Hari Shankar vs Union of India

Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Vivek Kumar Birla, JJ.—Heard Sri A.K. Sachan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prakash Padia, learned Counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation. This petition raises a challenge to the disqualification attributed to the petitioner''s candidature in relation to his graduation degree for award of L.P.G. distributorship by the Indian Oil Corporation. The challenge is to the intimation given to the petitioner of New Years Day i.e., 1.1.2014 that he was not eligible as he is not a graduate. Thus, it is his educational qualification which has been found to be deficient.

Sri Sachan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner is holder of a complete graduation degree from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, therefore, the decision of the respondents to discard the same, is contrary to law. He further submits that the brochure as contained in Annexure 14 to the writ petition, clearly prescribes that a candidate should be a graduate in any field, and since the petitioner is a graduate, therefore, he is entitled to be treated as eligible. He, however, submits that even assuming that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is neither a university nor a deemed university, yet the degree awarded to the petitioner has been treated to be an equivalent qualification as prescribed in the brochure for which reliance has been placed on the letter dated 19.3.2010 issued by the Research Officer of the Central Hindi Directorate, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, New Delhi, a copy whereof is Annexure-8 to the writ petition.

Relying on the said letter, Sri Sachan submits that the petitioner fulfils the educational qualification and consequently the denial of such an opportunity to the petitioner to compete for the distributorship is arbitrary.

The said contentions have been countered by Sri Padia contending that even assuming for the sake of the argument that the said communication of the Government of India dated 19.3.2010 is to be accepted, the same does not conform to the terms and conditions of the brochure inasmuch as the petitioner does not hold a graduation degree in any field as prescribed therein. He contends that the said letter,, categorically prescribes that this recognition is only for the subject of Hindi and is limited to that extent and the certificate so awarded, is not a complete-certificate of a degree examination.

We have considered the submissions raised and perused the affidavits as also the letter alongwith the press note dated 5.5.1998 which has also been appended along as Annexure-8 to the writ petition. A perusal of the brochure leaves no room for doubt that the degree of graduation has to be possessed from any recognised university or equivalent qualification recognised by the Ministry of Human Resource - Development, Government of India. The recognition on which reliance has been placed by the petitioner, namely the letter dated 19.3.2010, itself draws an exception to the certificate possessed by the petitioner by mentioning that the said certificate is only limited for the subject of Hindi and shall not be treated as equivalent to a certificate of a complete degree course. The letter clearly indicates that the said equivalent recognition is only for the subject of Hindi alone.

Having considered the aforesaid submissions we also find that the Apex Court has already held that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is neither a University nor Deemed University nor an Educational Board and in such circumstances, it was not found to be entitled to grant degrees even otherwise for which it did not possess any recognition. The said judgment is reported in Rajasthan Pradesh V.S. Sardarshahar and Another Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, .

This Court also had dealt with into such questions in relation to the examinations held by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan which came to be considered in the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

Consequently, in view of the conclusions drawn hereinabove and on a bare perusal of letter dated 19.3.2010, the certificate possessed by the petitioner, cannot be treated to be a certificate for graduation in any field as envisaged under the brochure which in our opinion is a clear indication of holding of a complete graduation degree. The certificate can be treated equivalent for the subject of Hindi alone. We therefore do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly rejected.