IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06.07.2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.NO.16075 OF 2011 B.Balakrishna ...Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chairman-cum-Managing Director TANGEDCO, 144, Anna Salai,Chennai 600 002. 2.The Secretary, TANGEDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. 3. The Chairman, Bharatiya Shiksha Parisha U.P. 'Bharat Bhawan' Matiyari, Chinhat, Faizabad Road, Lucknow 227 105. 4. The Secretary, University Grants Commission, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110 002. ..Respondents Petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in Memorandum No.45477/A.11/A.111/2011-1, dated 24.06.2011 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and direct the 2nd respondent to post the petitioner as Legal Officer with retrospective effect from 19.03.2010 when he was promoted as Section Officer and posted in Legal Cell. For Petitioner:Mr.D.Nellaiappan O R D E R The petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition challenging the communication dated 24.06.2011 sent by the second respondent. In the impugned communication, the petitioner, who, was working as a Section Officer in the respondent organization, was informed that LLB degree obtained by him from one Bharatiya Shiksha Parishad/Lucknow cannot be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ recognised as a valid law degree for the purpose of considering his case as Legal Officer. 2. Reference was made on the Regulation 94 of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations wherein it is stated that the Legal Officer must have a degree in law obtained from an University recognised by University Grants Commission and it was also informed that UGC by its letter dated 25.03.2010 has stated that the Bharatiya Shiksha Parishad/Lucknow is neither a University nor a deemed University and the degrees or certificates awarded by the said Institution are not valid for any employment and academic purpose. 3. The petitioner has now challenged the said communication and contended that the Bharatiya Shiksha Parisha/Lucknow has been conducting several courses in law and the High Court of Allahabad in a decision in C.M.W.P.No.18832 of 1999 dated 6th May 1999 has held that the candidate who possess BTC correspondence degree should be treated as equivalent to regular B.T.C. Courses and the petitioners should be considered. Since the petitioner had possess such a LLB degree, he cannot be debarred from making his claim for the post of Legal Officer. 4. Regulation 94 of the service regulation framed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board provides for qualification for the post post of Legal Officer and the Regulation reads as follows: "Must Possess a degree of any University or Institution recognized by the University Grants Commission for the purpose of its grants or any of the Universities recognised by the Government of Tamil nadu with a Bachelor's degree in law obtained from any University established by law in India and recognised by the University Grants Commission by undergoing a three year course of study. Or a Bachelor's Degree in Law obtained from any University established by law in India and recognised by the University Grants Commission by undergoing a five year course of study." 5. Therefore, in the light of the statutory regulation framed by the Board, the petitioner cannot contend that his degree should be recognised as a valid degree obtained from the University recognised by the University Grants Commission. Even otherwise Mr.D.Nellaiappan, learned counsel for the petitioner also stated that the degree obtained was only a decree obtained through Open University system. In fact, the question raised in this writ petition is no longer res integra. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. The Division Bench of this Court in Meenakshi Sundaram, President National Union of Journalist, Madras Vs. Director of Legal Studies, Madras Law College, Madras (1981) 2 MLJ 141 has held that the degree obtained through correspondence Course cannot be treated as a degree for the purpose of even for admission to the higher posts, unless such a degree is recognised by the Bar Council also. An identical question arose under the Tamil Nadu Secretariate Service wherein a candidate has challenged the Government order in G.O.Ms.No..45, Law Department, dated 04.02.1991 that such degree should not be recognised by the State Government for any employment as a Law Officer. That G.O. has been challenged before this Court in N.PUSHPA Vs. Secretary to Government, Law Department,Chennai reported in (2009) 8 MLJ 1072 and it was rejected by this Court. Hence, there is no case made out. The writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar. VJY To 1.The Chairman-cum-Managing Director TANGEDCO, 144, Anna Salai,Chennai 600 002. 2.The Secretary, TANGEDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. 3. The Chairman, Bharatiya Shiksha Parisha U.P. 'Bharat Bhawan' Matiyari, Chinhat, Faizabad Road, Lucknow 227 105. 4. The Secretary, University Grants Commission, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110 002. 1 cc to Mr.D. Nellaiappan, Advocate, Sr. 40503 W.P.No.16075 of 2011 MSM (CO) kk 22/7 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/