Roshan Ara @APPELLANT@Hash State Of Jammu & Kashmir And Others

Chief Education Officer, Shopian (respondent no.3 here), issued an Advertisement Notice dated 9th February 2012 (Annexure A

to writ petition) for engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleems (ReTs) in New Opening Schools under Sarva Shiksha Abhiya (SSA) at

difference places including Patipora, Mantribugh. Petitioner and private respondents 5 to 7 responded thereto. List of candidates,

who applied for ReT, was framed followed by preparation of a Panel of three candidates. Petitioner represented against validity of

Degrees of private respondents 5 to 7 as according to her, respondents 5 to 7 have by fraudulent means obtained the degrees, which

are not valid. Respondent no.3 forwarded a communication bearing no.CEO/ Spn/Plg/12/5779 dated 6th September 2012

(Annexure C to writ petition) to Zonal Education Officer, Vehil (respondent no.4), to reframe Panel as per merit in light of letter

dated 24th August 2012, received from Director, School Education, Kashmir (respondent no.2 here).

According to petitioner, respondent no.5 challenged communication (Annexure C to writ petition) in a writ petition, being SWP

no.1842/2012. As a sequel thereof, a Committee is stated to have been constituted, which opined that though Singhania University

has come into existence by an Act of State Legislature and can award Degrees, but these should be passed in regular mode in the

main campus only. Petitioner claims that respondent no.3 has only gone to the aspect that Singhania University is a creation of

State Legislature of Rajasthan and has declared the degrees submitted by private respondents as valid and genuine without going to

aspects of genuineness of certificates as well as acquiring qualification by bona fide means. Petitioner contends that private

respondents have enrolled themselves with some studycentre in Kashmir, which is not permissible. In view of respondent no.3

having assumed degrees, produced by private respondents at the time of submission of applications for engagement as ReT, as

genuine and as a consequence whereof, private respondents had been tentatively selected as ReTs in Primary School Patipora,

Mantribugh. Thereagainst objections had been filed by petitioner before respondent no.3. Respondent no.4 is said to have given

point-wise Reply to the objections of petitioner vide letter dated 21st July 2014 (Annexure G to writ petition). It is averred that as

reported by Headmaster High School, Mantribugh, Ms MasoodaAnayat (respondent no.7 here) was working as CPW but she was

allowed to undergo further studies (M.Ed.) by the then Headmaster and during this period wages were not drawn in favour of

CPW.

Petitioner claims that Ms Nargis Inayat (respondent no.5) has obtained M.Ed. Degree under enrolment no.0491105765 and SUI

no.0004508, which is in the name of Akashay Pathak, who is pursuing Diploma in Engineering. It is next contention of petitioner

that respondent no.7, figuring at serial no.03 in Panel, happens to be brother of private respondents 5&6 and son of private

respondent no.8, and has pursued his M.A. in English from Kashmir University and during Session 20062007, he has obtained less

than 55% and later on he fraudulently enrolled himself for M.Phil in English from Singhania University during Session 2009-2010

and at the same time enrolled himself for M.A. in English from MANU. The decision taken by Directorate of School Education with

regard to degrees of B.Ed. and M.Ed. awarded by Singhania University is stated to be erroneous and not inconsonance with law.

Creation of Singhania University by Statute, according to petitioner, is not enough for recognition of Degree because

programmes/courses are to be recognised by other statutory bodies, like UGC, Distance Education Council, NCTE and AICTE.

Petitioner, on the strength of case set up, seeks vouchsafe of following relief:

a) Writ of certiorari, quashing impugned selection of private respondents issued by Chief Education Officer, Shopian, published in

daily Newspaper Srinagar Times dated 6th July 2014, further any such decision be also quashed taken at the back of petitioner;

b) Writ of prohibition, restraining official respondents from issuing an order of engagement in favour of private respondents.

c) Writ of mandamus, commanding respondents to select and appoint petitioner for the post of ReT in PS PatiporaMatribugh in

pursuance of advertisement notice dated 09.02.2012, issued by Chief Education Officer, Shopian, retrospectively, from the date

engagement of candidates who were selected pursuant to the same notification;

d) Writ of mandamus, commanding respondents to hold an enquiry to find out under what circumstance private respondents were

engaged as CPW by his father and wages are released in her favour and while she was continuing her studies, erring official be

punished in accordance with law.

