Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Virender vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, Govt. Of ... on 21 February, 2023
1
OA No.3044 of 2017
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No.3044/2017
Reserved on: 15.02.2023
Pronounced on: 21.02.2023
Hon‟ble Mr. Anand Mathur, Member (A)
Hon‟ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Virender, Aged 28 years
S/o Sh. Ram Chander,
Resident of Vill. & PO Khubru,
Teh. Gannor, Distt. Sonipat (Hr.).
...Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Yogesh Sharma)
Versus
1. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.
Through its Chairman
Delhi Metro (DMRC) Head Office,
Metro Bhawan, Fire Brigade Lane,
Barakhamba Road,
New Delhi. ...Respondent
(By Advocate: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna)
ORDER
By Hon‟ble Mr. Anand Mathur, Member (A):
Learned counsel for the applicant stated as under:-
1.1 The respondent, vide Advertisement Notice No.DMRC/OM/HR/1/2016 invited applications for appointment to various posts including 1393 posts of Maintainer (Post Code-NE08) from those who possess the 2 OA No.3044 of 2017 prescribed education qualification, i.e., "I.T.I. (NCVT/SCVT) in the specific trade".
1.2 The applicant, who possesses B. Tech. Degree in Electronics and Communication, which is higher than the one prescribed, applied for the post of Maintainer. He appeared in the written examination under Roll No.15032100039, declared qualified and was shortlisted with merit no.299. Subsequently, the respondent issued a final merit-wise result wherein applicant‟s name found mention at merit no.224.
1.3 Thereafter, the applicant was called for document verification and medical examination. At the time of his document verification, the respondent raised an objection regarding his education qualification by stating that he did not possess the prescribed qualification of „ITI (NCVT/SCVT) in the specific trade‟. 1.4 Despite the fact that the applicant possesses B. Tech.
Degree in Electronics and Communication, higher than the one prescribed and without considering the same, the action of the respondent in rejecting his candidature for the post of Maintainer is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory as other similarly situated persons/juniors have been 3 OA No.3044 of 2017 medically examined and appointment letters have been issued to them.
1.5 In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in Pankaj Kumar Dubey vs. Punjab National Bank and Others [Writ Petition (C) No. 69034 of 2009 decided on 11.07.2014]; order dated 01.12.2022 passed in O.A. No. 1741/2022 and batch by a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, and also of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in Puneet Sharma & Ors. vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd & Anr., [Civil Appeal Nos. 1318- 1322 of 2021 decided on 07.04.2021], wherein it has been held that "Degree in Electrical Engineering/Electrical is a higher qualification than Diploma in that particular trade".
1.6 Aggrieved, the applicant filed the instant OA seeking a direction to the respondents to issue appointment letter for the post of Maintainer to the applicant with all consequential benefits from the date of appointment of other similarly situated/junior persons.
2. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents stated as under:-
4OA No.3044 of 2017
2.1 The Advertisement Notification stipulated the requirement for the post of Maintainer as under:-
Post Code Name of Grade No. of Education Age Medical Post (IDA) vacancie Qualificatio between Standards in INR s n as per as on Indian 01.07.2016 Rly.
Medical Manual NE08 Maintainer 8000- 1393 ITI 18 to 28 Bee-One 14140 (NCVT/ years (i.e., SCVT) in born not (B-1) specific earlier trade than (Listed 2.7.1988 below) and not later than 1.7.1998 As may be seen from the above table, the educational qualification prescribed for the post of Maintainer is „ITI (NCVT/SCVT) in specific trade‟, which the applicant does not possess.
2.2 He further pointed out that there is a hash tag (#) beneath this column, which reads as under:
"# Candidates with higher qualification in respective disciplines can also apply."
# is marked only against the posts of Junior Engineer/Station Controller/Train Operator in different fields and not against the post of Maintainer and it is not applicable in the present case".
2.3 He further stated that for the post of Maintainer, only four disciplines/trades have been prescribed, viz. Electrician, Fitter, Electronic Mechanic and Refrigeration & 5 OA No.3044 of 2017 AC Mechanic, none of which the applicant possesses as he is not ITI passed but B. Tech. in Electronics and Communication. He drew our attention to the footnote, which reads as under:
"Candidates must have ITI (NCVT/SCVT) in specific trades only, to be eligible for the post of Maintainer (Post Code-NE08). Details of Trade & the vacancies (Trade wise) of Maintainers are given below in the table".
