Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Ediga Pakkira vs M/O Defence on 24 June, 2025
Reserved
(On 08.04.2025)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JABALPUR BENCH
Jabalpur, this Tuesday, the 24th day of June, 2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J)
Hon'ble Ms Mallika Arya, Member (A)
Original Application No. 810 of 2014
1. Ediga Pakkira, P. No. 914053, Aged 42 Years, S/O Shri E.
Chennappa, Working as Chargeman(Mechanical), Section:
CMM/GAP, Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad- 461122,
R/o Q. No. 2135 / II, Ordnance Factory Estate, Itarsi, Distt:
Hoshangabad-461122 (Promoted -29/07/2012)
2. B.Venkateswarulu, P. No. 914055, Aged 39 Years, S/O Shri B.
Chennaiah, Working as Chargeman (Mechanical), Section: EO,
Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad- 461122, R/o 2122/I
Ordnance Factory Estate Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad-461122
(Promoted -29/07/2012)
3. Ediga Srinivasulu, P. No. 914054, Aged 40 Years, S/O Shri E.
Ramaiah, Working as Chargeman (Mechanical), Section: SM,
Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad- 461122, R/o 1218/I
Ordnance Factory Estate Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad-461122
(Promoted -29/07/2012)
4. Sushil Kumar Dinkar, P. No. 914063, Aged. 41 Years, S/O Shri
Raghubir Ram dinkar, Working as Chargeman (Mechanical),
Section: GMP, Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad-
461122, Q. No.2322 / AR, Ordnance Factory Estate, Itarsi, Distt:
Hoshangabad-461122 (Promoted -29/07/2012)
1
2025.06.25
VISHAL
09:57:12
KUSHWAH
+05'30'
5. Sitaram Mehra, P.No.914068, Age 48 years, s/o Shri Kanchhedi
Lal Mehra, Working as Chargeman(Mechanical). Section: CMM
NIGU, Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad- 461122, R/o
Q. No.2220 / AR, Ordnance Factory Estate, Itarsi, Distt:
Hoshangabad-461122 (Promoted -29/07/2012)
6. Birendra Kumar, P.No. 914061, Age 41 years, S/o Shri Patiram,
Working as Chargeman (Mechanical), Section: SM, Ordnance
Factori, ITARSI, Distt. Hoshangabad - 461122, R/o 2105/AR,
Ordnance Factory Estate, Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad-461122
(Promoted -29/07/2012)
7. Sunil, P.No.914069, Age 38 years, S/o Shri Manglu, Working as
Chargeman (Mechanical), Section: GMP, Ordnance Factori,
ITARSI, Distt. Hoshangabad - 461122 R/o 2142/AR Ordnance
Factory Estate, Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad-461122 (Promoted -
29/07/2012)
8. Khoob Singh, P.No.914078, Age 46 years s/o Mam Chand,
working as Chargeman (Electrical), Section: EM (GMP), Ordnance
Factory Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad- 461122, R/o Old Type C,
Ordnance Factory Estate, Itarsi, Distt: Hoshangabad-461122,
(Promoted -29/07/2012)
-Applicants
By Adv: Shri N S Ruprah
VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New
Delhi.
2
2025.06.25
VISHAL
09:57:12
KUSHWAH
+05'30'
2. Director General, Ordnance Factories Board, 10-A Shaheed
Khudiram Bose Road, Kolkata-700 011(W.B)
3. General Manager, Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Distt. Hoshangabad -
461122 (M.P)
4. The Secretary, Human Resources Development, Department of
Higher Education, Government of India, New Delhi - 110001
5. All India Council for Technical Education, 7th Floor, Chandralok
Building, Janpad, New Delhi-110 001
6. Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan, Vidyapeeth, (Established u/S 3 of
the UGC Act, 1956) Pratapnagar Udaipur 313001 Rajasthan
7. University Grants Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, NEW
DELHI 110002
8. Distance education bureau, UGC building Bahadur Shah Jafar
Marg, New Delhi 110002
........Respondents
By Adv: Shri S K Mishra
ORDER
By Ms. Mallika Arya, AM This Original Application has been filed by the applicants against the impugned orders dated 10.10.2014 (Annexure A/1), 25.07.2013 (Annexure A/2) and dated 21/24.10.2014 (Annexure A/2A) whereby the applicants have been reverted to their incumbent posts which they held prior to their appointment/promotion due to their ineligibility in fulfilling the eligibility criteria as per SRO 66.
