Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 422 (JK)

Alia Shafi Shah v. State of J&K

2015-08-19

BANSI LAL BHAT

body2015
JUDGMENT : Bansi Lal Bhat, J. 1. The petitioner by the medium of this writ petition has sought writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice dated 24.08.2011, issued by respondent No. 2, inviting respondents 6 to 19 for interview for the post of Lecturer (10+2) in Computer Science and specifically excluding the petitioner from the process of interview and has further sought writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 to call the petitioner for interview and consider her for selection/appointment to the post of Lecturer (10+2) in Computer Science in the School Education Department, alongwith respondents 6 to 19 and on her making the grade, appoint her to the said post in accordance with law and give her all the consequential benefits. Precisely, the case of the petitioner is that she has obtained the Degree from Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana, through Distance Education and has also done her M. Phil Degree from Manav Bharti University, Himachal Pradesh, recognized by University Grants Commission. It is contended that the Degree obtained by the petitioner from the Universities aforementioned is recognized by all members of the Association of Indian Universities. 2. Respondents have filed the reply and have resisted prayers made in the writ petition. Respondent No. 2 in his reply has specifically averred that the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana, and Manav Bharti University, Himachal Pradesh are not recognized Universities. Respondent No. 4 in his detailed reply at paragraphs 47 and 48 has pleaded that Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana has been established by the State Legislative Assembly of State of Haryana as a State University and is empowered to award degrees from its main campus under regular mode. Likewise, it is pleaded that Manav Bharti University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh has been established by the State Legislative Assembly of Himachal Pradesh as a private University and is empowered to award Ph.D. Degree as per the UGC Regulations, 2009 in regular mode from its main campus only. 3. From a perusal of the writ record, it is revealed that the posts of Lecturer in Computer Science were advertised vide Notification No. 06-PSC of 2008 dated 23.05.2008. It is further revealed that the Respondent No. 2-PSC issued a Notification bearing No. PSC/EXAM/11/50 dated 09.04.2011, whereby the candidates who had applied for the posts in question were notified the result of the screening test. It is further revealed that the Respondent No. 2-PSC issued a Notification bearing No. PSC/EXAM/11/50 dated 09.04.2011, whereby the candidates who had applied for the posts in question were notified the result of the screening test. It was further notified for the information of the candidates that cut-off merit of the candidates who could be called for interview will be notified separately provided the candidates who may fall within the short listing criteria but do not possess the prescribed qualification for the post shall not be called for interview. Furthermore, the Commission appended a Note III with the notification dated 09.04.2011, which is extracted hereunder: "who may fall within the short listing criteria but possesses the Degree through Distance mode/Study Centers except through IGNOU, DOEACC, & University of Jammu/Kashmir shall not be called for interview." 4. It is this note III reproduced above, which culminated in issuing of impugned notice dated 24.08.2011, is called in question in the writ petition at hand. 5. It is pleaded by respondent No. 2, that the State Government in terms of communication No. Edu-Coll/Coord/142/2008 dated 18.08.2009, has communicated its decision to the said respondent for not entertaining any such Degree in any recruitment process. More so, it comes to fore from the reply of respondent No. 4 that the Degrees awarded by the aforesaid Universities are recognized only if obtained through a regular mode. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner has not questioned the aforesaid decision of the Government. In that view of the matter, the case of the petitioner cannot be considered in isolation of the aforesaid decision of the State Government. 7. The petitioner has failed to produce any document from the competent authority to demonstrate that the degrees relied upon by her are recognized in terms of mandate of University Grants Commission Act and/or any decision of the Jammu and Kashmir Higher Education Department. This Court in a bunch of writ petitions, the leading case being OWP No. 674/2010 titled Khurshid Ahmad Sheikh & others v. State of J&E and others decided on 06.06.2012, reported in 2012 (4) SLJ 1195, 2013 (1) JKJ 248 [HC], has held as under: "8. In their objections, all the respondents in one voice have specifically averred that the Universities from where the petitioners in all the writ petitions have obtained degrees, are not recognized for offering off-campus courses i.e. distance mode of education. 9. In their objections, all the respondents in one voice have specifically averred that the Universities from where the petitioners in all the writ petitions have obtained degrees, are not recognized for offering off-campus courses i.e. distance mode of education. 9. The stand of the Government of J&K is that degrees obtained through distance mode are not recognized by it. It is averred that the Standing Committee of Academic Counsel, a statutory body of University of Jammu has resolved it, therefore, is binding. 