Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 19, 2009 Sonika & others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr.Neeraj Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners seek quashing of the advertisement dated 1.11.2007 issued by the respondents and for issuance of a direction to the respondents to accept their application forms and not to reject the same on the ground that they are not having a valid qualification. Posts of Junior Mistress, Cutting and Tailoring, Needle Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 2 : and Embroidery and dress making were advertised. In response to the same, the petitioners submitted their application forms. The petitioners are having NTC Certificate in the concerned field. They claim to have completed 8 months' advance course plus four months P.O.T., which is equivalent to T.T.C. It is further mentioned that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are having diploma in cutting and tailoring whereas petitioner Nos.3 and 4 have qualified in the diploma course in dress making. The petitioners would aver that advance course of 8 months plus P.O.T. course would be sufficient and equivalent to T.T.C. and all the petitioners having P.O.T. advance course degree. To highlight that the petitioners would be eligible for being considered for these posts, it is pointed out that respondent No.3 issued two different advertisements one for Ambala and another for Rohtak District. The essential qualification prescribed for Junior Mistress in Cutting and Tailoring, embroidery, heir and skin is NTC certificate, which the petitioners have already acquired, but in place of CTI/TTC in the concerned field, they have advance course plus POT, which is equivalent to the said course as given in the advertisement. It is claimed that the application forms of the petitioners have been rejected illegally and arbitrarily. The petitioners have placed reliance on letter dated 8.1.2007 to point out that in this letter, it is clearly mentioned that the course of 8 months duration followed by 4 months POT course, can be considered for appointment for vacancies on contract basis. The petitioners, being aggrieved against the action of the respondents, have also filed a representation. The prayer is that the advance course in POT is considered by all the States except the State of Haryana, which is, thus, termed as illegal Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 3 : and arbitrary. The petitioners have, thus, filed the present writ petition to impugn the advertisement dated 1.11.2007. As per the advertisement, copy of which is at Annexure P- 2, qualification for the posts are as under:- “i) National Trade Certificate in the concerned trade. ii) Training Instructor course Certificate/Teacher training certificate in the concerned trade. iii) Five years practical/teaching experience including the period of aforesaid i) and ii) from any reputed Industrial Organization or Institution. iv)Hindi as subject upto Matric Standard. Prescribed Qualifications for Jr.Mistress (women) Fashion Technology at Sr.No.5 i) Hindi and English or Sanskrit in Matric from Recognized Institution. ii) Degree/diploma in Fashion Technology from recognized Institution by technical Education Board. OR Certificate from some recognized institution or University by National Institute of Fashion Design (NIFT)/Apparel institution in Fashion Designing and clothing technology. OR (NTCT) part time faculty OR B.Tech Course in Textile Technology from some recognized Institution. Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 4 : OR M.Sc. In Clothing/Textile from recognized Institution/ University. OR MBA in Marketing from recognized institution/university or GMT diploma in Apparel marketing or marketing from NIFT (National Institution of Fashion Designing) or CPT from recognized state technical education board. iii)Five years practical/teaching experience including the course period in the concerned trade from some reputed Industrial organization under education board/ reorganization institution.” Thus, National Trade Certificate in the concerned trade is one of the essential qualification prescribed. It is further provided that preference would be given to Training Technology (POT) from Directorate Employment and Trading (DGE & T) Government of India. On this basis, the counsel would contend that the petitioners have this qualification, which is to be preferred. They would plead that view of the respondents that they are not having essential qualification, thus, would sound unfair and arbitrary. In the reply filed, it is stated that Haryana Industrial Training and Vocational Education Department, Field Offices (Group C) Service Rules, 1998 provides qualification and experience. The relevant rules as contained in Appendix B has then been reproduced. As per the Rule, essential qualification and experience for direct recruitment is (i) National Trade Certificate in the concerned Trade (ii) Training Instructor Course Certificate/Teacher Training Certificate Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 5 : in concerned trade (iii) Five years practical/Teaching experience, including the period of aforesaid (i & ii) from any reputed Industrial organization or Institution and (iv) knowledge of Hindi upto Matric Standard. Reference is then made to the qualification held by the petitioners, which are as under:- “Petitioner No.1 (i)Matric from Haryana Board. (ii) 10+2 from Haryana Board. (iii) National Trade Certificate in Cutting and Tailoring. (iv) National Trade Certificate in Embroidery and Needle Work. (v) CTI in Dress Making (Advanced) for 10/2003 to 5/2004= 8 months. (vi) Principle of Teaching (P.O.T.) for 3/2005 to 6/2005= 4 months. Petitioner No.2 (i) Matric from Haryana Board. (ii) 10+2 from N.O.S. New Delhi. (iii) National Trade Certificate in Cutting and Tailoring. (iv) CTI in Dress Making (Advanced) for 10/2003 to 5/2004= 8 months. (v) Instructor Course Principle of Teaching (P.O.T.) for 11/1999 to 2/2000= 4 months. Thus, the qualification of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were not considered sufficient, which would make them eligible for the post of Junior Mistress, Cutting and Tailoring. The order rejecting their application is, as such, justified. It is further pointed out that it is Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 6 : clearly mentioned in the Rules that:- “No person shall be appointed to any post in the Service, unless he is in possession of qualifications and experience specified in column 3 of Appendix B to these rules in the case of direct recruitment and those specified in column 4 of the aforesaid Appendix in the case of persons appointed otherwise than by direct recruitment.” So far as case of petitioner Nos.3 and 4 is concerned, it is stated that their applications have not been received against any vacancy and, thus, they can not be selected. The essential qualifications have been prescribed under the Rules. Concededly, the petitioners are not fulfilling the part of essential qualifications. Both the petitioners do not possess the qualification of Training Instructor Course Certificate/Teacher Training Certificate. The Rule further provides that no person shall be appointed to the post in service unless he is in possession of qualifications and experience specified in the Rules. In the advertisement, equivalence of Training Instructor Course Certificate/Teacher Training Certificate is not provided as qualification. In this background, the prayer of the petitioners to seek equivalence of the degree possessed by them, if permitted would not only stand in violation of the Rule position but also to the advertisement issued. Since the requirement is on the basis of Rule position, the judgments relied upon by counsel for the petitioners to seek equivalence of the degrees possessed by them on the basis of these judgments in the cases of Shyam Kumar Vyas and others Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2006(4) S.C.T.106, Smt.Raj Civil Writ Petition No.18248 of 2007 (O&M) : 7 : Kumari Garg Vs. State of Haryana, 2001(4) S.C.T.885, Balbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana, 2002(2) S.C.T.290 and Vimal Singh Rana Vs. State of Haryana, 2001(4) S.C.T.385, would not have much relevance. The applications of the petitioners accordingly have been rightly rejected and can not be termed as unjust, unfair and arbitrary in any manner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. August 19, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE