Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 1012
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
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
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Balan Haridas in WP.28402/2019 Mr.V.Ajayakumar in WP.1737/2020
For the Respondent: Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, Spl.Govt Pleader Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, SCGC for R5 Mr.Mr.M.Mahamani for R6 Mr.S.Pajani Radja, CGSC for R1. Mr.P.R.Gopinathan for R2. Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, Spl.Govt Pleader
Qualifications for promotion must meet specific recruitment rules, and diplomas from deemed universities without proper accreditation are not valid.
Headnote:(A) Recruitment Rules for the post of Tester - The petitioners, employees of the Electricity Department, sought promotion to the post of Tester, claiming eligibility based on a Diploma in Electrical Engineering obtained through Distance Education. The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed their application, stating that the Diploma was not recognized as valid. (Paras 2, 16)
(B) Educational Qualifications - The court emphasized that the petitioners' qualifications must meet the specific requirements outlined in the recruitment rules, which necessitate a Diploma from a recognized University. The court referenced previous rulings confirming that degrees from deemed universities without AICTE approval are not equivalent to those from recognized institutions. (Paras 14, 15)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners were denied promotion based on their Diplomas obtained through Distance Education, which the respondents claimed were invalid. The Tribunal ruled against the petitioners, leading to the writ petitions.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Tribunal's decision, confirming the petitioners' ineligibility for promotion due to the lack of recognized qualifications.
Issues: The central issue was whether the Diplomas obtained through Distance Education were valid for promotion under the recruitment rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that qualifications must be from recognized institutions as per the recruitment rules, and deemed university diplomas without AICTE approval do not qualify.
Result: Writ Petitions dismissed.
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 promotion in service.
5. Further, he would submit that the petitioners have acquired their Diplomas in Engineering through Distance Education Mode during the year 2007-2009. At that point of time, there had been no order to the effect that the Diploma acquired through Distance Education was not recognized. On the other hand, since the Diploma obtained through Distance Education Mode was the basis for effecting promotion, the subsequent orders derecognizing the Diploma b