The details of Trade and the vacancies (Trade wise) are given below in the table:
#Discipline/ Post Code No. of Reservation of posts Trade vacancies UR OBC SC ST Ex-
Servicemen (On horizontal basis) Electrician NE 08(A) 456 231 123 68 34 66 Fitter NE 08(B) 243 134 60 33 16 35 Electronic NE 08(C) 602 327 110 87 78 87 Mechanic Ref. & AC NE 08(D) 92 44 22 12 14 13 Mechanic TOTAL 1393 2.4 Learned counsel for the respondents stated that the contention of the applicant that the B. Tech Degree possessed by him is a higher qualification than ITI, is an erroneous interpretation because for ITI, only a Certificate is awarded whereas for other courses like Diploma and Degree, they are awarded with the same nomenclature of 6 OA No.3044 of 2017 Diploma and Degree. In other words, the requirement of the job is of a Certificate issued by an ITI under the Vocational Training Apprenticeship Programme, which is a vocational programme, whereas what the applicant possesses is a Degree, which is neither a higher qualification of ITI nor is it a Vocational Programme. In other words, vocational qualification is for „hands on‟ experience for a skilled job whereas Diploma/Degree are at a different pedestal for supervisory/managerial positions and are not higher qualifications of ITI Certificate.
2.5 Learned counsel stated that in view of the above, the candidature of the applicant for the post of Maintainer has been rightly rejected for want of prescribed educational qualification of ITI (NCVT/SCVT).
2.6 In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the respondent relied upon the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu in Surjeet Phounsa vs. J&K SSB and Others [SWP No.1003/2016 decided on 30.11.2018] and the order dated 17.02.2020 passed in O.A. No. 3747/2016 by a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal and upheld by the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in Praveen Kumar vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation & Ors. [WP(C) No. 8250/2020 decided on 25.03.2022].
7OA No.3044 of 2017 2.7 After arguing at some length and relying upon the decisions, referred to above, learned counsel for the respondents stated that the instant OA, being misconceived and devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed outrightly.
3. We have heard Mr. Yogesh Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, learned counsel for the respondent. We have carefully gone through the material on record as also the citations relied upon by the learned counsels of both the parties.
4. The crux of the matter is that the respondents have specifically stated in the Advertisement Notice that the essential qualification prescribed for the post of Maintainer (Post Code NE08) is „ITI (NCVT/SCVT) in the specific trade‟ and the specific trades are Electrician, Fitter, Electronic Mechanic and Refrigeration & AC Mechanic. It is a fact that the applicant does not have ITI Certificate in any of the above trades. His qualification is B. Tech in Electronics and Communication, which does not come under the aforesaid categories of ITI.
4.1 In order to understand the issue in common parlance, it may be worth quoting that if there is an advertisement to fill up the post of Carpenter, the user department wants the Carpenter for the purpose of making furniture. An ITI 8 OA No.3044 of 2017 trained Carpenter would be able to perform the job of a Carpenter because of skills acquired by him which are „hands on‟ in nature. Therefore, a candidate holding a Diploma or Degree in Civil Engineering may not be able to make furniture because his training is of a higher supervisory/managerial nature and lacks the skills required for a „hands on‟ job of a Carpenter. It is due to this reason that ITI trainees are only awarded a „Certificate‟ in their specific trade, which is a vocational qualification, as opposed to a Diploma or a B.Tech Degree.
4.2 We find that the advertisement in this case is unambiguous wherein it has been clearly stated that „Candidates must have ITI (NCVT/SCVT) in specific trades only, to be eligible for the post of Maintainer (Post Code- NE08)‟. Further, the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that candidates with higher qualification in the respective disciplines can also apply, is not at all relevant for the post of Maintainer in question, but has been marked only for the post of JE/Station Controller/Train Operator in different fields which require three years Engineering Diploma in Civil/equivalent trade from a Govt. recognized University/Institute. 9 OA No.3044 of 2017 4.3 The citations relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant deal with cases wherein the question of Degree being a higher qualification of Diploma has been considered and not with regard to ITI Certificate. 4.4 From the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents, we find that in Surjeet Phounsa‟s case (supra), Hon‟ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir has held that Diploma in Automobile Engineering and ITI Certificates are different in quality and quantity and cater entirely different job requirements; one creates the supervisory engineers and other skilled workers.
5. In the conspectus of the facts and circumstances brought out above, we find that the respondents were well within their rights to reject the candidature of the applicant on the plea that he does not satisfy the requirement of essential qualification of the post of Maintainer. The instant OA, therefore, lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.
6. No order as to costs.
(Manish Garg) (Anand Mathur) Member (J) Member (A) na/