10. The University of Kashmir, in its objections, submits that research degrees viz. M. Phil/Ph.D degrees awarded by universities through distance mode be not entertained/accepted to be valid as the same requires the services of a full fledged guide at the back of the student pursuing such course. In support of such contention, the University of Kashmir has placed reliance on a decision taken by its Committee dated 10th April, 2008. The University goes on to say that since the decision has not been challenged, therefore, the petitions merit to be dismissed on that count also. It is further contended that University of Kashmir does not give equivalence to the certificates pursued for research programmes, issued by any university through distance mode, with its corresponding degrees. The reason for not granting equivalence to such certificates is that research programme has to be imparted in the University campus itself and requires extensive practical work and guidance from guide appointed by the concerned university for supervision during such research, therefore, it can in no circumstances be imparted though distance mode. 11. The stand of the UGC and DEC is no different." 8. The above judgment was assailed in Letters Patent Appeal, bearing LPA No. 134/2012, and the Division Bench of this Court has upheld the same in terms of judgment dated 24.09.2012. 9. This Court in another writ petition (SWP No. 187/2006) of identical nature, titled Bilal Ahmad Najar and others v. State of J&K and others decided on 27.02.2009, reported in 2009 (II) SLJ 798: 2010 (2) JKJ 218 [HC], has also held as under: "7. On consideration of the matter I could not find any ground for admission of the present petition. On consideration of the matter I could not find any ground for admission of the present petition. The petitioner has obtained a degree in distance education which admittedly is not a recognized degree by the University of Kashmir or by the Government of Jammu & Kashmir as such the degree obtained by the petitioner cannot be treated as a valid degree in so far as employment in the State is concerned. 8. It is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the degree obtained by the petitioner is through distance education mode it is not in fact so as the petitioner has attended regular classes at the Kawa Institute of Management. This in my view will not help the petitioner. Admittedly the degree under the distance education programme by the said Institute or the said University has not till date been recognized either by the University of Kashmir or by the Government, so the petitioner cannot take benefit of the same. 9. Learned counsel has further referred to the said taken by the University of Kashmir wherein the University authorities have stated that the degree is not recognized by the University for academic purpose and that it is for the State Government to consider it for employment purpose. The State Government has admittedly not recognized the degree for the purpose of employment as such the petitioner cannot claim any weightage on the basis of such degree. 10. In these circumstances this petition is dismissed." 10. It is seen that learned counsel for the petitioner during the pendency of the writ petition filed an application seeking to bring on record the Government Order No. 252-HE of 2012 dated 30.05.2012, which was allowed subject to all just exceptions, to show that the degrees obtained through distance mode shall be considered for purposes of selection. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner merits rejection, inter alia, on the ground that the selection in question pertains to the year 2008, and the aforesaid Government order which the petitioner is relying upon has been issued in the year 2012. That apart, the Government order envisages certain conditions which need to be fulfilled for taking the certificates in question into consideration. The fact of the present case do not fulfill those conditions, therefore, the aforesaid Government order is not applicable in the present case. That apart, the Government order envisages certain conditions which need to be fulfilled for taking the certificates in question into consideration. The fact of the present case do not fulfill those conditions, therefore, the aforesaid Government order is not applicable in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on notification (44) dated 01.03.1995 issued by Ministry of Human Resource Development (Department of Education), Government of India, in terms whereof all the qualification awarded through Distance Education by Universities established by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature, deemed Universities and Institutions of National importance stand automatically recognized by Government of India for the purposes of employment to posts and services under the Central Government, provided the same have been approved by Distance Education Council, IGNOU/AICTE. Invoking of this notification is misplaced as the decision taken by Government of India in this regard is not binding on the State Government. Furthermore, the recognition in terms of the aforesaid notification holds good only for purposes of employment to posts and services under the Central Government only. It is significant to note that no notification of corresponding nature has been issued by the State Government. The petitioner cannot, therefore, derive any benefit from the aforesaid notification. 11. This Court on the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the degrees obtained by the petitioner from Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana, through Distance Education, and M. Phil Degree from Manav Bharti University, Himachal Pradesh, are also recognized had directed by way of interim measure to permit the petitioner to participate in the interview process, but at the same time it was provided that it shall be at her own risk and responsibility. Since this Court has decided the issue of degrees obtained through distance mode against the petitioner, therefore, this petition must fail. 12. For the foregoing reasons and in the totality of circumstances, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed being without any merit. I do so accordingly. Dismissed along with all connected CMPs. As a corollary interim direction shall stand vacated. However, there shall be no order as to costs.