CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 DATE OF DECISION: March 17, 2009 CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION, THROUGH ...PETITIONER DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION(S) U.T. CHANDIGARH, SECTOR 9, CHANDIGARH VERSUS SUDESH KUMARI D/O KARAM SINGH ...RESPONDENT INSTRUCTOR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR. PRESENT: NONE FOR THE PETITIONER. MR. H.S. SAINI, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The Chandigarh Administration has filed this writ petition impugning the order (Annexure P-3) dated 21.5.2004, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, vide which they have been directed to consider the grant of relaxation under Rule 6 of Chandigarh Education Service (School Cadre) (Group C) Recruitment Rules, 1991 in regard to respondent's qualification as equivalent qualification prescribed for the post of Nursery Teacher. The petitioners have further been directed to consider the case of the respondent for regularization of her service also. The respondent Sudesh Kumari filed Original Application before the Tribunal wherein it was prayed that as she possessed the qualification of Bal Sewika from Indian Council of Child Welfare, Chandigarh which according to her was equivalent to the qualification for CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 -2- Nursery Teacher, therefore, she be considered for appointment as Nursery Teacher and her services be regularized. It was averred that she has been working as part time Instructor since December, 1985. It was also averred that a large number of similarly situated persons who possessed Bal Sewika Training certificates have been regularized whereas the petitioner has been ignored. A perusal of the impugned order shows that services of large number of persons possessing the Bal Sewika Training certificates have been regularized as is clear from a perusal of Annexure A-11 dated 16.1.1986. The petitioners have not denied the fact that a large number of Nursery Teachers possessing similar qualification as that of the petitioner have been regularized. Apart from the above, the present respondent had earlier filed O.A. No.949/CH/1992 wherein the Tribunal had directed the Chandigarh Administration to consider the case of the respondent for appointment as Nursery Teacher against a vacant post. The respondent was declared ineligible, therefore, the respondent filed O.A. No.859/CH/1998 wherein directions were given by the Tribunal to consider granting relaxation to the respondent. Against the order passed in O.A. No.859/CH/1998, the Chandigarh Administration filed writ petition in the High Court bearing CWP No.9897-CAT of 2002. The operative portion of the order is as follows:- “In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed. However, we deem it proper to direct that the case of respondent no.1 be placed before the Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh for consideration whether it was a fit CWP No.12496-CAT of 2004 -3- case for granting relaxation in terms of Rule 6 of the Rules. It is hoped that the Administrator would pass appropriate order in this respect within 2 months from the receipt of copy of this order. If, on a consideration of the entirety of the matter, the Administrator comes to the conclusion that the requirement of recognition of the certificate by Chandigarh Administration should be relaxed, then the candidature of respondent No.1 shall be considered for regularization and appropriate order be passed by the competent authority within next 3 months.” As the case of the petitioner was not considered in terms of the order Annexure A-8 passed by the High Court, therefore, the petitioner filed the O.A. which has been allowed. From the aforementioned facts, it is clear that the petitioner has been discriminated against as the services of similarly situated persons who were possessing the certificate of Bal Sewika Training Course have been regularized, whereas, the petitioner has been ignored. Moreover the case of the petitioner for relaxation has been considered under Chandigarh Education Service (School Cadre) (Group 'C') Recruitment (First Amendment) Rules, 2001 whereas, her case should have been considered in terms of Rule 6 of Chandigarh Education Service (School Cadre) (Group C) Recruitment Rules. Thus, we find no infirmity in the impugned order dated 21.5.2004 and the writ petition is dismissed. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE March 17, 2009 (NIRMALJIT KAUR) Gulati JUDGE