IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.19 /2008 Decided on:8.7.2009 Smt. Shushma Devi. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Bhalla, C.J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1. For the petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. A.G. The petitioner was appointed as Language Teacher by Parent Teacher Association in Government High School, Gunaha, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan. However, she has not been paid remuneration by the respondents. The reason assigned for not releasing the salary of the petitioner is that the diploma obtained by the petitioner in Hindi language from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is not recognized. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Mr. Rakesh Thakur has drawn the attention of the Court to various Annexures placed on record to substantiate his plea that the diploma awarded to his client is duly recognized. It is settled law by now that the degree/diploma/certificate can only be awarded by those institution which have either been created by the Central or State Act and duly recognized by the University Grants Commission. Their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar versus U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and others, (2008) 7 SCC 153 have held as under: “16.The qualifications for holding a post have been laid down under a statute, any appointment in violation thereof would be a nullity. 17. It is a matter of some concern that appointments are being offered by the authorities of the State without verifying the fact as to whether the degree(s) possessed by the candidate(s) are valid or not. It was an ad hoc appointment. Why despite the same, he was allowed to obtain degree from another university is not known. 18. If the essential educational qualification for recruitment to a post is not satisfied, ordinarily the same cannot be condoned. Such an act cannot be ratified. An appointment which is contrary to the statute/statutory rules would be void in law. An illegality cannot be regularized, particularly, when the statute in no unmistakable term says so. Only an irregularity can be (See Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi (3) and others, ((2006) 4 SCC 1) National Fertilizers Ltd. and Ors. v. Somvir Singh, ((2006) 5 3 SCC 493) and Post Master General, Kolkataand Ors. v. Tutu Das (Dutta), ((2007)5 SCC 317)). 19. Various institutions have sprung up in different parts of India representing that their degrees are recognized. However, even no such representation appears to have been made to the appellant by the said institution. The directory of institutions for higher education merely gives details of the institutions. No statement was made therein that it was a recognised university. 20. Maithili Vishwa Vidyapeeth Sankat Mochan Dham was a name given to an institution. It was not a University. It is said to have been founded in the year 1962. Admittedly, it is a privately managed institution. Although it offered a large number of courses like Madhyama, Visarad, Shastri, Acharya, Vidyabhaskar, Vidyaratna, Vidyavaridhi, Vidyavachaspati, Mahamahopadhyaya, the number of teachers therein were nine only. What sort of education was imparted therein is not known. How an institution could be run with a teacher strength of nine can very well be imagined. 21. It is not in dispute that the said institution was not recognized by any University. A degree is recognized only if it is granted by a University constituted in terms of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 or under any State Or Parliamentary Act. No University can be established by a private management without any statutory backing.” The Hindi Sahitya Sammelen, Allahabad is neither created under Central nor State Act. It is volunteer organization. The certificates/diplomas/degrees issued by it are not comparable with 4 the certificates/diplomas/degrees issued by the duly established Universities either by the Central or State Act. In these circumstances, the decision of the respondents not to release the salary of the petitioner being not qualified cannot be faulted. Consequently, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. (Jagdish Bhalla), C.J. 8.7. 2009 (Rajiv Sharma ), J. *awasthi*