CWP (T) No.8518 of 2008. 24.11.2009. Present: Mr. Yash Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Addl. Advocate General with Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. Advocate General, Mr. J.K. Verma and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate Generals, for the respondents. Petitioner was appointed as daily waged Peon in the year 1985. He appeared in the matriculation examination from the Board of Adult Education Training (Prodh Shiksha Sansthan). According to the petitioner, the Certificate issued to him is equivalent to matriculation examination. He submitted this Certificate to the respondents to consider his case for promotion. The respondents sought clarification from the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education, Dharamshala. The Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education, Dharamshala informed respondent No.2 that the examination passed by the petitioner was not equivalent to matriculation examination. Petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents to consider his case by treating Annexure A-2 and A-3 equivalent to matriculation examination of H.P. Board of School Education. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. The Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education has already conveyed to respondent No.2 that the qualification obtained by the petitioner is not equivalent to matriculation examination. The State Government as per the contents of the reply has not recognized the Certificate issued by the Board of Adult Education and Training as valid qualification for the purpose -2- of public employment. The equivalence of educational qualification is to be seen by the employer and this Court will not sit in appeal over the decision already taken by the respondents and the H.P. Board of School Education. Consequently, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed. (R.B. Misra), ACJ. 24th November, 2009. (Rajiv Sharma), J. (tr)