IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. L.P.A. No.121 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.5.2010 Jagdish Prasad & another. -----Appellants Vs. Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present:- Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate for the appellants --- ORDER: 1. This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition of the appellants challenging selection of respondent No.4 to the post of Assistant Lineman in the Electricity Board (Bijli Vitran Nigam). 2. Essential qualification as per advertisement dated 19.10.2006 was Matric with two years I.T.I. or two years vocational course. Case of the appellants is that respondent No.4 did not have the said qualification and was, thus, not entitled to the said appointment. 3. The contention of the appellants was contested and in the reply of respondent No.4, it was stated that he had diploma in LPA No.121 of 2010 Electrical Engineering from Board of Technical Education, Haryana. It was further stated that the said qualification was higher than the I.T.I. certificate or two years vocational course. 4. Learned Single Judge held that the appointment of respondent No.4 could not be held to be illegal as Diploma in Electrical Engineering was higher than the I.T.I. or two years vocational course. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that though averment was made in the reply by respondent No.4 that he had Diploma in Electrical Engineering from Board of Technical Education, Haryana, the said diploma was not produced. Certificates, Annexure R-4/1 and R-4/2, which were produced, were not showing the diploma to have been possessed by respondent No.4 on the date of appointment and same could not be accepted. Further objection of learned counsel for the appellants is that the date of said certificate is after the filing of the writ petition and after two years of service. 7. We are unable to accept the submission. Certificate Annexure R-4/1 is duly issued by the Industrial Training Institute. We do not find any ground to disbelieve the certificate, even if the certificate is issued later to the selection. Finding has been duly recorded that respondent No.4 was duly qualified and possessed Diploma in Electrical Engineering, which was higher than I.T.I. 2 LPA No.121 of 2010 8. We, thus, do not find any ground to interfere with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. 9. The appeal is dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE May 07, 2010 ( ALOK SINGH ) ashwani JUDGE 3