Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 88 (UTT)

Geeta Ram Navani v. State of Uttarakhand

2016-03-01

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. Mr. B.P.S. Mer, Advocate present for the petitioner. 2. Mr. N.P. Sah, learned standing Counsel, present for the State/respondent. 3. The petitioner was a Class IV employee and has participated in a departmental exercise which was for promotion among Class IV employee to Class III employee, for which there is a 25% reservation. One of the essential conditions, however, is that a candidate must be having minimum High School qualification. 4. The candidature of the petitioner has not been considered by the authority concerned for the reason that she is not having High School qualification. 5. On the other hand, the petitioner contends that she has done “Parthama” and “Madhyama” from Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad in the year 1991 and 1996 respectively, which are equivalent to High School and Intermediate, respectively. 6. However, this contention of the petitioner is totally misconceived. The State counsel submits that the qualification of “Parthama” and “Madhyama” are not recognized as equivalent to High School and Intermediate in the State of Uttarakhand and in the State of U.P. as well. The learned counsel for the State further argues that in Shri Hira Singh Bhandari Vs District Inspector of Schools, Nainital & another reported in 2007 (2) U.D., 691, the learned Single Judge of this Court has already held that the certificate of “Parthama” issued by Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad is not a valid certificate and cannot be recognized as equivalent to High School in the State of Uttarakhand. 7. Since in any case, this is the view taken by the State that “Parthama and Madhyama”, which is that certificates granted by a Society in Uttar Pradesh (which is Hindi Sahitya Samelan) cannot be treated to be equivalent to High School and Intermediate qualifications and the Government is the one which is going to take employment from the petitioner, based on her qualifications, this Court does not find fault with the stand taken by the State Government. 8. In view of the above, the writ petition has no merit, the same is hereby dismissed.