Reply has been filed by respondents 1 to 4. They insist that petitioner also, being eligible and qualified, applied for the position of

ReT. However, she has low merit and figures at serial no.04 in Panel. According to respondents Habitation Patipora is not

qualifying Government order no.288-Edu of 2009 dated 8th April 2009 and the merit has been considered on revenue village basis.

The degree obtained by private respondents, as maintained by respondents 1 to 4, is valid as Singhania University authorities have

conveyed genuineness / verification of certificates in regular mode within campus of University. The degrees of empanelled

aspirants are said to have been considered as the same have been found obtained by private respondents after passing examinations

in regular mode in main campus of University as per verification. The degrees are to be considered as conveyed by Director, School

Education, Kashmir, vide communication no.DSEK/Legal/ 1310/Misc/142-43 dated 14th June 2014. Panel/tentative selection list

has been made under SSA as per norms in vogue as the genuineness/verification of degrees has been conveyed by the aforesaid

University. Respondent no.6, it is averred, is working as CPW in High School, Mantribugh, on part time basis and is being paid

honorarium of Rs.100/- per month. Before leaving for Singhania University, she has submitted her application to Headmaster

Mantribugh for allowing her to pursue M.Ed. Degree at Singhania University. The Headmaster is stated to have given her a proper

permission for pursuing the degree. Singhania University has authenticated genuineness/verification of certificates issued in favour

of Nargis Annayat (respondent no.5) and the degree awarded in her favour is genuine as conveyed by said University. In order to

improve her percentage, RasikAnnayat (respondent no.7) is said to have done P.G. in English through MANU University in a

distance mode and that she has not produced M. Phil Degree, while applying for ReT.

Respondents 1 to 4 also assert that Director, School Education, Kashmir, conveyed genuineness of University as all the process

has been made in light of instructions conveyed by Director, School Education, Kashmir, vide communication no.DSEK / Legal /

1310 Misc 142-43 dated 14th June 2014 after a Committee, which was constituted as per court directions discussed the issue

threadbare. Panel framed in respect of eligible candidates stands signed by all VEC Members including Headmaster High School,

Mantribugh. It is also averred that petitioner, Roshan Ara, has made an objection to the candidature of private respondents

(empanelled candidates) on the ground that empanelled candidates in whose favour tentative selection has been issued, do not

possess valid degrees, which is not correct. Verification qua genuineness mode of passing examination was taken with Singhania

University by respondent no.3. Registrar, Singhania University, vide letter no.SU/REG/ Verification / 2014 dated 12th August

2014, has conveyed that certificates are genuine and the candidates have passed their examination in a regular mode.

Respondents 5 to 7, in their Reply, insist that degrees obtained by them from Singhania University, after observing that said

University has been established by an Act of State of Rajasthan and recognised under Section 22 of University Grants Commission

Act and respondents 5 to 7 having pursued the course in the said University as bona fide regular students thereof. Official

respondents have justly and rightly reached the conclusions impugned. Respondents maintain that they have obtained degrees, that

have begotten them selection by regular mode from Singhania University, are genuine. As regards allegation of petitioner that father

of answering respondents has remained associated with selection process, respondents insist that father of respondents has had no

role in selection of respondents inasmuch as merit has been decided and determined objectively by Zonal Education Officer, in

which father of respondents has had no role. Members of Village Education or Headmaster have had no role in determination of

merit. Validity of degrees that have resulted in selection of answering respondents has been decided by Directorate of Education

after application of mind and father of respondents has had no role in it. Respondent no.6 has been working as Contingent Paid

