Dismissed

Jagdish Prashad and Anr. v. U.H.B.V.N.L. and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 May 2010LPA/121/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Indian High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed an appeal challenging the selection of a respondent to a post of Assistant Lineman. The High Court rejected claims that the respondent lacked minimum MATRIC+ITI qualifications, holding that a higher Diploma qualification was valid despite the certificate being produced post-exigency.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; order of learned Single Judge dismissed writ petition stands affirmed.

Jagdish Prashad and Anr. Vs U.H.B.V.N.L. and… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶2

L.P.A. No.121 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.5.2010

¶3

Jagdish Prasad & another.

¶4

-----Appellants

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & others.

¶7

-----Respondents

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH

¶9

Present:Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate for the appellants

¶10

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition of the appellants challenging selection of respondent No.4 to the post of Assistant Lineman in the Electricity Board (Bijli Vitran Nigam).

¶13

Essential qualification as per advertisement dated 19.10.2006 was Matric with two years I.T.I. or two years vocational course. Case of the appellants is that respondent No.4 did not have the said qualification and was, thus, not entitled to the said appointment.

¶14

The contention of the appellants was contested and in the reply of respondent No.4, it was stated that he had diploma in

¶15

LPA No.121 of 2010

¶16

¶17

Electrical Engineering from Board of Technical Education, Haryana. It was further stated that the said qualification was higher than the I.T.I. certificate or two years vocational course. 4. Learned Single Judge held that the appointment of respondent No.4 could not be held to be illegal as Diploma in Electrical Engineering was higher than the I.T.I. or two years vocational course.

¶18

We have heard learned counsel for the appellants.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that though averment was made in the reply by respondent No.4 that he had Diploma in Electrical Engineering from Board of Technical Education, Haryana, the said diploma was not produced. Certificates, Annexure R-4/1 and R-4/2, which were produced, were not showing the diploma to have been possessed by respondent No.4 on the date of appointment and same could not be accepted. Further objection of learned counsel for the appellants is that the date of said certificate is after the filing of the writ petition and after two years of service.

¶20

We are unable to accept the submission. Certificate Annexure R-4/1 is duly issued by the Industrial Training Institute. We do not find any ground to disbelieve the certificate, even if the certificate is issued later to the selection. Finding has been duly recorded that respondent No.4 was duly qualified and possessed Diploma in Electrical Engineering, which was higher than I.T.I.

¶21

LPA No.121 of 2010

¶22

¶23

We, thus, do not find any ground to interfere with the

¶24

view taken by the learned Single Judge.

¶25

The appeal is dismissed.

¶26

( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE

¶27

May 07, 2010 ( ALOK SINGH ) ashwani JUDGE

Jagdish Prashad and Anr. v. U.H.B.V.N.L. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Prashad and Anr. v. U.H.B.V.N.L. and Ors.

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

Satbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Kuldip Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Shaheed Udham Singh Kamboj Coop. Tpt. Society Vs Punjab St. Grain Procurement Corpn. Ltd. & Ors.

Gulab Rai Vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate & Ors.

Hemant Kumar Sayal Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Deva Singh Vs Gram Panchayat Thurana and Ors.