IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 7521 of 2008. Reserved on:18.4.2009. Decided on: 15.5.2009. ___________________________________________________________ Shri Raghunath Singh and others. … Petitioner. Versus The State of H.P. and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the Petitioners : Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy.A.G. ______________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Petitioner No.1 has passed Sahitya Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 1986. The petitioners No. 2 & 3 have obtained Sahitya Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 1977. The posts of Language Teachers are filled up 25% by promotion from amongst J.B.Ts., who have acquired the qualification of Prabhakar, 37.50% by direct recruitment through H.P. Subordinate Service Selection Board and 37.50% on batch-wise basis. The petitioners have got their names registered with their respective employment exchanges. They were called for interviews as per the pleadings. However, they were not offered appointments. They appeared in the interview for the posts of Language Teachers on 20.4.2000. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 They apprehend that for the year 2001, they shall not be called for interview on the ground that they have obtained their Sahitya Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocate has strenuously argued that the petitioners are fully eligible and qualified for the post of Language Teacher. He has drawn the attention of the Court to letter dated 10.1.1979 (Annexure AR-1). He has also placed on record copy of letter dated 15.1.2003 issued by the Director of Education. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that the certificates issued by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag, Allahabad are not recognized by the State Government for the purpose of employment. He has also placed on record copy of letter dated April, 2009 addressed to him by the Director. It has been mentioned in this communication that letter No. 149/79 ED/N/Manayata LT dated 10.1.1979 relied upon by the petitioners was never issued by the Director. I have heard the parties and perused the record carefully. The petitioners have obtained their Sahitya Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. The petitioners have not placed on record any tangible evidence to establish that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad has been created by or under any Act. The degrees/diplomas and certificates can only be issued by the Universities/Boards duly constituted under the law. Their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar versus U.P. Secondary Education Services 3 Commission and others (2008) 7 Supreme Court Cases 153 have held as under: “ The qualifications for holding a post have been laid down under a statute, any appointment in violation thereof would be a nullity. 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. 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 SCC 493) and Post Master General, Kolkataand Ors. v. Tutu Das (Dutta), ((2007)5 SCC 317)). 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. Maithil 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. 4 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 management of the school, when it came to learn that the appellant did not possess a degree of B.Ed, from a recognised University, should have terminated his services forthwith. It did not do so for reasons best known to it. It has not been shown to us that the management of the school had any authority to allow the appellant to obtain the requisite degree from any other University during the tenure of his services. Even the Commission in its counter affidavit, although otherwise supports the case of the appellant, did not say so.” In this judgment, their Lordships have also considered the judgment rendered by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Ram Bhagat Sharma versus State of Haryana, (1997) 4 RSJ 134 (P&H). It is evident from the paragraph quoted in this judgment that the Punjab & Haryana High Court had directed the Government of Haryana to take steps to prevent the recruitment of persons possessing qualifications awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad or Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag, Allahabad and at the same time to take appropriate measures to dispense with the services of the unqualified teachers. However, Punjab & Haryana High Court has dealt with the cases of those persons who had put in three years of service compassionately by permitting them to acquire the qualifications within a stipulated time. This direction of the Punjab & Haryana High Court has not been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar’s case. 5 The learned Senior Additional Advocate General has relied upon Annexure AR-1 dated 10.1.1979. The Director of Education in his communication to the learned Additional Advocate General, as noticed above, has informed that this letter was never issued by his office. As far as letter dated 15.1.2003 relied upon by Mr. Sharma is concerned, suffice to say that it will not advance the cause of Sharma’s clients. The text of letter dated 15.1.2003 reads thus: “Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag, Allahabad is neither a University nor University affiliated institution. It is one of the voluntary institutions SET UP FOR PROMOTION OF HINDI LANGUAGE. Its examinations/certificates are not (NOT) equated with the secondary stage/degree examinations. As per Govt. of India (Ministry of Human Resource Development) Press Notification dated 5th May, 1988 the recognition of its Exams is VALID/RESTRICTED TO THE SUBJECT OF HINDI only. Shiksha Visharad of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad may not be considered equivalent to B.Ed. Degree of an Indian University.” A bare perusal of this letter reveals that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag is neither a University nor University affiliated institution. It is only voluntary institution. It has also been held in this communication that Shiksha Visharad of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad be not considered equivalent to B.Ed. Degree of an Indian University. Accordingly, in view of the reasons mentioned hereinabove, it is declared that the petitioners are not eligible as per Recruitment & Promotion Rues to the post of Language Teacher. The certificates/diplomas issued by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan 6 Prayag, Allahabad are not valid. A degree/diploma can only be granted by the University/Board constituted under the State Act or the Central Act. The Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is a voluntary organization. It is neither established by the Central Act nor by the State Act. Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. May 15, 2009. (cr)