IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5272 of 2010 1. UNION OF JUNIOR ENGINEER (AUTOMOBILE) THROUGH THE PRESIDENT GOVT. POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CHAPRA, NAMELY MAD. SALAMULLAH, S/O MD. BISMILLAH, R/O BAHISTI MOHALLA, NEAR- MASJID, P.O.- DANAPUR, P.S.- DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA, PIN CODE-801503 Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA, 4TH FLOOR, TECHNOLOGY BHAWAN, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, TECHNICAL EDUCATION GOVT. OF BIHAR, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VISHVESWARIYA BHAWAN, CAMPUS, BAILY ROAD, PATNA-800015 (BIHAR) 3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVT. POLYTECHNIC CHAPRA AT MARHAWRAH, DISTT.- SARAN (BIHAR) ----------- 2. 25.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is stated to be the President of the Union of Junior Engineer (Automobile) from the Government Polytechnic, Chapra, for the Sessions 2002- 05. The examinations have been held late and the results published on 20.6.2007. The grievance is with regard to the students of the aforesaid Session that their Diploma in Automobile Engineering be declared as equivalent to Diploma in Mechanical Engineering for employment in the Automobile/Transportation/ Pollution Control Board and for admission into Mechanical Engineering Degree course. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the All India Council for Technical Education, the apex body regulating technical course, on 22.4.2008 has stated 2 that the Diploma in Automobile Engineering was equivalent to the aforesaid disciplines. The petitioners having appeared at the examination in 2007, are also entitled to a declaration and appropriate endorsement of their Diplomas that they do possess the equivalent qualification of Diploma in Mechanical Engineering. The last submission is of hostile discrimination when the equivalence has been granted to persons who have joined the course from the Sessions 2004-05 onwards. Counsel for the State in department of Technical Education is unable to demonstrate any material from the counter affidavit of any difference in course content etc. between the Sessions 2002-05 from that of the Session commencing 2004-05 to satisfy the Court that the petitioner is not entitled to be accorded similar treatment. Difference in course content can be sufficient justification provided such a defence was made out by the respondents. The communication of the All India Council for Technical Education dated 22.4.2008 at Annexure-1 to the writ application granting such equivalence is hardly helpful in adjudication. The writ application is therefore disposed with direction to the respondent State in the department of Technical Education to seek appropriate clarification from the All India Council for Technical Education, if the 3 benefit of the equivalence of the Diploma was to be granted to persons prior to the Session 2004-05 also or not. It is expected that the All India Council for Technical Education shall pass a reasoned and speaking order if it proposes to distinguish the case of the petitioners more particularly the reasons for the same including any difference in course content etc., the justification for a cut off Session 2004-06, for application of the same. The respondents State shall be obliged to seek clarification from the All India Council for Technical Education within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the State respondents. The State respondents shall further be obliged to inform the All India Council for Technical Education that the Council is then required to dispose the matter by a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of six weeks from the date that they receive the communication from the respondent State of Bihar. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)