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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 124

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi, ACJ, Lata Baswaraj Patne, J
P.Keshava Reddy, V.Koteshwara Rao, Kola Heera Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.021/00743/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C.G.Vidyasagar Naidu
For the Respondents: Smt. B.Gayatri Varma, Sr.CGSC

The court ruled that technical qualifications earned through approved modes must be recognized for promotions, overturning disqualification based on non-AICTE approved diplomas.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Promotion eligibility - Applicants claimed promotions denied based on diploma qualification from SBTET through Contact Cum Correspondence mode, ruled not AICTE approved—Challenged rejection citing Supreme Court precedents and AICTE circulars on recognition of diplomas. Court found applicants qualified due to ongoing recognition until 2013, directing their promotions with benefits. (Paras 1-12)

(B) Qualifications Recognition - Court noted that regulatory bodies’ acknowledgment of qualifications earned under prescribed modes impact eligibility for competitive promotions considering just practices. (Paras 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
Applicants, appointed in various capacities, underwent technical diploma training and sought promotions based on qualifications acquired. Despite recognition from their educational board, they faced disqualification due to lack of AICTE approval. Respondents cited rigid regulatory interpretations for disallowing promotions despite valid prior experience.

Findings of Court:
Applicants are entitled to promotions due to their qualifications falling under recognized standards and the significance of prior approvals relevant to their respective educational pursuits.

Issues: Dispute over the invalidity of diplomas due to AICTE non-approval affecting promotion eligibility. Court addressed challenges against arbitrary decisions based on procedural misalignments.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that prior qualifications and recognition of legitimacy in context to the processes of granting educational equivalences must prevail against restrictive interpretations. (Para 12)

Result: OA allowed; respondents directed to implement promotions and benefits.

Table of Content
1. legal basis for promotion eligibility. (Para 1 , 2)
2. substantiation of qualification claims. (Para 3 , 4)
3. doubts surrounding aicte approval. (Para 5 , 6)
4. recognition of prior qualifications. (Para 7 , 8)
5. court's empowerment in review. (Para 9 , 10)
6. final judgment and directive for promotions. (Para 12 , 13)

ORDER

PER: HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , seeking the following relief:

a. To declare the impugned order No.02/04/NG/DPC/ESTT/2023 dt: 13.11.2023 issued by the 4th Respondent whereby declaring the applicants as not eligible for the post of Chargemen through LDCE and also denying the promotion of Junior Works Manager which was already declared vide Proceedings N.DJWM/DPC/Tech & Non- Tech/2023/GB dated 28.12.2022 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Gazette of India vide SRO No.66 of 2003 and

b. To set aside the impugned proceedings dated 13.11.2023 by directing the Respondents to proceed further in pursuance of the Proceedings No.DJWM/DPC/Tech & Non-Tech/2023/GB dated 28.12.2022 duly granting promotions to the Applicants for the posts of Junior Works Manager on par with other candidates with consequential benefits and pass such other and further order or orders as are deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Tribunal in the circumstances of the case.

2. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, as submitted by the applicants, are as follows:

i. The 1st applicant was appointed in the 4th Respondent factory on 22.01.1999 as a Moulder with qualification from the National Council for Training in Vocational Trades (NCTVT) in the Moulder trade. The 2nd applicant was appointed on 06.04.1988 as a General Fitter with NAC certificate in the trade of Fitter. Likewise, the 3rd applicant was appointed on 01.03.1999 as a Welder with qualification from the NCTVT in the Welder trade.

ii. The State Board of Technical Education and Training (SBTET) had issued a notification in the year 2007 for admission to Diploma Courses for working employees through Contact Cum Correspondence (CCC) mode. Applicant Nos. 1 & 2 requested the 4th Respondent to grant NOC for pursuing the said Diploma courses. Applicant No.3 sought similar permission against the notification issued in the year 2008. On getting the NOC, the applicants forwarded their respective applications to the SBTET for pursuing the Diploma Course. SBTET conducted an entrance test and based on the rank/merit, Applicant Nos. 1 & 2 were admitted into Diploma in Mechanical Course in the year 2007 and Applicant No.3 in the year 2008. The applicants got admission in different Govt. Polytechnic Colleges and successfully completed their respective courses and received pass certificates from the SBTET, Andhra Pradesh. Their Diploma certificates were submitted to the department for making entry in their service records against the educational qualification.

iii. Based on the directives of the erstwhile Ordnance Factory Board, the 4th Respondent issued notification in the years 2012 and 2014 to fill up the posts of Chargeman (CM) (T&NT) through LDCE. Since the applicants were possessing the requisite qualification of Technical Diploma, they applied in the years 2012 & 2015, respectively, and appeared for the LDCE and also passed the same. As per their merit, they were promoted to the post of Chargemen Technical (Mechanical). The 2nd Respondent also published the modified final seniority list, dt.23.06.2022, of Chargemen wherein the applicants were shown at Sl.Nos.399, 437 & 1124, respectively.

iv. Based on the above seniority list, the 2nd Respondent issued promotion orders promoting the applicants to the post of Junior Works Manager (Tech) (Gr.B-Gazetted), vide proceedings, dt.28.12.2022. But the 4th Respondent, vide F.O.No.11, dt.05.01.2023, published Junior Works Manager promotion order, wh

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