IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.7936/2008 Decided on:12.5.2009 Khem Raj. …Petitioner. Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and another. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1. yes For the petitioner : Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, J. The petitioner was appointed as a Peon in the respondent-Board on 12.12.1992. He joined his duties on 17.12.1992. Thereafter he was promoted to the post of Bill Distributor on 20.8.1998. He was permitted to appear in the Prathma (matriculation) examination for the academic session 1997-98 from Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad. He was also accorded permission to sit in 10+1 and 10+2 examinations as a private candidate. The respondent-Board has issued seniority list on 31.12.1999. He made a representation for including his academic qualification in the seniority list. He has annexed with his representation copies of 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 communication dated 6.4.2000 and 12.7.2001. The stand of the respondent-Board is that the certificates issued by Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad are not recognized by the State Government. There is also a reference to the correspondence between the Education Department of the State Government and the Board regarding the validity of the degrees/certificates issued by the Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad. Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate has strenuously argued that as per Annexure A-5 read with letter dated 6.5.1960, the certificate of Prathma issued by the Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad is equivalent to matriculation examination. She further contended that the qualification acquired by the petitioner should have been incorporated in the seniority list. Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate has relied upon letter dated 21.1.1991 and 12.7.2001 to repel the contention raised by Ms. Ranjana Parmar. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Bill Distributor on 20.8.1998. He was permitted to sit in the examination for the year 1997- 98 in Prathma (matriculation) examination from the Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad. He has qualified the examination. The question which has fallen for determination is that: whether the degrees/certificates awarded by a volunteer organization like Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad can be treated at par with the degrees/certificates awarded by the Universities/Boards established by or under the Central or State Act. Ms. Ranjana Parmar has drawn the attention of the Court to communication dated 6.5.1960 Annexure A-5. A bare perusal of this communication reveals that Prathma from Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad has been treated as matriculation only for the purpose of standard of Hindi. Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad is a volunteer 3 organization. It is settled law by now that the degrees/certificates can only be issued by the Universities/Board established under the Central or State Act and duly recognized by the University Grants Commission. Their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar versus U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and others, (2008) 7 SCC 153 have held as under: “16.The qualifications for holding a post have been laid down under a statute, any appointment in violation thereof would be a nullity. 17. 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. 18. 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)). 19. 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 4 statement was made therein that it was a recognised university. 20. Maithili 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. 21. 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 consistent stand of the State and the Directorate of Education is that the degrees/certificates issued by volunteer organization like Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad are not recognized. Mr. Shashi Shirshoo also argued that the candidates who have passed Prathma examination are also required to qualify English as a subject to bring their qualification at par with matriculation. It is also true that the degrees/certificates awarded by the University established or incorporated under the Central or State Act need not be formally recognized and these degrees/certificates are automatically recognized for the purpose of employment. In the present case, the diploma/certificate is awarded by the Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad. It has neither been incorporated nor established under the Central or State Act. 5 Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. The diploma/certificate obtained by the petitioner from the Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad cannot be treated at par with matriculation examination. No costs. 12.5. 2009 (Rajiv Sharma ), J. *awasthi*