Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 608 (JK)

Sanjay Gupta v. State of J&K

2016-11-24

N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR, TASHI RABSTAN

body2016
JUDGMENT : Tashi Rabstan, J. 1. These letters patent appeals have been arisen and are directed against the common judgment dated 13.12.2007 passed in SWP No. 1184/2006 and other connected matters, whereby, while allowing the writ petitions, the short-list prepared by the J&K Service Selection Board (herein-after, for short, the Board), ignoring the writ petitioners from consideration for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspectors, came to be quashed, with a direction to the Board to prepare a fresh short-list on the basis of its advertised criteria treating the writ petitioners to be eligible for the post-in-question. The facts-in-brief are that the Board vide advertisement notice dated 29.12.2005 had invited twenty posts of Motor Vehicle Inspectors and besides other qualifications, every eligible candidate was required to be in possession of a Diploma in Automobile Engineering (3 Years Course) or a Diploma in Mechanical Engineer awarded by the State Board of Technical Education (3 Years Course). 2. The dispute arose when the Board did not allow the writ petitioners to compete for the post-in-question and held them ineligible on the ground that although they hold Bachelor of Engineering Degree in Automobile Engineering/Mechanical Engineering, yet they did not possess Diploma in Automobile Engineering/Mechanical Engineering, the minimum prescribed qualification for the said post. 3. Aggrieved of the same, the writ petitioners filed four writ petitions. The stand of State Government was that though possessing of higher qualification of Bachelor of Engineering by the writ petitioners make them eligible to compete for the post-in-question, yet they are ineligible for the said post in view of Central Government's S.O. 443(E) dated 12.06.1989, which prescribes Diploma in Engineering as the minimum basic qualification for the class of officers consisting of the category of Inspectors or Assistant Inspectors of Motor Vehicles and also in view of Notification so issued under Section 213(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 4. Learned Single Judge after going through the files and considering the rival contentions of the parties allowed the writ petitions vide common judgment dated 13.12.2007 and quashed the short-list prepared by the Board, with a direction to the Board to prepare a fresh short-list on the basis of its advertised criteria treating the writ petitioners to be eligible for the post-in-question. Hence, the present appeal on behalf of Board and some other appellants. 5. Hence, the present appeal on behalf of Board and some other appellants. 5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the writ record as well as gone through the appeals. 6. Corrigendum dated 21.02.2006 issued by the Board specifically provided that the candidates possessing Bachelor's Degree (B.E.) in the relevant discipline would be given 10 additional points and same was the position in case of Master's in Engineering in the relevant discipline; meaning thereby the Board had itself held the candidates possessing higher qualification of Bachelor's Degree and Master's Degree in Engineering in the relevant discipline to be eligible to apply for the post-in-question. It cannot be construed that only those candidates who had undergone higher qualification in Engineering after undergoing Diploma Courses in the relevant discipline would only be eligible to apply for the post-in-question. Even the All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi vide its different notifications had contemplated providing chance to meritorious diploma holders to have lateral entry to the four years Degree courses of Engineering. Further, the All India Council for Technical Education has treated the Degree in Engineering to be a higher qualification to that of Diploma in Engineering. Thus, it can safely be held that the candidates possessing Bachelor's Degree in Engineering would automatically be deemed to have undergone the Course of Diploma in Engineering in the relevant discipline too, thus they cannot be held to be ineligible to compete for the post-in-question. Therefore, in view of the above, we are not inclined to take a view other than the one taken by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the appeals fail and the same are dismissed along with connected miscellaneous petitions.