Worker (CPW) in the school, is not denied, but same does not advance cause of petitioner in any manner. Respondent had been

engaged as part time worker for sweeping school premises in morning. She had been simultaneously pursuing studies as well and

by dint of her hard-work and dedication, she has done postgraduation in due course and instead of lauding her for the same,

petitioner is trying to find fault without any basis. She had left job temporarily with permission of Zonal Education Officer, to

enable herself to pursue M.Ed. Course in Singhania University as a regular student. Â

Respondents 5 to 7 strenuously aver that Singhania University has been established by an Act of State Legislature of Rajasthan

and it automatically stands recognised throughout India by operation of Section 22 of University Grants Commission Act, which

occupies the field int eh matter. The certificates and degrees granted by university are with the authority of law and valid

throughout India and same do not need equivalent or recognition by any State University or Government. Respondents also assert

that Government of Jammu and Kashmir has been permitting its employees to pursue higher studies including research degrees in

Singhania University. Respondents also state that validity or otherwise of degrees, which are sought to be nullified by petitioner, has

been considered by Directorate of School Education, pursuant to order of this Court. After going through various aspects, including

legal and factual, the authorities have already concluded that degrees are valid and therefore, need to be taken into consideration.

The decision is stated to be not suffering from any legal infirmity and need not be interfered with by this Court inasmuch as the

decision being absolutely rational and reasonable and cannot be termed to be faulty or irrational.

Respondent no.9 (University Grants Commission) in its Reply states that Singhania University, Pacheribari, District Jhunjhunu,

Rajasthan, has been established by an Act of State Legislature of Rajasthan as a Private University and is empowered to award

degrees as specified under Section 22 of the UGC Act through its main campus in regular mode with the approval of statutory

Bodies/ Councils, wherever it is required. Singhania University is said to be not authorised to open study centre/off campus centre

beyond territorial jurisdiction of the State and no recognition has been given to Singhania University to offer any programme

through distance mode. The university cannot open its centre(s) even within the State as per the provision of UGC (Establishment of

and Maintenance of Standards in Private Universities) Regulations, 2003, without approval of UGC. It is also insisted that UGC has

not granted any approval to the University to open off-campus/study centre. Requirement of approval of B.Ed. and M.Ed. courses

would be informed by NCTE as NCTE is regulatory body for Teacher Education.

Heard and considered.

Learned counsel for petitioner states that private respondents have procured degrees from Singhania University by fraudulent

and illegal means. Singhania University may be created under an Act, but the courses, like, B.Ed. and M.Ed. are to be approved by

National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) because UGC has clearly mentioned that it needs recognition of NCTE, which is a

statutory body. According to learned counsel B.Ed. and M.Ed. degrees of Singhania University are not recognised by University of

Kashmir and J&K SSB.

Learned counsel for respondents 5 to 7 has stated that private respondents have obtained the degrees by regular mode from

Singhania University and the said certificates are genuine. He, in support of his submissions, has placed reliance on a judgement

rendered by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.9198/2017 titled Shanti Lal v. State

of Rajasthan and others.

Learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 has submitted that genuineness of the certificates, produced by private respondents, have

been got verified from Singhania University. The Registrar, Singhania University, is stated to have vide letter dated 12th August

2014 conveyed that the certificates are genuine and the candidates have passed their examination in a regular mode. The degrees

are also said to have been considered by Director, School Education, Kashmir, vide communication no.DSEK/Legal/1310 / Misc /

142-43 dated 14th June 2014.

The controversy in present case, having regard to pleadings of parties, narrows down to validity or otherwise of certificates,

produced by private respondents in response to advertisement notice, inviting applications for engagement as ReTs in new opening

school at Patipora, Matribugh.

Petitioner’s stand is that private respondents do not possess valid certificates whereas private respondents as also official

respondents claim and maintain that private respondents possess valid certificates, obtained by them from Singhania University.

Insofar as obtaining degrees through off-campus or study centre, official respondents as also the authorities of Singhania

University have stated that private respondents have obtained the degrees through regular mode. In such circumstances, there

remains a question/issue whether Singhania University is a recognised university.

Learned counsel for petitioner has produced a communication bearing F.no.48-5/2014/NCTE/N&S dated 18th November 2014,

addressed by Dr. S. K. Chauhan, Research Officer, National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) â€" a Statutory Body of the

Government of India â€" to Secretary, J&K Service Selection Board, intimating him that recognition for B. Ed. Programme only, and

not for M.Ed. course, has been granted in favour of Singhania B. Ed. College, Rajasthan, vide Order bearing F.no.NRC/NCTE/F-

3/RJ-564/ 2005 / 6757 dated 26th July 2005. He has also produced a communication bearing F. no. NRC/NCTE/Misc./ 2014 /

79317 dated 17th November 2014, addressed by Regional Director, NCTE, Rajasthan, to Research Officer, NCTE, New Delhi,

forwarding recognition order of Singhania B. Ed. College, Rajasthan, with an intimation that recognition is only for B. Ed.

programme.

Learned counsel for respondents 5 to 7, to counter submissions of learned counsel for petitioner, has taken this Court to

judgement dated 21st February 2018, passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in S. B. Civil Writ Petition

no.9198/2017 Shanti Lal v. State of Rajasthan and others, in which it has been held that as Singhania University is a University

established under the Statute, it does not need recognition by any other authority inasmuch as it is automatically recognised. He,

after making reference to afore-cited judgement, has stated that above precedent law covers case in hand and squares off present

dispute in toto. He thereafter invited attention of this Court to letter no.4-1/2011(CPP-IPU) dated 18th November 2012 of

University Grants Commission, New Delhi, in which it is clearly mentioned that the M.Ed. course run by Singhania University in

regular mode at the main campus of the university is valid. He has also produced an Order, bearing no.119-SSB of 2018 dated 21st

February 2018, issued by Secretary, J&K Services Selection Board, Jammu, to contend that the said order also settles conclusively

subject matter of present case.

As order no.119-SSB of 2018 dated 21stFebruary 2018 has, as rightly said by learned counsel for respondents, direct impact on

subject matter of present case, it would be advantageous to reproduce relevant and pertinent excerpt thereof hereunder:

“1. Whereas, the Services Selection Board vide advertisement notification no.06 of 2013 dated 10.05.2013 advertised posts of

Teachers District Cadre Poonch under item no.536…….

Whereas, in response to the said advertisement notice the petitioner had applied and participated in the selection process

conducted by the Board; and

Whereas, the petitioner’s name was not reflected in the selection list issued by the Board, however, one post at S.No.70 was

kept blank for him with the remarks “Recommendation withheld for want of certain clarificationâ€​; and

Whereas, Board has not considered masters degree obtained by the petitioner from Singhania University Rajasthan for the post of

teacher; and

Whereas, thereafter a decision was taken by the Board rejecting the selection of the petitioner thereafter petitioner through the

medium of SWP No.1008/15 approached Hon’ble High Court at Jammu sought directions from the Hon’ble High Court to

declare the petitioner as selected to the post of Teacher Distt Cadre Poonch in reference to adv. Notification No.06 of 2013, dated

10.5.2013 item No.536 under OM category without finding fault with the M.Ed qualification attained/acquired by

petitioner…….has been duly considered to be valid by the Directorate of School Education Kashmir as well as Directorate of

School Education Jammu and even by the J&K Services Selection Board itself and recommend the name of the petitioner to the post

of teacher district cadre Poonch; and

Whereas, in CMA No.1275/15 has been finally in SWP No.1008/15 the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 08.4.2015 ahs

been pleased to direct as under:-

“Meanwhile subject to objections from the other side and till next date of hearing respondents are directed to keep reserve one

post of teacher district cadre poonch.â€​; and

Whereas, SWP No.1008/15 has been finally disposed of by the Hon’ble High court vide judgment dated 11.12.2017. The

conclusive part of the judgment dated 11.12.2017 is reproduced as under:

“…To counter this stand taken in the reply affidavit learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner did

the course on regular basis. All the colleges in which he undertook the courses are recognized by the University Grants Commission

(UGC) and the degree issued by the Singhania University Rajasthan. The University is a recognized University and to support this

plea, he relies upon the report (Annexure-U) submitted by the committee pursuant to order dated 25th April, 2013. This

communication was addressed by the respondent No.2, i.e. Director School Education, Kashmir to respondent No.3, i.e. Chief

Education Officer, Shopian. The substance of this communication is that the Singhania University Rajasthan, which has come into

existence by an Act of State Legislature can award degree, i.e. B.Ed/M.Ed. However, these should be passed in a regular mode in

the main campus only.

In view of the factual matrix, it was stated by Mr. Raman Sharma learned Dy. Advocate General supported by Mr. Suneel Malhotra

learned Government Advocate that the Services Selection Board will call on this issue raised by the petitioner clarified by the

committee’s report in terms of the court and the case of the petitioner will be considered on merits.

In this view of the matter respondents Nos.4 and 5 are directed to verify the claim of the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid

report of the respondent No.2 and take a decision expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of

certified copy of this order. Petitioner is also directed to make further representation along with copy of this report and copy of this

order so as to enable respondent Nos.4 and 5 to take a decision expeditiously.

With the above observations the writ petition is disposed of along with connected MP(s)â€​; and

Whereas, the claim of the petitioner was rebutted by the Board in the objections and same have not been appreciated/ agreed by

the Hon’ble High Court while disposing of the matter vide judgment dated 11.12.2017; and

Whereas, Hon’ble High Court while deciding the matter, relied upon the report submitted by the Director School Education

in compliance to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High court in SWP No.1842/12 in the case titled Nargis Aanayat& other

Vs State and others. The relevant part of the report reflected in communication No.DSEK/ Legal/1310 Misc/142-43 dated

14.6.2014 is reproduced as under:- “….In compliance to Hon’ble High Court direction matter was placed before the

committee constituted for the purpose which has after threadbare discussions, taking into consideration of all the relevant material,

viewpoint of different authorities and most important of all the Hon’ble Supreme Court observations and gave its findings that

the Singhania University which has come into existence by on Act of State Legislature can award degrees i.e. B.Ed/M.Ed. However,

these should be passed in a regular mode in the main campus onlyâ€​.

 “You are therefore, advised to proceed further in the matter accordingly and accord consideration to the incumbents who

have read/pursued in the main campus strictly in the regular mode only and complete the process of finalization of the panel of

most meritorious/eligible candidates within the shortest possible time so that Hon’ble High Court direction can be implemented

in letter and spirit and a compliance report filed through Addl. Advocate General J&K High Court at Srinagar under intimation to

this Directorate.â€​; and

Whereas, the merit position secured by the petitioner after considering the report of the committee constituted in compliance to

directions of the Hon’ble High court passed in SWP No.1842/12……

Whereas, last selected candidate under OM category is having 57.0094 points and the petitioner has secured 58.045 points in the

selection process and petitioner on the basis of merit obtained by the petitioner is justifying his place under OM category at

S.No.70…….â€​

From the above extracted passage of Order no.119-SSB of 2018 dated 21st February 2018, it becomes indubitably conspicuous

that Singhania University can award degrees of B.Ed./M.Ed., but same should be passed in a regular mode in the main campus. In

the present case, the stand of official respondents is that private respondents have obtained the degrees from Singhania University

through regular mode, which has smashed the case of petitioner in smithereens. Having said that, this Court need not to beat

around the bush. In such circumstances, writ petition lacks in merit.

Based on the foregoing discussion and discourse, writ petition is dismissed with connected MP(s). Interim direction

Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.