32025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30'
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants passed the Diploma in Engineering from Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth (JRNRV), a deemed University. Since they were qualified to appear in the LDCE for Departmental promotion to the post of Chargeman, they appeared in the Examination and passed the same. Thereafter, they were promoted to the post of Chargeman. However, vide order dated 25.07.2013 (Annexure A/2) it was clarified that the holders of Diploma awarded through distant learning mode cannot be considered to be eligible to appear in LDCE for Chargeman (Technical). Thereafter the impugned order (Annexure A/1) was issued by DGOF, Kolkata directing all Heads of Units/Ordnance Factories to revert such promotees to their parent post, which they held prior to their promotion. The Director General, Ordnance Factory Board, Kolkata issued an order dated 21/24.10.2014 (Annexure A/2A) wherein it was held that appointments/promotions through LDCE based on Diploma Qualification acquired from Janardan Vidyapeeth University was irregular since these courses were not approved by AICTE and hence they did not conform to the provisions of SRO 66. Thereafter, without any show cause notice or any opportunity of hearing, the applicants were reverted to their original post. The 4 2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30' Tribunal vide order dated 20.10.2014 directed the respondents to maintain status quo (Annexure A/1 and A/2).
3. The respondents have filed their reply wherein it has been submitted that the applicants were not eligible to participate in the LDCE for promotion to the post of chargeman. However, they were erroneously allowed to participate in LDCE and got promoted to the post of Chargeman. The Ordnance Factory Board vide order dated 21/24.10.2014 requested all the factories/units to take immediate necessary action for identification of such appointments/promotions made on the basis of the Diploma acquired from "Janardan Vidhyapeeth University". Subsequently, they were further directed to revert such incumbents to their parent post in terms of SRO 66, dated 27.05.2003. The same order of reversion dated 21/24.10.2014 and subsequent orders were challenged before the CAT Mumbai Bench in OA No. 665/2014, 692/2014 and 724/2014. This was dismissed vide common order dated 02.01.2017. This order was also challenged before the coordinate Cuttack Bench of this Tribunal in O.A./697/2015 (Pratap Chandra Dehury Vs UOI and others). The Cuttack Bench also dismissed the said Original Application vide order dated 28.08.2019.
5 2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30'
4. We have considered the matter, perused the documents and the judgments relied upon by the counsels of both the parties.
5. It has been stated by applicants' counsel that the permission was granted by the respondents for pursuing the diploma. Subsequently they were allowed to appear in the examination for the promotion to the post of Chargeman (Tech) as per the SRO 191, a copy of which is enclosed as Annexure R/2. The applicants were selected and got promoted in 2010 and were subsequently reverted in 2011. The learned counsel for the respondents has reiterated the grounds mentioned in the counter reply and submitted that Ordnance Factory Board directed all the factories/units to take immediate necessary action for identification of such appointments/promotions made based on the Diploma qualification acquired from JVU and take further action for reversion (Annexure A/2A and R/2). The action of reversion was challenged by some applicants before the CAT, Cuttack Bench vide O.A. No. 697/2015 wherein the relief has not been granted to them.
