Equivalence of two educational qualifications is a technical and academic matter and it must be done by a specific order by experts in field
1. Distinguished issue that has cropped up for consideration is whether this Court in its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can draw equivalence of two educational qualifications and declare equivalence, that too after initiation of recruitment process.
2. The Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (for short ‘the PSC’) issued an advertisement on 15-7-2015 inviting applications from eligible candidates for recruitment on the post of Assistant Professor in different branches viz., Civil, Electrical, Electronics & Telecommunication, Information Technology, Mechanical and Mining, in Engineering Colleges, laying down the requisite educational qualification for the said posts to be Graduate in relevant branch and Post- Graduate degree i.e. M.E./M.Tech. in first class. The petitioner claiming to be eligible candidate as having Graduate degree in Information Technology and having M.Tech. in Computer Science made an attempt to submit application on-line in which he remained unsuccessful, as he does not have the post-graduate degree in Information Technology. Thereafter, the petitioner made representation to respondent No.2 highlighting his difficulty and claimed candidature but in that also he remained unsuccessful. Thereafter, he filed writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the action of respondent No.2 holding him disqualified for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) stating inter alia that the post graduate degree of Computer Science is equivalent to the post-graduate degree of Information Technology which is apparent from the syllabus prescribed in the advertisement and the PSC has also permitted one candidate Bheem Prasad Ram who is similarly situated having same qualification as the petitioner is and also brought to the notice of the Court that University of Mumbai by its notification dated 10-2-2012 held the degree of Computer Science to be equivalent to that of Information Technology and, therefore, the petitioner is duly eligible to be considered for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) as such, the action of the respondents in not permitting him to appear in the examination be held to be void and inoperative and an appropriate writ be issued commanding the respondents to allow him to appear in the examination as eligible candidate for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology), and consequential writ / direction be issued.
3. Return has been filed by the respondent State of Chhattisgarh stating inter alia that in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Section 23 read with Sections 10 (i) & (v) of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987, Regulations known as “the All India Council for Technical Education [Pay Scales, Service Conditions and Qualifications for the Teachers and other Academic Staff in Technical Institutions (Degree)] Regulations, 2010” (for short ‘the AICTE Regulations’) has been framed which lays down the qualification for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) to be B.E./B.Tech. and M.E./ M.Tech. in relevant branch with first class or equivalent either in B.E./B.Tech or M.E. / M.Tech.. It has further been pleaded that the State Government in exercise of power conferred under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India framed rules namely “the Chhattisgarh Technical Education (Teaching cadre- Engineering College) (Gazetted) Services Recruitment Rules, 2014” (for short ‘the Rules of 2014’) in which as per Schedule-I enacted under Rule 5, qualification for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) has been prescribed to be the same and it has further been pleaded that on enquiry being made by respondent No.1, the Chairman of All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) on 21-8-2015 has clearly informed that the degree in the discipline in which the candidate is applying for a faculty position is required, as such, the petitioner does not have the post-graduate degree in Information Technology, as he is only having post-graduate degree in Computer Science and, therefore, he was not eligible to be considered against the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) and his candidature has rightly been declined for the said post, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
4. Return has also been filed by the PSC in line with the return filed by the State of Chhattisgarh stating inter alia that the petitioner’s application was not entertaine mainly on the ground that he does not hold the postgraduate degree in Information Technology which is the requisite qualification prescribed for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) and, therefore, the petitioner is not eligible to be considered for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology). It has also been pleaded that the application of Bheem Prasad Ram has been accepted due to technical fault of the website which is an auto generated mechanism and his candidature will be taken care of at the time of scrutiny of papers and if the same are not found as per the prescribed criteria, he will be held ineligible as per the advertisement dated 15-7- 2015. The petitioner being ineligible candidate, his case has not been accepted by declining his candidature as such, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
5. Rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner and the circular of the University of Mumbai dated 10-2-2012 has been brought on record in order to demonstrate that the post-graduate degree in Computer Science is equivalent to the post-graduate degree in Information Technology and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be considered against the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology).
6. Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner holds post-graduate degree in Computer Science which is one and same as that of post-graduate degree in Information Technology and as it has been concluded by the University of Mumbai in its circular dated 10-2-2012, post-graduate degree in Computer Science to be equivalent to post-graduate degree in Information Technology. He would further submit that admittedly, the respondent PSC has permitted one candidate Bheem Prasad Ram, who is also having post-graduate degree in Computer Science, to be eligible candidate for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology). He would also submit that the AICTE in its memo, filed by the State as Annexure R-4, has vaguely replied with regard to the query made by the State/ respondent No.1 as to whether a person possessing post-graduate degree in Computer Science is eligible for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) in Engineering Colleges. He would lastly submit that there is no reason for the PSC to exclude the candidature of the petitioner besides his submission that the action of the respondents, in particular, the PSC, is arbitrary and liable to be struck down.
7. Mr. Prafull Bharat, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State of Chhattisgarh/respondent No.1, while vehemently opposing and countering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner is out-and-out ineligible to be considered for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology), as the requirement of AICTE Regulations and the Rules of 2014 followed by advertisement in the notification dated 15-7-2015, stipulate clearly and unambiguously that the candidate applying for the post must have B.E./ B.Tech. and M.E./ M.Tech. in relevant branch with first class or equivalent either in B.E./B.Tech or M.E. / M.Tech.. Elaborating his submission, he would further submit that “relevant branch” would mean the branch/discipline in which a candidate is applying for the post like in the present case, Information Technology. He would also submit that equivalence of educational qualification claimed by the petitioner is the job of experts and it could be by a specific order or resolution duly published that too prior to the issuance of advertisement and it must be in the Recruitment Rules. It is also the submission of Mr. Bharat that the petitioner is not entitled for negative parity as this Court would not like to issue a writ of mandamus to act contrary to law, however, he would submit that the candidature of Bheem Prasad Ram will be examined afresh at the appropriate time / level and if he is found ineligible, care will be taken to see that he is duly declared ineligible at the stage of scrutiny. He would lastly submit that the declaration made by the University of Mumbai would be inapplicable in the present case, as the State Government has not made any declaration making equivalence of two postgraduate degrees of Computer Science and Information Technology. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief as claimed in the writ petition.
8. Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the PSC while adopting the submissions made on behalf of the State, would additionally submit that the AICTE Regulations and the Rules of 2014 clearly and unambiguously provide eligibility qualification for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) which has been prescribed in the advertisement and which vividly states that the candidate applying for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology) must have degree in Information Technology and must have post-graduate degree in Information Technology, as Information Technology would be the relevant subject for the candidate applying for the post of Assistant Professor (Information Technology). He would further submit that the same advertisement also invites application for the post of Lecturer in Polytechnic College prescribing graduate degree in relevant branch i.e. Computer Science or Information Technology, as the case may be. He would also submit that the declaration made by the University of Mumbai would not be applicable to the present case, as the said declaration made by the University of Mumbai would not be applicable to Public Service Commission because the State Government has not made any such declaration.
9. In the rejoinder argument, Mr. Dhurandhar would submit that the matter may be referred to the expert body for examination whether the post-graduate degree of the petitioner in Computer Science is equivalent to the postgraduate degree in Information Technology.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given thoughtful consideration to the submissions raised therein and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection.
11. In order to comprehend the controversy raised by the parties herein, it would be appropriate to first notice the AICTE Regulations which have been framed under the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987. The AICTE Regulations provide for faculty norms the relevant portion of which reads as under:-
