”

4. To strengthen his contentions, he has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case reported in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Limited Vs. Rabi Sankar Patro and others, (2018) 2 SCC 298 [M.A. Nos. 1795-1796/2017 in Civil Appeal Nos. 17869 & 17870/2017] and submitted that the Diploma awarded by the concerned Universities are not barred from consideration for promoti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top