CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CASE NO.: CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004
DATE OF DECISION: March 17, 2009
CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION, THROUGH ...PETITIONER
DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION(S) U.T.
CHANDIGARH, SECTOR 9, CHANDIGARH
VERSUS
SUDESH KUMARI D/O KARAM SINGH ...RESPONDENT
INSTRUCTOR
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR.
PRESENT: NONE FOR THE PETITIONER.
MR. H.S. SAINI, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL)
The Chandigarh Administration has filed this writ petition
impugning the order (Annexure P-3) dated 21.5.2004, passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, vide which they have been
directed to consider the grant of relaxation under Rule 6 of Chandigarh
Education Service (School Cadre) (Group C) Recruitment Rules, 1991 in
regard to respondent’s qualification as equivalent qualification prescribed
for the post of Nursery Teacher. The petitioners have further been directed
to consider the case of the respondent for regularization of her service also.
The respondent Sudesh Kumari filed Original Application
before the Tribunal wherein it was prayed that as she possessed the
qualification of Bal Sewika from Indian Council of Child Welfare,
Chandigarh which according to her was equivalent to the qualification for
CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 -2-
Nursery Teacher, therefore, she be considered for appointment as Nursery
Teacher and her services be regularized. It was averred that she has been
working as part time Instructor since December, 1985. It was also averred
that a large number of similarly situated persons who possessed Bal Sewika
Training certificates have been regularized whereas the petitioner has been
ignored.
A perusal of the impugned order shows that services of large
number of persons possessing the Bal Sewika Training certificates have
been regularized as is clear from a perusal of Annexure A-11 dated
16.1.1986. The petitioners have not denied the fact that a large number of
Nursery Teachers possessing similar qualification as that of the petitioner
have been regularized.
Apart from the above, the present respondent had earlier filed
O.A. No.949/CH/1992 wherein the Tribunal had directed the Chandigarh
Administration to consider the case of the respondent for appointment as
Nursery Teacher against a vacant post. The respondent was declared
ineligible, therefore, the respondent filed O.A. No.859/CH/1998 wherein
directions were given by the Tribunal to consider granting relaxation to the
respondent. Against the order passed in O.A. No.859/CH/1998, the
Chandigarh Administration filed writ petition in the High Court bearing
CWP No.9897-CAT of 2002. The operative portion of the order is as
follows:-
“In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order
is quashed. However, we deem it proper to direct that the case
of respondent no.1 be placed before the Administrator, Union
Territory, Chandigarh for consideration whether it was a fit
CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 -3-case for granting relaxation in terms of Rule 6 of the Rules. It
is hoped that the Administrator would pass appropriate order
in this respect within 2 months from the receipt of copy of this
order. If, on a consideration of the entirety of the matter, the
Administrator comes to the conclusion that the requirement of
recognition of the certificate by Chandigarh Administration
should be relaxed, then the candidature of respondent No.1
shall be considered for regularization and appropriate order
be passed by the competent authority within next 3 months.”
As the case of the petitioner was not considered in terms of the
order Annexure A-8 passed by the High Court, therefore, the petitioner filed
the O.A. which has been allowed. From the aforementioned facts, it is clear
that the petitioner has been discriminated against as the services of similarly
situated persons who were possessing the certificate of Bal Sewika Training
Course have been regularized, whereas, the petitioner has been ignored.
Moreover the case of the petitioner for relaxation has been considered under
Chandigarh Education Service (School Cadre) (Group ‘C’) Recruitment
(First Amendment) Rules, 2001 whereas, her case should have been
considered in terms of Rule 6 of Chandigarh Education Service (School
Cadre) (Group C) Recruitment Rules. Thus, we find no infirmity in the
impugned order dated 21.5.2004 and the writ petition is dismissed.
(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE
March 17, 2009 (NIRMALJIT KAUR)
Gulati JUDGE