Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
U.K.Rastogi vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Others on 13 April, 2011
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH OA No. 3741/2009 MA 2215/2010 New Delhi this the 13th day of April, 2011 Honble Mr. L.K.Joshi, Vice Chairman (A) Honble Dr.Dharam Paul Sharma, Member (J) U.K.Rastogi, Son of Shri M.L.Rastogi, R/0 91, Maliwara, Ghaziabad (UP), Presently posted at N.S.T.P. Coronation Pillar Kingsway Camp, Delhi-110009. Applicant (By Advocate Shri M.K.Bhardwaj) VERSUS Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others 1. Sh. Ramesh Negi, Chief Executive Officer, Delhi Jal Board, Varunalaya, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. 2. Sh. Dharam Pal, Member Administration, Delhi Jal Board, Varunalaya, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. 3. Sh. Raheshwari Tiwari, Assistant Commissioner (T), Varunalaya, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. 4. The Secretary, Ministry of HRD, Deptt. of Higher Education, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 5. Distance Education Council Through its Chairman, Indra Gandhi Open University, Maidangarhi, New Delhi. 6. The Vice Chancellor, I.A.S.E. University, Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardar Shohar, Distt. Churi (Raj). Respondents (By Advocates Shri Nisha Kant Pandey for respondents (DJB) and Shri S.M.Arif for respondent (M/o HRD) O R D E R Mr. L.K.Joshi, Vice Chairman (A) :
This OA was earlier decided by this Tribunal by the following order dated 16.04.2010:
The objection of the Respondents for granting of look after charge of Executive Engineer to the applicant was that they were not certain whether the degree awarded by the IASE, Sardarshahr, Churu, Rajasthan was recognized for the purpose of employment under the Central Govt. or not. The Respondents have stated in paragraph 13 of the counter affidavit that :
13.That another Departmental Screening Committee met on 12.03.2010 for considering ad-hoc/look after charge to the post of Executive Engineer (E&M), wherein it was decided that matter regarding the validity of the degree obtained by the applicant be dealt with administratively and in view of various contradictory facts coming in to the picture, it was decided that it be referred to the Government of India, Ministry of HRD for final opinion with regard to the validity of the degree obtained by the applicant. Therefore, the Screening Committee in its meeting on 12.03.2010 decided that one post of EE(E&M) on the look after charge basis for the applicant be kept vacant till the final verification of his technical degree is obtained from Ministry of HRD.
2. The learned counsel for the Applicant had obtained information from the Ministry of Human Resource and Development (HRD) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 which reads thus:-
I refer to your application dated 20.01.2010 on the above noted subject and state that the degrees/diplomas already awarded by the IASE, Sardarshahr, Churu, Rajasthan are recognized for the purpose of employment under the Central Government.
3. In view of this, it is clear that the doubt in the minds of the Respondents has been clarified by this. The learned counsel for the Respondents states that this information has been given to the applicant in some other case and that the Respondent-Delhi Jal Board would wait for the official communication from the Ministry of HRD. However, the information obtained under the Right to Information Act is also official information and is perfectly acceptable.
4. In view of this, it is clear that the final objection, which the Respondent had for giving the current duty charge ( look after charge) to the Applicant has been clarified amply by the Ministry of HRD.
We direct the Respondents to give the current duty
charge of Executive Engineer to the Applicant within 15
days from today. OA is disposed of. No costs.
However, the above order was recalled on a Review Application filed by the Respondents and the OA restored to its original position by order dated 02.08.2010. The Applicant arrayed the Ministry of HRD also as a party respondent by amending the OA.
2. When the matter came up for hearing the counsel for the parties agreed that the issue would be decided in the light of the reply affidavit filed by the Respondent, Ministry of HRD and the Respondent, Distance Education Council (DEC), about the validity of the B. Tech distance education course run by the Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (Deemed University), Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshar, Churu, Rajasthan. The DEC has, inter alia, averred thus in its affidavit:
4. That the IASE University starting imparting education through distance education mode some time in the year 2002-03 although no prior approval of the DEC for starting such courses was ever obtained.
5. That vide its letter dated 13.12.2002, the answering Respondent furnished to the University, the guidelines for establishing distance education centres. However, application for recognition of the Universitys distance education programme was received on 19.8.2003.
6. That the said application of the IASE University was rejected by the answering respondent pursuant to inspection carried out by the answering respondent. The rejection of the application for grant of recognition of the IASE University was communicated vide letter dated 27.6.2005.
7. That thereafter when the Distance Education Council issued a public notice on 5th January 2007 on its website listing out various universities which were not recognized for the purpose of imparting education through distance education mode, the said university again applied for recognition of programmes being imparted through distance education.
