Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Krishan Kumar Son Of Sh. Prem Kumar vs Chandigarh Administration Through Its ... on 27 February, 2017
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH CHANDIGARH O.A. No.060/01030/2015 Decided on: 27.02.2017 Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SULLAR, MEMBER (J) HONBLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A) Krishan Kumar son of Sh. Prem Kumar, aged about 26 years, resident of House NO. 859, Ward No. 14, Near D.A.V. School, Dangra Road, Tohana, District Fatehabad, Haryana.
.Applicant Argued by: Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate Versus
1. Chandigarh Administration through its Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh.
2. Education Department, U.T. Chandigarh through its Secretary, Department of Educational, Additional Delux Building, Sector 9, Chandigarh.
3. Director Public Instructions (S), Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh.
..Respondents Argued by: Mr. Vivek Arora, Advocate Order(Oral) BY HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SULLAR, MEMBER (J)
1. The challenge in this Original Application (O.A.), filed by applicant Krishan Kumar s/o Sh. Prem Kumar, is to the impugned order dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure A-1), whereby his candidature for selection to the post of Nursery Training Teacher (NTT) was rejected by the Competent Authority, on the ground that he has passed NTT course from Ganesh Vocational Education Institute, which is not recognized by the National Council Training Education (NCTE), on the grounds of being arbitrary and illegal.
2. The respondents have refuted the claim of the applicant, and filed the written statement, stoutly denying all the allegations and grounds, contained in the O.A. and prayed for its dismissal.
3. Thus, it would be seen that the short and significant question that arises for our consideration in this case is as to whether the NTT certificate obtained by the applicant from Ganesh Vocational Education Institute, is valid or not. It is not a matter of dispute that the Ganesh Vocational Education Institute is not recognized by the NCTE.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the parties are fairly at ad-idem that the identical controversy has already been decided vide order dated 05.07.2016 in O.A. NO. 060/00569/2016 titled Sanjeev Kumar & Another Vs. Chandigarh Administration and Others, by this Tribunal. They pray that this O.A. be also disposed of in the same terms.
5. As is evident from the record that the identical subject-matter was considered and decided, vide order dated 05.07.2016 in Sanjeev Kumars case (supra) by this Tribunal, which, in substance, is as under:-
We have carefully considered the matter. Admittedly Ganesh Institute is not recognized either by National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE) or by Chandigarh Administration. It is clearly stipulated in advertisement (Annexure A-3) read with corrigendum (Annexure A-4) that the diploma or certificate in NTT or its equivalent must be from an Institute recognized by NCTE or by Chandigarh Administration. Consequently, certificates obtained by the applicants from Ganesh Institute do not fulfill the aforesaid mandatory eligibility criterion laid down in the advertisement that the diploma or certificate in NTT or its equivalent has to be from an Institute recognized by NCTE/Chandigarh Administration. The applicants have thus been rightly held ineligible for the post of Nursery Teacher in accordance with stipulation in advertisement (Annexure A-3). It may be added that the applicant no. 2 has even not obtained diploma or certificate in NTT but obtained certificate in ECCE which is not depicted to be equivalent to NTT. Accepting certificate of NIOS for some other posts by some other entities as per documents annexed would not make the applicants eligible for the post of Nursery Teacher pursuant to advertisement (Annexure A-3) read with corrigendum (Annexure A-4). At the risk of repetition, it has to be observed that the applicants have obtained certificate from Ganesh Institute which is admittedly not recognized by NCTE/Chandigarh Administration and, therefore, as per clear and unequivocal stipulation in advertisement (Annexure A-3), the applicants do not fulfill the essential qualification for the post of Nursery Teacher. Therefore, the applicants have been rightly held to be ineligible for the said post.
6. Meaning thereby, the similar certificate obtained by the applicant therein from the same Institute i.e. Ganesh Vocational Education Institute was held to be invalid, for the purpose of selection to the post of NTT. Thus, the judgment is mutatis mutandis applicable to the facts of the present case as well.
7. Therefore, it is held that the indicated certificate obtained by the applicant was not valid for the purpose of selection to the post of NTT and he has been rightly held to be ineligible in this regard.
8. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, so the instant O.A. is hereby dismissed in the same terms and manner of above mentioned judgment of this Tribunal. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs.
(RAJWANT SANDHU) (JUSTICE M.S. SULLAR)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
27.02.2017
mw
-3- O.A. No.060/01030/2015