IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3206 of 2010 Date of decision: 05.04.2011. Sudesh Kumari and others …Petitioners Versus HPSEB …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the Petitioner : Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr.Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J (Oral) 1. The only question which arises in this petition is whether the petitioners who are working as Junior Engineers in the respondent Board have attained the necessary qualification to be promoted as Junior Engineers. 2. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the Diploma Holder Junior Engineers who qualify the graduation course have a quota and can be promoted as Assistant Engineers. The case of the petitioners has been rejected mainly on the ground that the Universities from which they have obtained degrees are teaching through distant education mode and these Universities are not recognized. The Universities are I.A.S.E. and Vinayaka Mission University. It is also not disputed that all Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 the petitioners have attained their qualifications on or before the academic session 2007-2008. 3. Sh.Lovneesh Kanwar has drawn my attention to the various letters written by the University Grants Commission (UGC), All Indian Council for Technical Education( AICTE) and the Distant Education Council (DEC). It would also be pertinent to mention that all these three bodies have also formed a joint Committee. As far as the State Government is concerned the stand is that all degrees given from the recognized deemed Universities and Institutions are recognized for the purposes of employment. 4. The UGC when asked what is its stand in the matter, has vide its letter Annexure P-23 dated 23.9.2009 stated that if the approval to the course has been given by DEC such decree is valid for employment and higher education purposes. The DEC vide its letter dated 30th November, 2009 Annexure P-25, has stated that it (Distance Education Council) has accorded post-facto approval to Vinayaka Missions University and IASE Deemed University for admission for the year 2005 to run the programmes which are approved by the statutory bodies of the University through distance mode. It is also mentioned that DEC has accorded regular recognition to Vinayaka Missions University from February 2007 to 3 February, 2012 and Provisional Recognition to IASE Deemed University for the academic year 2007-08. 5. The UGC in its public notice Annexure P-26 has clearly stated that it is the Joint committee of the UGC-AICTE- DEC which has to consider this question. The minutes of the 3rd meeting of the Joint Committee have been placed on record as Annexure P-28 and this Annexure shows that ex-post-facto approval to various institutions including the Vinayaka Missions University and the IASE Deemed University up to the academic year 2007-08 was granted. Thus, it is clear that both these Institutions were duly recognized up to the year 2007-08. It is also not disputed that all the petitioners had attained their graduation degree in Engineering on or before the said session. 6. The stand of the Board is reflected in the decision of the Board of Directors taken pursuant to the earlier directions passed by this Court in CWP No.1523 of 2010 dated 20th April, 2010. The Board is only relying upon the public notice issued by the AICTE in the year 2010 wherein the AICTE stated that it does not recognize the qualification acquired through distant education mode at Diploma, Bachelors & Master’s level in the field of Engineering, Technology amongst others. 7. This stand of the Board cannot be accepted in view of the recognition granted to the aforesaid two Institutions to 4 conduct these courses by distant education mode as is reflected in the minutes of the Joint Committee of the UGC-AICTE-DEC, referred to above. 8. In view of the aforesaid decision there can be no manner of doubt that the petitioners are deemed to be graduates in Engineering from the date they acquired these qualifications. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and a writ is issued that the Board shall treat the petitioners to be graduates in Engineering i.e. B.Tech (Electrical) or B.E. (Electronics) as the case may be for all intents and purposes. The Order Annexure P-35 dated 29.5.2010 not recognizing the qualification of petitioners is quashed and set-aside. 9. A further direction is issued that the Board shall consider the petitioners for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineers from the date of their obtaining Bachelor Engineering degree with all consequential benefits. 10. The Board shall ensure that necessary action pursuant to the aforesaid directions is taken latest by 31st August, 2011 and the petitioners if found eligible are also paid the arrears, if any, due to them failing which the Board shall also be liable to pay interest on the said arrears @ 12% p.a. 11. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. April 5, 2011 ( Deepak Gupta ), PV Judge