HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.13993 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 2 and 3 in not issuing call letters to the petitioners for the examination schedule to be held on 15.05.2011 for the post of Junior Executive Trainees (E & M) (E1) Grade Internal on the ground that the petitioners have not obtained prior approval at the time of acquisition of the qualification required for the said post as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present writ petition are as follows:- The petitioners were appointed in various categories in different years in the respondent Company. Some petitioners obtained certificates from Institution of Mechanical Engineers (India) in respect of Section-A & B of Associate Membership Examination, and some of them obtained certificates of B.Tech., in different courses. They are fully eligible to participate in the selection process in pursuance of Notification No.4 of 2010, for the post of Junior Executive Trainee (Electrical & Mechanical) (E1) Grade. Their grievance is that in spite of their acquiring the requisite qualifications as per the said notification, no call letters were issued to them to participate in the written examination. Therefore, they filed the present writ petition. 3. While admitting the writ petition on 11.05.2011, an interim order was passed in WPMP.No.16922 of 2011 directing the respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioners to participate in the written examination to be held on 15.05.2011. In pursuance of the said order, the petitioners have participated in the written examination. 4. Along with vacate stay petition filed by the respondents seeking to vacate the interim order dated 11.05.2011 passed in WPMP.No.16922 of 2011 on the ground that the petitioners are not qualified in terms of the notification issued by the respondents, a counter affidavit is filed stating that the institutions from which the petitioners obtained the degrees have not been recognized by the University Grants Commission (UGC) or by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and in case of in-service candidates, acquiring qualification from institutions by way of Distance Education Mode shall have to obtain prior permission from the competent authority to prosecute their higher studies. It is stated that none of the petitioners obtained prior approval for prosecuting certain degrees by way of Distance Education Mode and, therefore, they are not eligible to participate in the selection process. It is further stated that the universities from which the petitioners obtained their degrees are not recognized by either UGC or AICTE or Distance Education Council (DEC), therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in respect of deemed Universities, the Joint Committee of AICTE, DEC and UGC jointly held a meeting on 07.08.2007, wherein and whereby it was decided that the only universities should be given provisional recognition for a period of one year i.e., for the academic year 2007-08. Learned counsel further contended that prior permission is not necessary when it is a deemed university, and that the syllabus of the Institution in which some of the petitioners obtained the degree certificates have been recognized by the competent authority, and therefore, they are fully qualified to write the written examination in pursuance of the notification issued by the respondents. Therefore, he prays to allow the petition and declare the results of the written examination. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contended that since the degrees obtained by the petitioners have not been recognized either by UCG or AICTE or DEC, the petitioners are not qualified to participate in the selection process. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioners have not obtained prior permission from the competent authority to prosecute further studies and, therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. The appointment of the petitioners in various categories in different years is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the 3rd respondent issued internal circular vide Ref.No.CRP/PER/R/01/02/589, dated 04.08.2010, for filling up the vacancies in Executive cadre posts with reference to Employment Notification No.04 of 2010, and that the said circular was issued enclosing therewith the terms and conditions applicable for internal candidates so as to enable the internal qualified and eligible candidates to apply for the said posts. For internal candidates, nine vacancies were notified, but later seven more vacancies were added. The minimum qualification and experience for the internal candidates as notified in the notification are as follows: “B.E., B.Tech., AMIE or its equivalent qualification in Electrical, Mechanical or Electrical & Electronics Engineering from the institution approved by UGC & AICTE and as recognized by the Directorate General of Mines Safety. Note: i) In case the candidates acquire above qualification through Distance Education Mode it shall have the approval of DEC (under the Indira Gandhi National Open University) in addition to the above approval. ii) The candidate who acquires above qualification (while in service) after due approval of the competent authority shall only be considered.” When the notification is not under challenge, the respondents have to conduct the written examination to the persons who are duly following eligibility and qualifications notified in pursuance of notification No.4 of 2010. The first and foremost minimum educational qualification for the internal candidate is pass in B.E., B.Tech., AMIE or its equivalent qualification in Electrical, Mechanical or Electrical & Electronics Engineering from the institution approved by UGC & AICTE and as recognized by the Directorate General of Mines Safety. The petitioners have not filed a single document either in writ petition or in the reply affidavit that the institution from which they obtained degrees through Distance Education Mode is recognized by either UGC or AICTE or DEC. In the reply affidavit also, the petitioners have not categorically stated about the recognition of the institution from which they obtained their degrees. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the document issued by the Joint Committee consisting of UGC, AICTE and DEC. This document issued by the Joint Committee as well as the documents filed by the petitioners along with the writ petition and the reply affidavit would only go to show that the syllabus of the institution from where the petitioners obtained their degrees has been approved by the authority competent, but they do not disclose that the institution was recognized by UGC and AICTE. Therefore, the petitioners failed to establish that the degrees obtained by them from their respective institutions have been recognized by UGC & AICTE. 8. Secondly, the other conditions laid down in the notification is that the persons who are in service must acquire the relevant educational qualification after prior approval of the competent authority. Admittedly, the petitioners who obtained the degrees through Distance Education Mode have not obtained any prior permission from the competent authority to prosecute further studies. When the two conditions laid down in the notification are not fulfilled by the petitioners, the question of issuing Mandamus does not arise. When the notification is not under challenge, a Mandamus cannot be issued directing the respondents to act contrary to the terms and conditions laid down in the notification. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed and the interim order granted by this Court on 11.05.2011 in WPMP.No.16922 of 2011 is vacated. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 13.06.2011 v v