Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 19, 2009
Sonika & others
.....Petitioners
VERSUS
State of Haryana & others
....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
PRESENT: Mr.Neeraj Kumar, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana,
for the State.
****
RANJIT SINGH, J.
The petitioners seek quashing of the advertisement dated
1.11.2007 issued by the respondents and for issuance of a direction
to the respondents to accept their application forms and not to reject
the same on the ground that they are not having a valid qualification.
Posts of Junior Mistress, Cutting and Tailoring, Needle
Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :2:
and Embroidery and dress making were advertised. In response to
the same, the petitioners submitted their application forms. The
petitioners are having NTC Certificate in the concerned field. They
claim to have completed 8 months’ advance course plus four months
P.O.T., which is equivalent to T.T.C. It is further mentioned that
petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are having diploma in cutting and tailoring
whereas petitioner Nos.3 and 4 have qualified in the diploma course
in dress making. The petitioners would aver that advance course of 8
months plus P.O.T. course would be sufficient and equivalent to
T.T.C. and all the petitioners having P.O.T. advance course degree.
To highlight that the petitioners would be eligible for being considered
for these posts, it is pointed out that respondent No.3 issued two
different advertisements one for Ambala and another for Rohtak
District. The essential qualification prescribed for Junior Mistress in
Cutting and Tailoring, embroidery, heir and skin is NTC certificate,
which the petitioners have already acquired, but in place of CTI/TTC
in the concerned field, they have advance course plus POT, which is
equivalent to the said course as given in the advertisement.
It is claimed that the application forms of the petitioners
have been rejected illegally and arbitrarily. The petitioners have
placed reliance on letter dated 8.1.2007 to point out that in this letter,
it is clearly mentioned that the course of 8 months duration followed
by 4 months POT course, can be considered for appointment for
vacancies on contract basis. The petitioners, being aggrieved against
the action of the respondents, have also filed a representation. The
prayer is that the advance course in POT is considered by all the
States except the State of Haryana, which is, thus, termed as illegal
Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :3:
and arbitrary. The petitioners have, thus, filed the present writ petition
to impugn the advertisement dated 1.11.2007.
As per the advertisement, copy of which is at Annexure P-
2, qualification for the posts are as under:-
“i) National Trade Certificate in the concerned trade.
ii) Training Instructor course Certificate/Teacher training
certificate in the concerned trade.
iii) Five years practical/teaching experience including
the period of aforesaid i) and ii) from any reputed
Industrial Organization or Institution.
iv)Hindi as subject upto Matric Standard.
Prescribed Qualifications for Jr.Mistress (women)
Fashion Technology at Sr.No.5
i) Hindi and English or Sanskrit in Matric from
Recognized Institution.
ii) Degree/diploma in Fashion Technology from
recognized Institution by technical Education Board.
OR
Certificate from some recognized institution or University
by National Institute of Fashion Design (NIFT)/Apparel
institution in Fashion Designing and clothing technology.
OR
(NTCT) part time faculty
OR
B.Tech Course in Textile Technology from some
recognized Institution.
Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :4:
OR
M.Sc. In Clothing/Textile from recognized Institution/
University.
OR
MBA in Marketing from recognized institution/university or
GMT diploma in Apparel marketing or marketing from
NIFT (National Institution of Fashion Designing) or CPT
from recognized state technical education board.
iii)Five years practical/teaching experience including the
course period in the concerned trade from some
reputed Industrial organization under education board/
reorganization institution.”
Thus, National Trade Certificate in the concerned trade is
one of the essential qualification prescribed. It is further provided that
preference would be given to Training Technology (POT) from
Directorate Employment and Trading (DGE & T) Government of
India. On this basis, the counsel would contend that the petitioners
have this qualification, which is to be preferred. They would plead
that view of the respondents that they are not having essential
qualification, thus, would sound unfair and arbitrary.
In the reply filed, it is stated that Haryana Industrial
Training and Vocational Education Department, Field Offices (Group
C) Service Rules, 1998 provides qualification and experience. The
relevant rules as contained in Appendix B has then been reproduced.
As per the Rule, essential qualification and experience for direct
recruitment is (i) National Trade Certificate in the concerned Trade
(ii) Training Instructor Course Certificate/Teacher Training Certificate
Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :5:
in concerned trade (iii) Five years practical/Teaching experience,
including the period of aforesaid (i & ii) from any reputed Industrial
organization or Institution and (iv) knowledge of Hindi upto Matric
Standard. Reference is then made to the qualification held by the
petitioners, which are as under:-
“Petitioner No.1
(i) Matric from Haryana Board.
(ii) 10+2 from Haryana Board.
(iii) National Trade Certificate in Cutting and Tailoring.
(iv) National Trade Certificate in Embroidery and Needle
Work.
(v) CTI in Dress Making (Advanced) for 10/2003 to
5/2004= 8 months.
(vi) Principle of Teaching (P.O.T.) for 3/2005 to 6/2005= 4
months.
Petitioner No.2
(i) Matric from Haryana Board.
(ii) 10+2 from N.O.S. New Delhi.
(iii) National Trade Certificate in Cutting and Tailoring.
(iv) CTI in Dress Making (Advanced) for 10/2003 to
5/2004= 8 months.
(v) Instructor Course Principle of Teaching (P.O.T.) for
11/1999 to 2/2000= 4 months.
Thus, the qualification of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were not
considered sufficient, which would make them eligible for the post of
Junior Mistress, Cutting and Tailoring. The order rejecting their
application is, as such, justified. It is further pointed out that it is
Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :6:
clearly mentioned in the Rules that:-
“No person shall be appointed to any post in the Service,
unless he is in possession of qualifications and
experience specified in column 3 of Appendix B to these
rules in the case of direct recruitment and those specified
in column 4 of the aforesaid Appendix in the case of
persons appointed otherwise than by direct recruitment.”
So far as case of petitioner Nos.3 and 4 is concerned, it is
stated that their applications have not been received against any
vacancy and, thus, they can not be selected.
The essential qualifications have been prescribed under
the Rules. Concededly, the petitioners are not fulfilling the part of
essential qualifications. Both the petitioners do not possess the
qualification of Training Instructor Course Certificate/Teacher
Training Certificate. The Rule further provides that no person shall be
appointed to the post in service unless he is in possession of
qualifications and experience specified in the Rules. In the
advertisement, equivalence of Training Instructor Course
Certificate/Teacher Training Certificate is not provided as
qualification. In this background, the prayer of the petitioners to seek
equivalence of the degree possessed by them, if permitted would not
only stand in violation of the Rule position but also to the
advertisement issued. Since the requirement is on the basis of Rule
position, the judgments relied upon by counsel for the petitioners to
seek equivalence of the degrees possessed by them on the basis of
these judgments in the cases of Shyam Kumar Vyas and others
Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2006(4) S.C.T.106, Smt.Raj
Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) :7:
Kumari Garg Vs. State of Haryana, 2001(4) S.C.T.885, Balbir
Singh Vs. State of Haryana, 2002(2) S.C.T.290 and Vimal Singh
Rana Vs. State of Haryana, 2001(4) S.C.T.385, would not have
much relevance. The applications of the petitioners accordingly have
been rightly rejected and can not be termed as unjust, unfair and
arbitrary in any manner.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
August 19, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE