THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.31301 of 1997 Dated:30.01.2008 Between Jana Satyavani …..Petitioner and 1.The Life Insurance Corporation of India, rep. By its Senior Divisional Manager, Visakhapatnam And another. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.31301 of 1997 ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare the impugned orders dated 2 & 3.6.1997 passed by the respondent-Life Insurance Corporation of India as arbitrary, illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. It appear that the petitioner belong to Devanga community which is included in the category of OBC. She passed SSC examination and also Technical Examination lower grade in Type Writing (English). Thereafter, she studied three years full time Diploma course under curriculum of Government Polytechnic for Women, Bheemunipatnam and passed the Diploma in Elec. Comm-Engineering (D.E.C.E) held in April-May, 1992 . The said diploma obtained by her is equivalent to two year course of Intermediate Examination under 10 plus 2 pattern in the state of Andhra Pradesh. Likewise, PUC is also equal to two year Intermediate examination under 10 plus 2 pattern as per the certificate issued by Andhra University dated 13.2.1997. Further, the Osmania University, Hyderabad also clarified on 16.3.1992 stating that the diploma obtained by the petitioner is equivalent to intermediate examination in the state of Andhra Pradesh for admission to B.E., B.Tech., B.E., B.Com., B.Sc., Courses. Thus, according to the petitioner, the qualifications obtained by her are equivalent to the intermediate Course in the State of Andhra Pradesh. While that being so, she applied for the post of Assistant in the respondent-Corporation pursuant to a notification issued by it under OBC quota and attended the interview on 19.8.1996. In the said call letter the minimum education qualification noted as per Clause (1) (b) of the notification was Intermediate/XII Standard (or equivalent examination). The certificates and marks sheets are required to be produced by the petitioner. Accordingly, she attended the interview and got selected for the post of Assistant. As per letter dated 23.10.1996, she was advised to report at the 1st respondent’s office on 25.10.1996 and accordingly, she reported on that date. Then, she was advised to report at Branch Office, Chodavaram as Temporary Assistant in leave vacancy i.e., 2nd respondent office and she joined there. While that being so, she had received a letter dated 6.5.1997 from the first respondent stating that she was provisionally selected for appointment to the cadre of Assistant subject to medical fitness and she was asked to appear for the medication examination on 10.5.1997 and she appeared for the same. While working as such, she received a letter from the first respondent stating that she was found not eligible for appointment as Assistant under OBC category in their organization as she do not possess the requisite educational qualifications. The respondents vide letter dated 2.6.1997 informed that they were unable to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Assistant and on 3.6.1997, 2nd respondent issued a letter terminating her services. Hence, the present writ petition. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents denying the allegations made by the petitioner. However, it is admitted that the diploma certificate held by the petitioner is equivalent to intermediate examination as per the letters of the Osmania Unviersity as well the Andhra University. Further, it is stated that the petitioner was appointed purely on temporary basis which had arisen on account of maternity leave availed by an Assistant appointed on regular basis. On verification of the certificates, it was found that the certificates obtained by her were not equivalent to that of the intermediate examination. Therefore, the services of the petitioner were terminated. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that it is for the selection committee to verify and come to a conclusion as to whether the diploma certificate held by the petitioner was equivalent to two years intermediate course or not and such an exercise was done by the selection committee. The selection committee accordingly recommended her case for appointment and she was subjected to medical examination. Even before that, she attended duty and worked for more than six months and at that stage, the letter dated 3.6.1997 was addressed to the petitioner terminating her services. Therefore, the said order of termination is arbitrary and illegal and is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently contended that it is for the authority to decide as to whether the certificate obtained by the petitioner is equivalent to two years intermediate course or not and the clarification issued by the Osmania University and the Andhra University have no relevance. He further contends that the appointing authority is superior and can take a decision as to the equivalency of the certificate obtained by the petitioner. I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the impugned order and other material available on record. It is unfortunate such a stand is taken by the respondents. The fact that the petitioner was subjected to selection process; that she was selected by a duly constituted selection committee and appointed on temporary basis; and further subjected to medication examination is not in dispute. The only dispute is that the diploma certificate held by the petitioner, according to the respondents, is not equivalent to two years intermediate examination. In this regard, of course, there is no denial from the respondents that the said certificate is equivalent to two years intermediate course as clarified by the Osmania University as well as Andhra University. Firstly, the petitioner was admitted to the diploma course on the basis of SSLC qualification for three years diploma course. Secondly, it is the State Board of Technical Education which conferred that certificate and further diploma certificate was also considered to be equivalent to that of two years intermediate course by the Andhra University and the Osmania University for the purpose of admission to B.Tech., B.E., courses and other higher studies. Therefore, the contention of the respondents that the services of the petitioner were terminated since the diploma certificate obtained by the petitioner was found to be not equivalent to the intermediate examination cannot be countenanced. In fact, there was no exercise done in this regard by the respondents nor it has sought for any clarification from the Board of Technical Education or from the Osmania Unversity or Andhra University. It is the petitioner who sought clarification from the Osmania University and Andhra University. Now, the respondents have admitted that the diploma obtained by the petitioner is equivalent to that of the intermediate. Under those circumstances, the impugned order is erroneous and the same is liable to be set aside. Apart from that, no notice of any kind was issued to the petitioner before terminating services asking her as to how the certificate obtained by her is equivalent to that of the intermediate examination. For all the above reasons, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in to service forthwith with all attendant benefits, but without any back wages. __________ 30-01-2008 rkk