Allowed

Ramniwas v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi HC21 Jul 2016W.P.(C)/7290/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three petitioners who secured recognition as constables in CISF after passing 2008 examinations (valid in 2006) faced termination when their university was deemed unrecognized. The Court allowed petitions, quashing the termination orders as degrees awarded before recognition withdrawal remained valid.

What did the court decide?

Impugned communications dated February 02, 2015 are quashed. CISF to proceed to offer appointment and grant consequential seniority benefits without back wages.

Ramniwas Vs Union of India & Anr. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~10 to 12

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision : July 21, 2016

¶4

+ W.P.(C) 7284/2015

¶5

ARUN TOMAR ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Aditya Singh, ADovcate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Vikram Jetly, CGSC with SI/Ex.G.Rajakumar, CISF

¶6

W.P.(C) 7290/2015

¶7

RAM NIWAS ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Aditya Singh, ADovcate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Vikram Jetly, CGSC with SI/Ex.G.Rajakumar, CISF

¶8

W.P.(C) 7747/2015

¶9

VIPIN TOMAR ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Aditya Singh, ADovcate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Vivek Goyal, Advocate/CGSC with Mr.Arun Kumar, Advocate (Govt. Pleader)

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG

¶12

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page 1 of 7

¶13

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

¶14

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)

¶15

The three writ petitioners passed class XII from Gurukul University Vrindavan in the year 2008. They were all awarded a degree certified that they had passed the Xth Standard Examination conducted by Gurukul University Vrindavan which was concededly notified as equivalent to the High School Examination conducted by the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Board. The applicable recognition and equivalent was accorded by the State of Uttar Pradesh. The three petitioners successfully cleared the recruitment process for being appointed as a constable in a Central Armed Police Force and as per their marks were allocated to the Central Industrial Security Force. All of them have been conveyed orders dated February 02, 2015 informing them that the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya Vrindavan is a nonrecognized institution and thus the certificate on the strength of which they were found educationally qualified being found to be invalid their services were being terminated. In that, their very candidature was cancelled. 2. In paragraph 10 of the writ petition the writ petitioners have pleaded as under:-

¶16

“10. That after being declared successful in the written examination the petitioner was waiting for his appointment order for the said post, however on 02/02/205 he received the order impugned herein whereby it was alleged that the university from which the petitioner had done his 10^th standard was a fake university whose affiliation had been cancelled by the state of UP, however it is submitted that although the said assertion of Respondent No.2 would have been true but the same is not in consonance with the facts of the case for the reason that the affiliation of Gurukul University, Vrindavan had indeed been cancelled by the State of UP as communicated vide letter dated 30/04/2009 written by Secretary Secondary

¶17

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page 2 of 7

¶18

Education, State of Uttar Pradesh, however the same and only been done for degrees/examination of 10^th standard conducted by the said University after 2008 while the petitioner had passed his 10^th standard examination in the year 2006. True copy of letter dated 30/04/2009 written by the Secretary Secondary Education, Uttar Pradesh as well as the 10^th standard certificate of the petitioner are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P-6 .”

¶19

In the counter affidavit reply to para 10 of the writ petition has been merged with replies to paras 12 and 13. The composite reply reads as under:-

¶20

“In reply to paragraphs 10 to 13 of the writ petition, it is further submitted that during the scrutiny of recruitment dossiers of the candidates for the post of Constable/GD2013 in CISF, by the Dossier Scrutiny Board, it is found by the board that the Matric Certificate issued from Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura submitted by the petitioner in support of his educational qualification for the recruitment of Constable/GD-2013 in CAPFs and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles-2013 is fake educational certificate as per University Grants Commission, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi letter No.F.No.-7-3/97(MPC) dated December, 2011 regarding Press Release for “Precautions against Fake Universities/Vishwavidyalayas” letter No.F.73/2012(MPC) dated May, 2014 and letter No.F.7-3/2012 (MPC) dated June, 2015 and Govt. Gazette dated 18/05/2013 published by Govt. of Uttar Pradesh. Accordingly the present matter was referred to CISF HQrs New Delhi for taking decision in the matter. In turn FHQrs has directed the CISF 5^th Res Bn, Ghaziabad vide message bearing No.(239) dated 28.01.2015 to cancel the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Constable/GD in CISF, as per the instructions issued earlier vide FHQrs message No. (2391) dated 13.10.2014. Accordingly the candidature of Roll No.3011535154 Arun Tomar S/o Shri Satender Tomar has been cancelled vide Sr.Commandant CISF 5^th Res Bn Ghaziabad letter No.(2284) dated 02.02.2015 (which is to be read as 02/03/2015). It is also

¶21

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page 3 of 7

¶22

pertinent to mention her that in order to confirm the authenticity of certificate issued by Gurukul Vishwavidhyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura, a written request was made to the Secretary, Mahdyamik Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh vide Sr.Commandnat CISF 5^th Res. Bn. Ghaziabad Lr.No.(4252) dated 06.05.2015 which was sent through a representative i.e. Sub-Inspector/Exe from CISF 5^th Rs Bn Indirapuram Ghaziabad. Accordingly, vide Secretary, Madhaymik Shikhya Parisad, UP, Allahabad letter No.Parisad-9/95 dated 08/05/2015, which is supported by Govt. Gazette dated 18/05/2013 issued by the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, copy of which is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R/VII , it was clarified that the Adhikari Pariksha of Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura is not equivalent to High School Pariksha for any year. Thus, the action taken by the respondents is legal, valid and fully justified and warrants no interference by this Hon’ble Court in view of the detailed facts stated hereinabove, which may be read as part and parcel hereof for the sake of brevity.”

¶23

Now, there is no denial to the assertion made in paragraph 10 of the writ petition that the recognition granted was withdrawn after the year 2008 and that the petitioners had obtained the degree in question in the year 2006. 5. The reference in the counter affidavit to the gazette notification dated May 08, 2013 is sans the notification being filed. What has been filed is a letter dated May 08, 2015. The same is Annexure R VII. It throws considerable light on the issue. It reads as under:-

¶24

“Forwarded by: The Secretary, Secondary Education Board, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,

¶25

To, The Office of Sr. Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force,

¶26

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page 4 of 7

¶27

5^th Res. Battalion, Ghaziabad, Post - Indra Puram

¶28

Letter No. – Board – 9/95 Dated: 08-05-2015

¶29

Subject: Regarding equal class

¶30

Sir,

¶31

Regarding the aforesaid subject in reference to your letter E-32023/C.I.S.F./5^th Res.Bat/RGD-13/2015/4252, dated 0605-2015, it is informed that official examination of Gurukul Vishvidyalya, Brindavan, Mathura had been equivalent to High School Examination of Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Board till 2008 with the provision that the said examination may not have been passed in parts alongwith English subject in more than one year. Here, the word “Parts” means supplementary examination.

¶32

Vide Administrative Order No. 500/15-07-2013-(139)/2005, dated 09-04-2013, the administration abolished even the aforesaid equivalence of official examination which had been recognized till 2008. Regarding the aforesaid, Notification No. Board-9/85 dt. 10-05-2013 was published in the official Gazette by the Board Office for the information of General Public . (The copy enclosed).

¶33

It is clear from aforesaid Notification that official examination of any year conducted by Gurukul Vishvidyalya, Brindavan, Mathura is now not recognized as equivalent to High School Examination of the Board.

¶34

Enclosure: As per above.

¶35

Yours sincerely, Sd/ illegible 08-05-2015 Dy. Secretary (Board)”

¶36

Suffice it to state that the letter recognizes the fact that the

¶37

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page 5 of 7

¶38

examination conducted by Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya Vrindavan was recognized and made equivalent to the High School Examination conducted by the UP Secondary Education Board till the year 2008 with the provision that the examination had to be passed in the same year and not that some papers were cleared in one year and some in the other. The recognition enured till the year 2008. The last part of the letter creates a little confusion by recording the opinion of the sender of the letter that in view of the notification dated May 09, 2013 where equivalence was abolished the degrees issued by the Vishwavidyalaya are not recognized as equivalent to High School Examination conducted by the Board.

¶39

It is trite that a vested right cannot be taken away except by a law which is expressly made retrospective and must stand the scrutiny of law. The Board or the State of Uttar Pradesh did not invalidate degrees awarded by the Vishwavidyalyas in the past during the period the Vishwavidyalya was recognized and degrees granted were given equivalence. The recognition was withdrawn in the year 2009. 8. When the petitioners took the examination in the year 2006 the Vishwavidyalas was recognized and equivalence was given to the degrees awarded by it. It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioners cleared the examination in more than one year. 9. The writ petitions are allowed. Impugned communications dated February 02, 2015 are quashed. CISF shall proceed ahead in the matter of giving employment to the petitioners as per law. If petitioners cleared the medical examination and are entitled to be offered appointment as Constable in CISF, letter offering appointment shall be issued to them. The petitioners would be entitled to consequential benefits of seniority as per their merit position but no back wages would be paid to them.

¶40

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page 6 of 7

¶41

Compliance be made within 4 weeks from today.

¶42

No costs.

¶43

(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE

¶44

(PRATIBHA RANI) JUDGE

¶45

JULY 21, 2016

¶46

mamta

¶47

W.P.(C) No.7284/2015 & conn.matters Page

¶48

7 of 7

Ramniwas v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramniwas v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Gurcharan Singh Vs UOI & Ors.

Chander Bhan Vs Union of India

M/S.M.S.Shoes East Ltd. Vs UOI & Ors.

New Delhi Municipal Council Vs V.K. Gulati

M/S Sml Isuzu Ltd. & Anr. Vs UOI & Ors.

V.E. Commercial Vehicle Ltd. & Anr. Vs UOI & Ors.

Rajiv Boolchand Jain Vs Union of India & Ors.

Raghavendra Prasad Kuruva, Cisf Vs Union of India

Arcil Vs the Registrar Drt-I, Delhi & Ors.

Pankaj Singh Bajad Vs the Commandant C.I.S.F. Unit Bccl, Dhanbad, Jharkhand & Ors.

Sudhir Kumar & Ors. Vs Deputy Commandant (Recruitment Cell) I.T.B.P.

Cdt Mohit Jayas Vs Union of India and Anr.

Vipin Tomar Vs Union of India & Ors.