Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Ashok Kumar vs Union Of India And Others on 18 August, 2021
Author: Pankaj Mithal
Bench: Chief Justice, Sanjay Dhar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CJ Court
Reserved on: 12.08.2021
Pronounced on: 18.08.2021
WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w
WP(C) No.1728/2019
Ashok Kumar ...Petitioner(s)/Appellants.
Through: Mr. S. A. Naik, Advocate.
Vs.
Union of India and others. ....Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Nazir Ahmad Bhat, CGSC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
Pankaj Mithal, CJ
01. The judgment and order dated 17.09.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in TA No.62/00011/2015 :
Ashok Kumar v. Union of India, and others and various miscellaneous applications connected thereto, has been challenged by both the sides by filing two writ petitions.
02. The Tribunal by the impugned order has set-aside the order of termination of Ashok Kumar and has directed for his reinstatement into service but without backwages and any promotion. The aforesaid Ashok WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 1 Kumar has preferred the writ petition being WP(C) No.2754/2019 claiming backwages whereas the other writ petition being WP(C) No.1728/2019 has been filed on behalf of the Union of India.
03. The aforesaid Ashok Kumar came to be appointed on a post of Peon/Mate (SSK) upon selection pursuant to the advertisement dated 05.12.2011 which provided for the minimum qualification for the said post as Matriculation from a recognized Board/ University or ITI in any trade from a recognized Institute/ University or equivalent course from an Institute recognized by National College for Vocational Training. The aforesaid appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled initially on 30.03.2013 followed by subsequent similar orders on the ground that his certificate of matriculation from the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi, is not from the recognized Board/ University.
04. So the only question which crops up before us is whether in terms of the aforesaid advertisement Ashok Kumar is having the certificate of matriculation from a recognized Board/ University.
05. We have heard Mr. S. A. Naik, learned counsel for Ashok Kumar and Mr. Nazir Ahmad Bhat, learned counsel for the Union of India.
06. It has been argued on behalf of the Union of India that the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi, is not a recognized Board and any certificate of matriculation given or issued by it is not admissible. The said Board upon enquiries have been found to have been de-recognized at least from 2012 though it stood de-recognized earlier also. WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 2
07. Learned counsel appearing for Ashok Kumar submits that his client has passed High School from a School at Gurdaspur (Punjab), which is affiliated to the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi, in the year 2009-10 and during this period the Board was validly recognized under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Therefore, any previous or subsequent de-recognition of the Board would not make the certificate of matriculation to be illegal and in-admissible for the purposes of above job.
08. The case put up before us is that the Board of High Secondary Education, Delhi, is recognized under Regulation 2 of Chapter XIV of the Regulations framed under the UP Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and that its name figure at serial no.29 and 38.
09. The documents annexed by Ashok Kumar along with his petition reveal that he was student of Ganpati Public Sr. Secondary School, Bariar, District Gurdaspur in Punjab. It is said that the aforesaid school was affiliated to the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi. He has been issued a secondary school certificate for the year 2010 by the aforesaid Board on 19.06.2010. It is followed by the marks sheet also of the said Board. The aforesaid certificate and marks sheet demonstrates that the said Board claims itself to be a Board recognized for conducting examinations at the level of the High School etc., of the students of the school and colleges affiliated to it. The said Board also claims itself to be recognized under Regulation 2 of Chapter XIV of the regulations of the UP Intermediate Education Act, 1921.
WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 3
10. In these circumstances, it is essential for us to have a glimpse over the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the regulations framed thereunder.
11. The aforesaid Act vide Section 1(2) clearly provides that it shall extend to the whole of Uttar Pradesh meaning thereby that its jurisdiction is limited to the State of Uttar Pradesh and does not go beyond it so as to recognize any Board or Institute outside the State.
12. The said Act provides for the constitution of a Board known as Board of High School and Intermediate Education for the purposes of grant of diplomas or certificates to persons who have pursued a course of study in an institution admitted to the privileges of recognition by the Board and to conduct examination at the end of the High School and Intermediate courses. It also has the power to recognize institutions for the purposes of its examinations. The word "Institution" has been defined under Section 2(b) to mean a recognized Intermediate College, Higher Secondary School or High School, and includes, where the context so requires, a pan of an institution.
13. On plain reading of the above provisions constituting the Board and laying down its power as also the definition of Institution, it is clear that it is only the institutions as defined that are to be granted recognition by the said Board. A Board which in itself is an authority to recognize institutions, to conduct examinations and to award certificates is not contemplated to be recognized under the aforesaid Act.
