Madhya Pradesh High Court
Amit Singh Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 June, 2025
1
WP No. 20035 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
ON THE 16th OF JUNE, 2025
WRIT PETITION NO. 20035 of 2025
AMIT SINGH BAGHEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
.........................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Rahul Mishra - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Yogesh Dhande - Govt. Advocate for the respondents /State.
..........................................................................................................
ORDER
The present petition has been filed putting to challenge the order dated 26.05.2025 (Annexure P-8) whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated on the ground that he has failed to acquire the mandatory qualification of CPCT (Computer Proficiency Certification Test) despite 9 years from entry in service.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Grade -III vide order (Annexure P-1) dated 21.07.2016 and there was no condition in the appointment order to obtain CPCT qualification. Therefore, the petitioner could not have been asked to obtain the CPCT qualification and his services could not be terminated for want of obtaining CPCT qualification. On this count, the termination order (Annexure P-8) is assailed.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Signing time: 18-06-2025 11:06:31 2 WP No. 20035 of 20253. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently argued that as per circular (Annexure P-2) dated 01.07.2013 the CPCT qualification is a mandatory requirement so also by force of subsequent circular dated 18.08.2015. It is therefore argued that the petitioner was under obligation to acquire CPCT Diploma within three years of entry in service which he failed to do and therefore, the termination order is fully valid and proper.
4. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, it is seen that petitioner claims exemption from the Computer Proficiency Test on the ground that he has acquired qualification of B.E. in Computer Science and Engineering. Therefore, he can be said to have sufficient proficiency in computer. As per appointment order (Annexure P-1) Clause 10 related to mandatory condition of the employee obtaining typing examination and one computer certificate course out of the 5 courses as mentioned in Clause 10 thereof. Clause 10 of appointment order is as under:-
"10. िनयिमत ापना म सहायक े ड-3 के पद पर िनयु िकये गये उ कमचारी को म० ० शी लेखन rFkk मु लेखन बोड से मु लेखन परी ा उ ीण करने का माण प तथा िन िल खत म से िकसी मा ता ा सं ा से क ूट र परी ा उ ीण करना अिनवाय होगा-
(अ) यूजीसी ारा मा ता ा सनरत िव िव ालयों से िड ोमा
(ब). यूजीसी ारा मा ता ा सम मु िव िव ालयों से िड ोमा
(स). डी ओ ई ए सी सी से िड ोमा लेवल परी ा
(द). शासकीय आई.टी.आई. ारा एकवष य क ूटर ऑपरे टर एवं ो ािमंग
अिस ट" (COPA) माण प ।
(ई). शासकीय पॉलीटे क महािव ालय से माडन ऑिफस मैनेजमट पा म।
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 18-06-2025
11:06:31
3
WP No. 20035 of 2025
उ परी ा अ थ को तीन वष के अं दर उ ीण करना अिनवाय होगा अ था
िनयु आदे श िनर माना जावेगा इस हेतु अलग से समय सीमा बढ़ाया जाना
संभव नही ं होगा ।"
5. The petitioner can be said to have sufficient computer proficiency because he has obtained the Degree of Engineering in Computer Science and Engineering. However, the requirement as per Clause-10 of the appointment order was twin. Firstly, to obtain typing examination certificate and to obtain computer qualification. While the petitioner can be said to have sufficient computer proficiency by obtaining degree in Engineering in Computer Science but so far as the Hindi typing part is concerned, qualification in Computer Engineering cannot lead to inference that the petitioner has qualified Hindi typing as well. This Court has considered the issue in detail in WP No.27333/2024 in case of an employee who succeeded to obtain CPCT qualification but after the time limit of three years granted by the State and his increments were postponed for that reason. This Court has held as under:-
"7. It is undisputed that petitioner has been appointed on clerical post which was earlier known as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) and subsequently re-designated as Assistant Grade -III (AG-III). For clerical post Hindi Typing Examination used to be the requisite qualification but subsequently, the State took note of the fact that in Government functioning more and more use of computers is taking place and the person needs to be well versed in computer typing as well as in operating the computer. For that purpose, the State Government Department of GAD vide circular dated 01.07.2013 did away with the requirement of Hindi Typing Examination and in its place, put in place requirement of computer typing qualification with 30 words per minute speed in Hindi typing from M.P.Vyavasayik Signature Not Verified Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Signing time: 18-06-2025 11:06:31 4 WP No. 20035 of 2025 Pariksha Mandal. Subsequently vide circular dated 26.02.2015 (Annexure R-1) the said requirement was modified and in place of computer typing proficiency, the requirement of Computer Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT) was put in place which is composite test of computer proficiency and typing. Para-1 of circular (Annexure R-1) reads as under:-
"सामा शासन िवभाग के उपरो संदिभत प रप िदनांक 01 जु लाई,
2013, ारा िह ी मु लेखन परी ा की अिनवायता को समा करते ए
म दे श ावसाियक परी ा म ल से 30 श ितिमिनट की गित से
क ूटर टायिपंग द ता माण प को अिनवाय िकया गया था। उ
ावधान को संशोिधत करते ए ापम के ान पर िव ान एवं ौ ोिगकी
िवभाग ारा आयोिजत क ूटर द ता माणीकरण परी ा Computer
Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT) माण प ( ोर काड) को मा
िकया जाता है ।"
8. The certificate of CPCT (Annnexure P-7) also makes it clear that CPCT certification is having two components i.e. computer proficiency as well as Hindi typing and English typing. The petitioner vide certificate (Annexure P-7) has qualified computer proficiency and Hindi typing as well as English typing.