6. The counsel for the respondents produced an order passed by the CAT, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 697/2015. The relevant portion of the order of CAT, Cuttack Bench (Supra) reads as follows: 6
2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30' "9. Regarding the other question relating to the validity of the Diploma qualification acquired by the applicant through distance mode from JRNRV for the purpose of the promotion to the post of Chargeman as per the SRO 191, it is seen that this Tribunal vide order dated 30.6.2014 (Annexure-13) passed in the OA No. 290/2011, it was held as under:-
"......The AICTE in their letter dated 23.12.2010 confirmed that it is not the policy of the AICTE to recognize the qualification acquired through distance education mode in the field of engineering, technology including architecture, town planning, pharmacy, hotel management etc. and instead, they recognize only MBA and MCA Programmes through Distance Education Mode. This position was also confirmed by a letter dated 31.12.2010 received from the Joint Secretary, Ministry of HRD, Government of India. Based upon these clarification, it was decided that the applicant did not possess the educational qualification required for Chargeman and therefore, he was issued with a show cause notice dated 1.2.2011. According to Respondents, Hon'ble High Court of Orissa vide judgment reported in 2011 (1) OLR CUT-162 (Policy Planning Body and another -vs- silicon Institute of Technology & Ors. ) held that AICTE is the body which can grant permission to the institute for study of technical education and not the University or Government. Since the AICTE had not approved the Diploma course obtained by the applicant from J.R.N.R.Vidyapeeth University, Rajasthan, the Respondents concluded that the certificate in their opinion was non est in the eyes of law and consequently, the applicant was not eligible for the post of Chargeman (T). In response to the show cause notice, reply given by the applicant was considered and no merit was found in the same. This was disposed vide order dated 2.4.2011 and accordingly, the order of reversion was issued......"
10. Above order dated 30.6.2014 was challenged by the applicant before Hon'ble High Court in W.P. (C) 12140 of 2014, which was disposed of vide order dated 29.9.2015 (Annexure-23) of Hon'ble High Court, in which it was held as under:-
"1. This petition is preferred from the order dated 30.6.2014 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench Cuttack in O.A. No. 290 of 2011, whereby the prayer of the petitioner to direct upholding his promotion by upholding the Diploma Certificate on the basis of which promotion was granted, has been rejected.
2. The impugned order of the Tribunal is expressly relying upon ratio of earlier decision of the Tribunal in O.A. Nos. 253 and 254 of 2008 as also 7 2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30' O.A. No. 62 of 2011. The Tribunal has adopted the view that, as decided in the earlier applications, the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hold an opinion when the authenticity of the certificate as well as the institution issuing such certificate were called into question by the employer. The employer in the present case has clearly conveyed once again vide its order dated 24.8.2015 inter alia as under:-
"Whereas letter dated 21/24.10.2014 and the report of the Committee constituted for the said purpose and clarification received from OFB (Ordnance Factory Board) vide their letter no.
2982/LDCE/CM(T&NT)/Vig/Per/NG. dated 13.3.2015 in response to this factory letter of even number dated 10.3.2015 together, it reveals that the promotion earned on the basis of Diploma qualification obtained from Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth University,Udaipur, Rajasthan by the said P.C.Dehury is irregular."
3. The promotion granted to the petitioner having been cancelled on the above basis and the letter dated 21/24.10.2014 and the report of the Committee constituted for the purpose having admittedly not been challenged in any forum, the petitioner was not entitled to straightway claim or pray for setting aside the order cancelling his promotion based upon the clarification which has been determined to be irregular. There is not even any argument as to why Tribunal should have taken any view inconsistent with its earlier decision on the same point.
4. Therefore, the petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the original order, letters and decision whereby it is decided that the certificate of the petitioner was not required to be recognized or relied upon for his promotion. There is no order as to cost."
