CWP NOS.9319/2006 & 15667/2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 29.1.2009 1.CWP NO.9319/2006 Laxmi Rani and others ...Petitioners VERSUS The State of Punjab & Others …Respondents 2.CWP No.15667/2007 Shinder Pal Kaur and others ..Petitioners VERSUS The State of Punjab & Others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.R.K.Chopra, Sr.Advocate with Ms. Maninder, Advocate for petitioners in CWP No.9319/2006 Mr.Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for petitioners in CWP No.15667/2007 Ms.Charu Tuli, Sr.DAG, Punjab Mr.N.R.Dahiya, Advocate for respondent no.4 Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) This order will dispose of CWP Nos.9319/2006 & 15667/2007 as common questions of law and facts are involved in both the writ petitions. The petitioners applied for the posts of ETT teachers pursuant to the CWP NOS.9319/2006 & 15667/2007 2 advertisement issued by the State Government which was published in local newspaper, Daily Ajit in its issue dated 27.5.2006. The minimum qualifications prescribed for the post were 10+2 or equivalent diploma as recognized by Punjab Govt. with ETT recognized by any State Education Board and equivalent course from defence Services only. In case of non- availability of ETT candidates up to district level, the candidates with BA/B.Sc./B.Com plus B.Ed. (from any university recognized by UGC) will be considered. The petitioners in both the writ petitions, though passed their graduation from the institutions recognized by State of Punjab Government, however, they acquired the B.Ed. qualification from Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Internal University, Raipur, State of Chhattisgarh. On completion of the process of selection, the select list was notified. The petitioners were not selected. The claim of the petitioners for selection has not been considered on the ground that they acquired the B.Ed. Qualification from the University which is not recognized under law and for this purpose, reliance is placed upon judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Prof. Yashpal and another vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others, 2005 (2) RSJ 112. In the aforesaid case, vires of local enactment of the State of Chhattisgarh, namely, Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya (Sthapna Aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2002 was challenged. Vide the aforesaid judgment delivered on 11.2.2005, the Hon'ble Supreme Court struck down Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the aforesaid Adhiniyam as ultra vires and all notifications issued thereunder notifying the Universities were held invalid. Apart from that while quashing the aforesaid provisions and passing various directions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court protected the interest of the students who were studying in the CWP NOS.9319/2006 & 15667/2007 3 institutions established by such Universities. The relevant extract from the aforesaid directions is noticed here-in-below:- “45... In order to protect the interest of the students who may be actually studying in the institutions established by such private universities, it is directed that the State Government may take appropriate measures to have such institutions affiliated to the already existing State Universities in Chhattisgarh. We are issuing this direction keeping in mind the interest of the students and also Sections 33 and 34 of the Act, which contemplate dissolution of the sponsoring body and liquidation of a University whereunder responsibility has to be assumed by the State Government. It is, however, made clear that the benefit of affiliation of an institution shall be extended only if it fulfills the requisite norms and standards laid down for such purpose and not to every kind of institution. Regarding technical, medical or dental colleges, etc. affiliation may be accorded if they have been established after fulfilling the prescribed criteria laid down by the All India Council of Technical Education, Medical Council of India, Dental Council of India or any other statutory authority and with their approval or sanction as prescribed by law.” Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners have vehemently contended that all the petitioners acquired their B.Ed. qualifications before the aforesaid provisions of enactment were annulled by Hon'ble Supreme Court and directions were issued and at the relevant time their degrees were duly recognized by the U.G.C. as also the CWP NOS.9319/2006 & 15667/2007 4 Government of India and for this purpose, reliance is placed upon communication dated 19.1.2004 (Annexure P-3 in CWP No.9319/2006) issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Secondary & Higher Education to the Registrar of Shri Rawatpura Sarkar International University, Chhattisgarh which reads as under:- “I am directed to refer to your letter SRI/DO/2004/725, dt. 06th Jan. 2004 regarding recognition of degrees/diplomas/certificate issued by Shri Rawatpura Sarkar International University, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). It is to say that Degree/Diploma/Certificate and Pre University Course awarded by a University for which it is recognized or authorized by any law does not require any separate recognition. Your University being established under State Act (Chhattisgarh) notified by Gazette Notification No.F- 73/77/02/HE/38, dated 09/09/02 under Chhattisgarh Nizi Kshetra (Vishwavidyala (Sthapana Aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam 2002 ( No.2 of 2002). Degree/Diploma/Certificate issued by Rawatpura Sarkar International University, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) stands automatically recognized for the purpose of the employment under Central/State Government and for higher studies in India/abroad.” It is accordingly contended that since the petitioners had qualified from the recognized University and it was only at subsequent stage that the provisions of the local enactment were declared ultra vires and the directions issued for de-recognition of the University. According to Mr. Chopra, the judgment will have no application or implication so far as the CWP NOS.9319/2006 & 15667/2007 5 rights of the petitioners are concerned. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after going through the aforesaid judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prof. Yashpal (supra), I am of the considered view that these petitions are not maintainable, in view of the clear cut directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment have protected the rights and interest of only such students who were undertaking the course at the time of delivering the judgment. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has not protected the degrees awarded by the Universities prior to the judgment and since the very existence of the University has not been considered as legal and even thereafter also, the University has not been recognized till date, nor its degrees already granted have been validated by any law and thus, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. In view of the above, I find no merit in these petitions which are accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the Hon'ble Supreme, if so advised. A copy of this order be placed on record on each concerned file. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 29.1.2009 MFK NOTE:Whether to be referred to Reporter or not:YES/NO