9. This Court posed a query to learned counsel for the petitioner that whether he is having a separate qualification of Hindi typing, if he wants that his DCA certificate should be treated to be sufficient. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner was unable to state that the petitioner has separately obtained any Hindi typing certificate or qualification.
10. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds. At the relevant point of time the compassionate appointment policy of the State Government dated 29.09.2014 was in place which is still in Signature Not Verified Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Signing time: 18-06-2025 11:06:31 5 WP No. 20035 of 2025 vogue. The petitioner is admittedly was appointed on 29.01.2016 which is after the compassionate policy dated 29.09.2014 and after issuance of circular (Annexure R-1) dated 26.02.2015. The compassionate appointment policy dated 29.09.2014 mentions as under in para-6.5:-
"fnoaxr 'kkldh; lsod ds vkfJr dks lgk;d xzsM&3 ds in अनुकंपा fu;qfDr के fy;s dEI;wVj fMiyksek तथा dEI;wVj Vk;fiax n{krk izek.k i= ijh{kk izkIr laLFkk ls mRrh.kZ fd;s tkus gsrq 3 o"kZ dk le; fn;k tkosxk A rhu o"kZ esa Hkh okafNr ijh{kka, mRrh.kZ u djus ij lacaf/kr deZpkjh }kjk ijh{kka, mRrh.kZ djus ds iz;klksa vkSj Vk;fiax {kerk tks vftZr dh xbZ gks] dks ns[krs gq, fu;ksDrk vf/kdkjh }kjk ,d o"kZ dh vof/k vkSj c<+kbZ tk ldrh gSA bl vof/k ds O;rhr gksus ij Hkh lacaf/kr deZpkjh }kjk okafNr ijh{kka, mRrh.kZ u djus ij mudh lsoka, lekIr dh tk ldasxhA**
11. As per the aforesaid para-6.5, it is clearly provided that for all dependants of Government servant who are appointed on the post of Assistant Grade-III on compassionate grounds, computer diploma and computer typing proficiency certificate are essential for which the time of three years will be given and the said time limit can be extended by a period of one year by the appointing authority and in default of the employee acquiring the qualification within four years, then his services are liable to be terminated. The petitioner admittedly did not obtain CPCT certification within four years but obtained it more than six years after his appointment. Therefore, sufficient indulgence has been given to the petitioner by the State Government by retaining him in service and granting him repeated opportunity to qualify CPCT certification. He having been allowed to save his appointment cannot Signature Not Verified Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Signing time: 18-06-2025 11:06:31 6 WP No. 20035 of 2025 now claim increments from the first date of appointment as he did not have the requisite qualification for the post on that date."
6. In the present case also, learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to indicate whether the petitioner has separately obtained any Hindi typing qualification. If he had qualified CPCT then he would have obtained Hindi typing qualification also as it is a composite qualification. However, he has not qualified CPCT nor has qualified any Hindi typing test separately.
7. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner was asked that in terms of judgment of this Court in case of Virat Dev Singh Vs. State of M.P and Ors. (WP No.16770/2022) whether the petitioner is willing to get himself considered for Class-IV post having failed to obtain CPCT qualification or even Hindi Typing examination. The petitioner was however unwilling for this. Resultantly, finding no merits in the writ petition, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.
(VIVEK JAIN)
nks JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 18-06-2025
11:06:31