Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dheeraj vs Security Printing And Minting ... on 6 May, 2025
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
Bench: Subodh Abhyankar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940
WP No.5860 of 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
ON THE 6th OF MAY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 5860 of 2024
DHEERAJ
Versus
SECURITY PRINTING AND MINTING CORPORATION OF INDIA
LIMITED (SPMCIL) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manuraj Singh - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vivek Patwa, learned counsel for the respondent(s).
ORDER
1] Heard finally, with the consent of the parties.
2] This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:-
"(i) issue an appropriate writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order quashing the impugned order dt.29.01.2024 (Annexure P/1).
(ii) issue an appropriate writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing the respondents to accept the candidature of petitioner and he may be appointed as a Supervisor (Printing).
(iii) Allow this Writ petition with costs and any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner."
3] The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 29.01.2024, passed by the respondent No.3 Joint General Manager (H.R.), Bank Note Press, Dewas whereby the petitioner has been informed that since his Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940 WP No.5860 of 2024 2 qualification is not in conformity with the advertised qualification, his candidature cannot be accepted.
4] In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner is an Engineer, having done his B.Tech in Printing and Packaging Technology from Central University of Haryana. The petitioner had applied for the post of Supervisor (Printing), pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondents on 22.07.2023 (Annexure P/2), wherein amongst others, two posts of OBC category were also created, and the essential qualifications for the same were stated to be the Diploma in Printing Technology or the Higher qualification, i.e., B.Tech./B.E. in the relevant trade was also to be considered. The petitioner's application has been rejected by the impugned order on the ground that he holds the degree in Printing and Packaging Technology, instead of Printing only, as is reflected in the Return filed by the respondents, although, in the impugned order, it is only mentioned that he does not meet the required qualification. Thus, this petition.
5] Shri Manuraj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is eligible to be appointed on the post of Supervisor (Printing), as he holds the requisite qualification of B.Tech. in Printing and Packaging Technology. Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the qualification clause of the advertisement, which provides that apart from the Diploma, which is the essential qualification, the Higher qualification of B.Tech. in the relevant trade shall also been considered. Thus, it is submitted that the word 'relevant trade' would include Printing and Packaging also, and not only the Printing. Counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to the Higher qualification in Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940 WP No.5860 of 2024 3 respect of another post, advertised in the same advertisement i.e., for the post of Junior Technician (Printing) in which, so far as the Higher qualification is concerned, it is specifically mentioned that a Full Time Diploma in Printing Technology from Government recognized Institute/Polytechnics will also be considered, instead of referring to the word, 'relevant trade'. Thus, it is submitted that since no such specification is there, in respect of the petitioner's post of Supervisor (Printing), and the relevant trade as mentioned in the qualification clause would include Printing and Packaging Technology.
6] Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that even otherwise also, the petitioner had obtained certain information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 from the Currency Note Press, Nashik, Maharashtra, which has been filed along with the counter-affidavit, in which it was specifically asked that if there is any Supervisor having degree of B.Tech. in Printing and Packaging Technology, to which a pointed answer has also been given by the said Unit of the Currency Note Press, Nashik, that the said Unit has the Supervisor having degree of B.Tech. in Printing and Packaging Technology. And it was also asked if anyone having a degree of B.Tech in Printing and Packaging Technology is eligible for the post of Supervisor, to which also the answer has been given in affirmative. Thus, it is submitted that there was no reason for the respondents to discriminate the petitioner, when it comes to Bank Note Press, Dewas.
7] Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the rejection of the petitioner's candidature at the stage of verification of the document was wrong, as the petitioner fulfill all the requisite qualification. Counsel Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940 WP No.5860 of 2024 4 has also referred to the Certificate (Annexure P/7), which has been issued by the Registrar of Central University of Haryana, in which it is specifically certified that the degree of B.Tech. in Printing and Packaging Technology is equivalent to the degree of B.Tech. in Printing Technology.
8] Shri Vivek Patwa, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer, and it is submitted that no case for interference is made out, and no comparison of the present post of Supervisor (Printing) at Dewas can be made with the other Unit of the Bank Note Press, as all the Units have different machines of different technology, and expertise are also different.