14. Simultaneously, it would be necessary to have a glance upon Regulation 2 of Chapter XIV of the Regulations framed under the said Act. WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 4 The said Regulation 2 declares that the examinations mentioned therein are declared equivalent to the High School of the Board constituted under the UP Intermediate Education Act for making the candidates eligible for study of prescribed course of Intermediate Examination. For the sake of convenience, the aforesaid Regulation 2 is reproduced hereinbelow:
"2. Following examinations are declared equivalent to the High School of the Board for the purpose of making the candidates eligible for the study of prescribed course of Intermediate Examination...."
15. The aforesaid Regulation is sufficiently clear and it only provides for the equivalent qualification to that of the High School Examination of the Board under the UP Intermediate Education Act that too only for a limited purpose for eligibility to the study of Intermediate Examination.
16. It is only for the above purpose that the name of the Board of Higher Secondary Education Delhi has been included therein at sr. no.29 as under:-
"(29) Higher Secondary Examination (one year or three years' course) of Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi."
17. The entry 38 of the said Regulation though mentions the name of Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi, but that is in connection with a different qualification i.e., Higher Secondary Technical Examination with which we are not concerned.
18. In other words, on the simple reading of Regulation 2 of Chapter XIV of the aforesaid Regulations, it is as clear as crystal that the Board of WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 5 Higher Secondary Education, Delhi, has not been recognized under the UP Intermediate Education Act, 1921 rather the certificate of High School issued by the said Board has been recognized to be equivalent to the High School of the UP Board only for the purposes of admission to the Intermediate Examinations.
19. It may be pertinent to mention here that the aforesaid Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi was closed down, as per the information of the Ministry of Human Resources and Development vide resolution dated 30th June, 1962 passed by the Directorate of Education, Delhi and that it has seized to exist.
20. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is nothing on record to establish that the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi is a recognized Board.
21. The submission that it is recognized under the UP Intermediate Education Act, 1921, is not acceptable for the reason that said recognition is not actually a recognition of the Board but only a recognition of its Matriculation certificate as equivalent to the High School Certificate of the Board of UP for the purposes of making the candidates eligible for the study of prescribed course of Intermediate Examination. In this manner, even if Ashok Kumar has passed his Matriculation in the year 2009-10, when there was alleged recognition of the said Board of High Secondary Education, Delhi, under the UP Intermediate Education Act, it would not constitute to be a Matriculation certificate from a recognized Board. WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 6
22. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the aforesaid Ashok Kumar does not possess the minimum qualification of Matriculation from a recognized Board for appointment as a Peon. The Tribunal thus committed manifest error of law in ignoring or misconstruing Regulation 2 of Chapter XIV of the Regulations framed under the UP Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and failed to find out whether it contemplates for the recognition of the Board or only provides for the equivalence qualification to the High School of the UP Board of High School and Intermediate Examination.
23. It is an admitted fact that Ashok Kumar was appointed on 20.03.2013 and when his services were terminated he filed a writ petition and obtained a stay order and as such continued to function till 2017 and after some break has again been directed to reinstated by the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal. He bonafidely appears to have pursued the course of High School from a school at Gurdaspur without actually knowing whether the Board of High Secondary Education, Delhi, to which it is affiliated is duly recognized or not. Therefore, he cannot be penalized for it when he has otherwise been selected and appointed and at the same time has worked for so many years. The post on which he has been appointed is not a post of skill or a post on which very talented persons are required to function. The aforesaid Ashok Kumar is a „little Indian‟ who is educated up to Matriculation from a school which may not be affiliated to a recognized Board and as such, it would not be in the ends of justice to disturb his appointment at this stage. The post on which he is working requires work of menial in nature. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 7 provided for his reinstatement but without any right of promotion to any higher scale post unless he improves upon his educational qualification while in service.
24. In the facts and circumstances of the case, after laying down the legal position, that matriculation certificate of the Board of Higher Secondary Delhi, is not of a recognized Board, still we do not deem it necessary to touch the judgment and order of the Tribunal and dismiss both the petitions with the observation that the aforesaid Ashok Kumar may be allowed to pursue his High School afresh from some institution duly affiliated to a recognized Board, may be by a distance mode after taking appropriate permission from his Employers and acquire the minimum qualification for the post.
25. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(SANJAY DHAR) (PANKAJ MITHAL)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Srinagar
18.08.2021
Abdul Qayoom, PS
Whether the order is speaking? Yes.
Whether the order is reportable? Yes.
WP(C) No.2754/2019 c/w WP(C) No.1728/2019 8
ABDUL QAYOOM LONE
2021.08.18 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document