11. There is nothing on record to show that the order dated 29.9.2015 was challenged before Hon'ble Apex Court. The said order, which has attained finality, upheld the decision of the respondents vide order dated 24.8.2015 (Annexure-21 of the present OA) to revert the applicant on the ground that his Diploma obtained from JRNRV was irregular, with the liberty to the applicant to challenge the original decision regarding the requirement of his certificate. As per the SRO No. 66 (Annexure-R/3 of the Counter), the requirement for direct recruitment to the post of Chargeman Gr.II (technical) was a three year Diploma qualification certificate in respective field duly affiliated by AICTE. In the notification (at Annexure-6 of the OA) advertised for promotion through LDCE, the eligibility criteria clearly mentioned that the educational 8 2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30' qualification for Direct Recruitment as per the SRO 66 will be applicable. The applicant has not challenged these notifications which specified the requirement that his Diploma is required to be affiliated to the AICTE in this OA. As observed in the order dated 30.6.2014 of this Tribunal (Annexure-13), the AICTE does not have policy for affiliating the Diploma courses on distance mode and it was decided that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide the validity of the said certificate and the writ petition filed to challenge the order dated 30.6.2014 was dismissed by Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 29.9.2015.
12. The respondents have cited the order dated 12.12.2014 of Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal (Annexure-R/5) in OA No. 138/2012 and other linked OAs, in which a similar dispute was adjudicated and it was held as under:-
"2. In the present original application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, the applicants has prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 04.11.2011 (Annexure A-5) passed by the respondent no. 3 by means of which the candidature of the applicants to appear in Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (hereinafter referred to as L.D.C.E) for the post of Charge Man /Technical /Non- technical (Store & OTS) has been rejected on the ground that the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering awarded by the Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeet (Deemed) University, Udaipur, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as "J.R.N.R.V") have not been issued by the authorized / authentic Institution as per the provisions of the relevant SROs. ............................................................................
28. From the view as emerging from the above mentioned judgement of the Apex Court, it is clear that the concept of equality , as contained in Article 14 of the Constitution, is a positive concept and cannot be enforced in a negative manner. If an authority is shorn or realizes that it has committed any illegality or irregularity in favour of any individual or group of individuals, others cannot claim same illegality or irregularity on the ground of denial thereof to them. Having regard to this position, the argument of counsel for the applicants on this part based upon example of Shri D.K. Malviya cannot be sustained. .......................................................
31. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of these O.As, it is clear that the impugned order has been passed declaring the applicants as educationally ineligible to appear in LDCE -2011-12, in strict accordance 9 2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30' with the provisions of statutory recruitment orders framed by the department. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the impugned orders. It is worth noting that SROs based upon which the advertisement of examination has been issued, have not been challenged in these O.As and so long they continue to exist in the present form, the respondents will have to follow its provisions. As the action of the respondents is in conformity with the provisions of relevant SROs and in terms of the relevant advertisement while passing the impugned orders, we do not find any good ground to interfere with it. Accordingly, the O.As are dismissed. No costs."
13. In the case before Allahabad Bench, the issue of validity of the Diploma certificate awarded by JRNRV on distance mode was adjudicated for the purpose of assessing the eligibility for promotion to the post of Chargeman under the Ordnance Factory Board. Hence, the factually the present OA is squarely covered by the order dated 12.12.2014 of Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal in the OA No. 138/2012.
14. In view of the above, the question no. (ii) of para 7 of this order is no longer res integra in view of the judgment dated 29.9.2015 of Hon'ble Orissa High Court (Annexure-23 of the OA) and the order dated 12.12.2014 of Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal in OA No. 138/2012 (Annexure-R/5 of the Counter). Following the above judgments, the Diploma qualification of the applicant from JRNRV on distance mode has to be held to be inadmissible for the purpose of the promotion to the post of Chargeman and the question no.
(ii) is to be answered accordingly.
15. In the circumstances, the OA is devoid of merit and hence, it is dismissed with no order as to cost."
7. The O.A./697/2015 has been dismissed by placing reliance on the order of The Hon'ble High Court, Orissa in W.P.(C) 12140 of 10 2025.06.25 VISHAL 09:57:12 KUSHWAH +05'30' 2014 and the order of the Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal in O.A./138/2012.
8. In view of the above, we are of considered view that the instant O.A. gets squarely covered by the orders passed by the Cuttack Bench/Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal (Supra).
9. Accordingly, the O.A. is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Mallika Arya) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
VK/-
11
2025.06.25
VISHAL
09:57:12
KUSHWAH
+05'30'