Allowed

Mange Ram Chaudhari v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2020SPLA/327/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special appeal challenging a writ dismissal, the High Court held that a B.Ed. degree from a statutory university (Annamalia University) via distance mode does not require independent State recognition due to Government Order of 1964 and precedent. Consequently, the appellant was deemed eligible for the Principal post.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment dated 22.12.2017 set aside; Writ petition allowed; Order treating appellant ineligible as Principal declared illegal.

Mange Ram Chaudhari Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Chief Justice's Court

¶3

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 327 of 2018

¶4

Appellant :- Mange Ram Chaudhari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Srivastava, Harish Chandra Shukla, Om Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Ashok Kumar Yadav, Ramgee Prasad, Shyam Dhar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Govind Mathur, Chief Justice Hon'ble Samit Gopal, J.

¶6

To question correctness of the judgment dated 22nd December, 2017, passed by Learned Single Bench in Writ-A No. 62419 of 2012, this appeal is preferred.

¶7

Suffice to state that an appointment was given to the appellant as Principal of D.A.V. Inter College, Kishanpur Baral, District Baghpat on 22nd July, 2011 by the Committee of Management of Inter College, Kishanpur Baral, District Baghpat. Respondent No. 7, Shri Shyam Singh, submitted a complaint relating to eligibility of the appellant to hold the post of Principal. The authority competent, after examining the complaint, arrived at the conclusion that the appellant was not possessing a valid degree of B.Ed. and hence, he was not entitled to be appointed as Principal of Intermediate College. Aggrieved by the same, the petition for writ was filed., that came to be dismissed by the judgment impugned.

¶8

Learned Single Bench, after examining the record, held that the degree of B.Ed. was obtained by the appellant-petitioner in the year 1987 from Annamalia University Tamil Nadu through a distance course and such a degree was not recognized by the Directorate of Secondary Education or by Directorate of Higher Education or by the Government of Uttar Pradesh.

¶9

In appeal, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant are in two folds. It is stated that the appellant obtained degree of

¶10

-2-

¶11

B.Ed. from a University created by statute and, therefore, no need was there to have separate recognition. It is also stated that, as a matter of fact, the State of Uttar Pradesh much back in the year 1964 clarified that the degrees awarded by statutory universities are not suppose to have independent recognition by the Universities or the State Government itself for the purpose of admissions in the educational institutions as well as for employment.

¶12

The second limb of the argument is that as per the eligibility prescribed under the Intermediate Education Act, the need of degree of B.Ed. is not necessary if an aspirant is to be considered for appointment as Principal who is having ten years teaching experience.

¶13

Meeting with the arguments advanced, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents as well as on behalf of respondent No. 7, Sri Shyam Singh, states that the recognition is necessary in light of the fact that the eligibility prescribes to have degree of B.Ed. or a qualification recognized by the State as equivalent thereto.

¶14

Heard learned counsels and examined the record.

¶15

At the threshold, it would be appropriate to state that the Government of Uttar Pradesh, under its Government Order dated 15th May, 1964, clarified that no formal recognition of any degree, diploma or certificate is required to be issued by the Government if that has been granted by a University in India established by law. The Government Order aforesaid reads as under:

¶16

“ I am directed to say that the question of recognition of the degree/diplomas awarded by the Universities as established by law in India for purpose of recruitment to services and posts under the State Government has been under their consideration for some time past. In the light of the decision taken by the Government of India and in consultation with the Lok Seva Ayog, Uttar Pradesh, it has been decided that in the case of degrees/diplomas awarded by Universities in India which are incorporated by an Act of the Central or State Legislature, no formal orders recognizing such degrees/diplomas need be issued by

¶17

-3-

¶18

Government. Such degrees/diplomas should be recognised automatically for purposes of employment under the State Government.

¶19

Similarly no orders are required for the formal recognition of any certificate or diploma awarded by Boards of Secondary and Intermediate Education duly setup and recognised by the Central or Annamalia University Tamil Nadu the State Governments and they may be automatically recognised for purpose of recruitment to services and posts under this State Government. These orders may kindly be brought to the notice of all concerned. ”

¶20

It would also be appropriate to state that Supreme Court in Dr. B. L. Asawa Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, reported in AIR 1982 SC 933, while dealing with the same issue held that the qualification possessed by a person from a university created under the University Grants Commission Act is not required to have independent recognition. A degree issued by such universities is suppose to be recognized at its own without having independent recognition by different universities or the State Governments. So far as the distance qualification is concerned, that issue too came up before different High Courts and in a case of Mrs. Madhu Santosh Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2502/1989), the Rajasthan High Court held that qualification of Bachelor degree in Education availed by distance course is not required to be recognized by each and every University or State Government as the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak issued the Bachelor degree in Education through distance course a university established by law.

¶21

In light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Dr. B.L. Asawa (supra) and also in view of the Government Order dated 15th May, 1964, we are of the considered opinion that the degree obtained by the appellant-petitioner in the year 1987 from the Annamalia University Tamil Nadu was not required to be recognized to make the appellant-petitioner eligible to be considered for appointment as Principal of an Intermediate College. The qualification aforesaid is required to be treated as the

¶22

-4-

¶23

qualification of B.Ed. as required under the eligibility clause pertaining to the post concerned under the relevant statute. The appeal, hence, is allowed. The judgment impugned dated 22nd December, 2017 is set aside. The writ petition preferred by the appellant-petitioner is accordingly allowed. The order passed by the respondents not treating the appellantpetitioner as a person eligible to hold the post of Principal is declared illegal. All consequential orders also stands quashed accordingly.

¶24

Order Date :- 20.2.2020 VMA

¶25

(Samit Gopal, J.) (Govind Mathur, C.J.)

Mange Ram Chaudhari v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mange Ram Chaudhari v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anand Veer Vs State of U.P. through Shief Secretary (Home) and 5 Others

Savitri Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Civil Supply and 3 Others

Baboo Lal Patel Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secreatry Govt. of U.P.and 6 Others

surendra kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 others

Indrajeet Puri Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Control of Pollution and Another

Pankaj Mudgal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others