9] Counsel for the respondent has also submitted that as directed by this Court on 01.10.2024, a report dated 11.11.2024 has also been filed on 27.11.2024, in which the documents filed by the petitioner and the other documents were verified, and it has been concluded that the petitioner does not meet the required criterion, as he does not fulfill the requisite qualification. Thus, it is submitted that no case for interference is made out.
10] Heard. Having considered the rival submissions, perusal of the documents filed on record, as also the certificate issued by the University of the petitioner dated 05.02.2024, which reads as under:-
" TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN As per the recommendations of the Staff Council and the approval of the Competent Authority, this is to certify that the B.Tech. (Printing and Packaging Technology) progamme running under School of Engineering and Technology in Central University of Haryana is equivalent to B.Tech (Printing Technology).Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940 WP No.5860 of 2024 5 This certificate is issued to Mr. Dheeraj (Roll No.192136), a student of B.Tech. (Printing and Packaging Technology) of Batch-2019- 2023.
Here it is also certified that the Central University of Haryana is a Central University established vide Central Universities Act, 2009 (Act-25 of 2009 of the Parliament) and comes under the purview of the Ministry of Education (erstwhile Ministry of Human Resource Development). The Central University of Haryana is fully funded by the University Grants Commission and also recognized by the University Grants Commission vide Section 2(f) of Chapter I of The University Grants Commission Act, 1956. The University is also NAAC accredited "A" Grade University."
(Emphasis supplied) 11] It is also apparent from the aforesaid certificate that the University is governed by the Central Universities Act, 2009, and thus, the certificate issued by the same cannot be said to be irrelevant or not binding on any unit of the Central Government.
12] It is also found that so far as the advertisement is concerned, it is clearly provided that the Higher qualification shall also include the degree in relevant trade, the relevant excerpts of the advertisement regarding qualification of Supervisor (Printing) as also the Junior Technician (Printing) read as under:-
"1. QUALIFICATIONS (as on closing date of receipt of applications):
Supervisor Essential: 1st class full Time Diploma in Printing (Printing) Technology/Engineering from Government recognized Institutes/ polytechnics.
OR Higher qualification i.e. B.Tech. /B.E. in the relevant trade will also be considered.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940 WP No.5860 of 2024 6 Junior Essential: Full Time ITI certificate recognized from Technician NCVT/SCVT in Printing trade viz. Litho Offset Machine (Printing) Minder/ Letter Press Machine Minder/ Offset Printing/ Platemaking / Electroplating/ Full time ITI in Plate Maker cum Impositer/ Hand Composing OR Higher qualification i.e. Full Time Diploma in Printing Technology from Government recognized Institutes/ polytechnics will also be considered.
(Emphasis Supplied) 13] It is apparent from the aforesaid qualifications also that there is no such specific pointed higher qualification indicated in respect of the Supervisor (Printing), as has been indicated in respect of the Junior Technical (Printing).
14] So far as the word 'relevant trade' used in respect of Higher qualification for the post in question, Supervisor (Printing), is concerned, this Court can rely upon the certificate issued by the University, which holds that the degree of B.Tech. in Printing and Packaging Technology shall be considered as the degree in Printing Technology only. 15] So far as the report dated 16.01.2024 submitted by the Committee constituted as per the order passed by this Court is concerned, this Court finds that certain relevant aspects of the matter have been left out by the said Committee while considering the candidature of the petitioner, and he has been compared with a person, who has already been given the appointment, and who holds a Diploma, and thus, there was no comparison between the petitioner and the said person as they hold different qualifications.
16] In such facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the petitioner's candidature has Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11940 WP No.5860 of 2024 7 been wrongly rejected by the respondents, and accordingly, impugned order dated 29.01.2024 passed by the respondent No.3, is hereby quashed, and the respondents are directed to accept the petitioner's candidature, and issue him the appointment order within a further period of three weeks from today.
17] With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed and disposed of.
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE Pankaj Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ PANDEY Signing time: 5/26/2025 7:07:25 PM