WP(C) 1741/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Both the writ petitions raising the same issue have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. In both the writ petitions, the petitioners are aspirants for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. They were initially appointed as Junior Engin eer in the PWD. Thereafter with the permission of the competent authority the pe titioners undertook higher studies leading to B. Tech (Civil Engineering) degree . They got admitted in the Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Gandhi Vi dya Mandir, Sardarshar, Rajasthan a deemed University offering the course leadin g to the said degree, i.e. B.Tech. (Civil Engineering). On completion of the cou rse, the petitioners sat in the final examinations. While the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 1741/2010 sat in the examination in 2007, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 331/2011 sat in 2008. Both of them cleared the said examination. Accordingly th e degree was conferred to them. After getting the B. Tech (Civil Engineering) degree the petitioners mad e representation to the respondents for their promotion to the next higher grade , i.e. Assistant Engineer. However, the respondents having denied the promotion to the petitioners on the ground that the said degree has not been recognised b y All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), they have approached this C ourt by filing the instant writ petitions for appropriate direction. I have heard Mr. N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners as we ll as Mr. I. Choudhury, learned SC, PWD. I have considered the materials availab le on record. By Annexure - 7 notification dated 25.06.2002, the Govt. of India Minist ry of Human Resources Development Department of Secondary & Higher Education not ified that the Institute in which the petitioners had undergone the said course, i.e. Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarsha r, Rajasthan, to be a deemed University for the purpose of UGC Act, 1956. By Ann exure-8 letter addressed to the respective Registrar of the Member Universities/ Institutes by the Association of Indian Universities, it was conveyed that the examination of the Universities named in the letter should be recognised by anot her on a reciprocal basis. In the said letter the Institute in question finds me ntion at serial No. 2. Annexure-9 notification dated 17.07.2003 was issued by th e UGC granting status of Deemed University to the Institute in question. Annexu re-10 is another communication dated 28.01.2004 addressed to the Registrar, IASE Deemed University, Sardar Shahr, Rajasthan by the Govt. of India Ministry of Hu man Resource Development Department of Secondary & Higher Education, Language Di vision in which it was conveyed that the said Institute is a Deemed University r ecognised by the UGC under Section 3 of UGC Act, 1956. It was further conveyed t hat all the certificates/ diploma/ degrees awarded by the UASE-Deemed University , Sadarshahr, Rajasthan stands automatically recognised for the purpose of emplo yment under Central/State Govt. service. Annexure-11 is the minutes of the 3rd meeting of the Joint Committee of University Grant Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AI CTE) and Distant Education Council (DEC) held on 07.08.2007. As per the said min utes and resolution adopted therein the recommendation for granting ex post fact o approval to the Institutes named in the resolution including the Institute in question was accepted. It is in this context, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the approval was granted in 2007 and 2008 during which the petitioners had obtained their degrees, the respondents ought t o have considered the case of the petitioners instead of creating hurdles for t hem. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been stated th at the course which the petitioners had undergone towards their aforesaid degree being not approved/ recognised by AICTE, they are not in a position to consider the case of the petitioners as qualified B. Tech (Civil Engineering) degree hol ders. They have also referred to the public notice issued by the AICTE vide adv ertisement No. UB/03(03)/CO and also the advertisement No. Legal/01(02)/01 by wh ich it was notified to the students to be careful in undertaking degree/course b eing imparted through distant education mode. From the above, there is no manner of doubt that the course that was u ndertaken by the petitioners is recognised by the UGC. Only question to consider is as to whether the said course is also recognized by the AICTE. The public notice vide advertisement No. Legal/01(02)/09 (Annexure-A to counter affidavit in W.P.(C) No. 1741/2010) speaks of memorandum of understandin g signed by the UGC, AICTE and DEC indicating that the Universities including t he Deemed Universities imparting technical education and technical institutions are required to obtain specific prior approval from the Joint Committee of UGC-A ICTE-DEC for conducting programmes/courses in technical education through distan ce mode. In the public notice vide advertisement No. UB/03(03)/2010 (Annexure-D to the said counter affidavit) speaks that qualification acquired by the indivi duals through distance education mode are recognised for the purpose of employme nt to posts and services under the Central Govt. subject to the condition that t he same have been approved by the DEC-IGNOU, New Delhi and wherever necessary by AICTE, New Delhi. By the said notices students were directed to check the appro val of Joint Committee of DEC/UGC/AICTE. From the above, what is seen is that the approval of the AICTE in respec t of the course in question may not be in direct form, but is on the basis of th e approval of the Distant Education Council and also in the form of Joint Commi ttee meeting of DEC/UGC/AICTE. In the instant case as noted above, both the petitioners completed their final examinations conducted in 2007 and 2008. As per the aforesaid Joint Commi ttee minutes, the Institute in question has already been approved ex post facto . For a ready reference, the resolution No. 3 of the meeting is quoted below: 3. Instructions applied for ex-post-facto approval The Joint Committee accepted the recommendations for the Committee appo inted by Dec for examining the institutions that have applied for ex-post-facto approval to DEC. It accepted the recommendations of granting ex-post-facto appro val to all the four institutions namely JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Allahabad Agri culture Institute Deemed University. Vinayaka Missions University, Punjab Techni cal University and IASE Deemed University up to the current academic year i.e. 2 007-08 ad the suggestions made by the visiting Expert Committee should be made k nown to them which should be strictly adhered to. However, they need to apply fo r formal recognition to DEC for the next academic year. Above apart, another department of Govt. of Assam, Water Resources Depar tment has already recognised the degree obtained from the Institute in question as will be evident from the letter dated 07.10.2009 (Annexure-14) addressed to t he APSC by the Govt. of Assam in the said department. After such communication t he candidates with the degree from the said Institute have already been promoted in the said department. Thus under the same Govt. there cannot be two different standards. For all the aforesaid reasons, I am inclined to accept the prayer made b y the petitioner for a direction to the State respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer recognising B .Tech. (Civil Engineering) obtained by them from the Institute in question. The writ petitions are allowed. However, there shall be no order as to c osts.