8. That the IASE University, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan applied to DEC for post-facto recognition of its programmes offered through distance mode. For this a committee was constituted and as per decision taken in the third Joint committee meeting of UGC-AICTE-DEC which was held on 7th August 2007, the IASE deemed University was accorded post factor approval ( to all programmes that were approved by statutory bodies of the institute) till 2005. The same was communicated to them Vide letter No. F. No. DEC/IASE/RJ/03/5449 dated 29.08.2007. The above University has also been accorded provisional recognition for one academic year 2007-08 Vide letter No. F. No. DEC/Univ/State/07/5740 dated 03.09.2007, a copy whereof is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure R/1. No further recognition has been accorded by the DEC to above University. The matter is sub-judice. The Ministry of HRD has stated, inter alia, in its affidavit that:
10.That the Honble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4173 of 2008 in the case of Annamalai University Vs. Secretary to Government, Information and Tourism Department and others with Civil Appeal Nos. 4189-4191 of 2008 in the case of N. Ramesh Vs. SIBI Madan Gabriel & Ors, has observed inter-alia as under:
A degree is valid only, if the candidate concerned had the entry level qualification for admission to a course/programme leading to award to degree in question as per the University Grant Commissions (UGCs) relevant regulations on maintenance of minimum standards in education; and Distance Education Council may be an authority under the Act for grant of approval for the programme offered through Distance Modes, but its orders ordinarily would only have a prospective effect.
A copy of the said Order is also annexed as R-7. An identical matter had come up before this Tribunal in Sh. Vikrant Sokhanda V. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., OA number 1210/2010. The paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order dated 19.11.2010 in the above OA are reproduced below:
2.The applicant had obtained a certificate of diploma in Mechanical Engineering in the month of June 2005 from the Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASE) having the status of deemed University called Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr. He applied for the post of Station Controller/Train Operator in response to the advertisement during 20-26 June 2009 in respect of 688 such posts. He passed the requisite tests and was declared a successful candidate and was called upon for medical test on 08.12.2009. But, unfortunately without assigning any reason, he was not permitted to go through medical examination. He served legal notices on the respondent organization on 16.12.2009 and on 11.03.2010. He was informed that the question of recognition of the Institute was being examined. According to the applicant, he had furnished relevant Notifications about recognition of the IASE, but, inspite of such clarification, the respondent organization did not give any favorable response; hence this O.A.
3. According to his averments, he got the diploma in respect of a three year course in Mechanical Engineering having passed out in the First Division. The Govt. of India in its Notification dated 25.06.2002 gave the status of Deemed University to IASE under Section-3 of the UGC Act, 1956. The UGC issued a Notification on 17.07.2002 and declared IASE as a Deemed University for the purpose of provisions of the aforesaid Act. The Association of the Indian Universities also admitted IASE as one of its members, a fact, which was communicated in their letter dated 3.0.6.2003. AICTE clarified on 14.11.2004 that there was no need for a Deemed University to take prior approval from them to start any Technical Education Programme whether regular, or distance. This clarification was given in reply to the query made by IASE itself. This fact was also clarified again in the Govt. of India Notification dated 07.04.2006 which states that Deemed Universities are empowered to award degrees as specified under the UGC Act, 1956 and that such institutions did not have to take prior approval of AICTE to start technical or management education. It was further observed in paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 as follows:
6.1. A specific clarification was given by Indira Gandhi National Open University in its letter dated 29.08.2007 (Annexure A-13 Colly. P.72), relevant extracts of this letter are reproduced below:
This has reference to your application requesting for one limit ex-post-facto recognition for programmes offered under distance mode.
In connection with ex-post-facto recognition, we would like to convey that all programmes (that were approved by the statutory bodes of your institute) are approved till date. As you have not been offering education through distance mode since 2005, all your programmes (approved by the statutory bodes of your Institute) till 2005 happen to be approved by the DEC. The Ministry of Human Resource Development in its letter dated 12.02.2010J (Annexure A-14 p.76) makes the following observations:-
I refer to your application dated 20.01.2010 on the above subject and state that the degrees/diploma already awarded by the IASE, Sardarshahr, Churu, Rajasthan are recognized by the purpose of employment under the Central Government. 6.2 Besides, IASE in its letter dated 22.12.2009, Annexure A-11 (page-39) has clarified that all the programmes run by the Deemed University under distance mode were given ex-post-facto approval till the academic year 2007-2008 by the Joint Committee consisting of representatives of UGC, DEC and AICTE in its meeting held on 07.08.2007. The minutes of Joint Committee meeting (pages 44-45) support this contention. It was held thus by the Tribunal that:
7. The applicant had got the diploma certificate in Mechanical Engineering in the month of June 2005. In other words, the programmes run by IASE which had the status of Deemed University got post-facto approval of DEC for all its programmes till 2005 and ad hoc approval was also given for the programmes upto 2007-2008. This position is borne out from the foregoing discussions. Therefore, the contention of the applicant that he had a valid diploma from a recognized Institute stand vindicated and we do not see any justification to sustain the objection of the respondents in this regard.
8. In the circumstances, our findings are that the diploma certificate from IASE obtained by the applicant in the year 2005 was a valid one and the Institute from which the applicant passed out had the status of Deemed University having the powers of running programmes in Distance Education mode for which it had post-facto approval from the DEC in respect of the relevant period.
3. The Applicant herein has obtained the degree from IASE in the year 2007. The IASE University had provisional recognition for the year 2007-08 as per the DECs reply affidavit.
4. In the light of the above the OA is allowed. The Respondent, Delhi Jal Board, will pass an appropriate order in the matter within 15 days of the receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
( Dr.Dharam Paul Sharma ) ( L.K.Joshi ) Member (J) Vice Chairman (A) sk