STATE OF ASSAM Vs. JAYANTA KUMAR SARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review application has been filed by the State of Assam and three others, seeking review of the common judgment and order dated 30.01.2014, passed by this court in WA No. 248/2012 and W.A. No. 249/2012.

(2.) By passing a common order dated 21.11.2011, the learned Single Judge had allowed two writ petitions, being W.P.(C) No. 331/2011 and W.P.(C) No. 1741/2010. It is against the said order that the State of Assam and others had preferred two herein before mentioned writ appeals. It would be pertinent to mention herein that the order dated 21.11.2011 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1741/2010 was corrected by order dated 27.02.12 and, as such, W.A. No. 248/2012 was filed for assailing both the orders.

(3.) Relevant summary of the case is that the writ petitioners were holding Diploma in Engineering and they were working in the Public Works Department of the Government of Assam as Junior Engineers. The prescribed qualification for the promotional post of Assistant Engineer is a degree in Engineering. The writ petitioners had projected that they have taken B. Tech degree in Civil Engineering from the Institute of Advanced Studies and Education, Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardar Sahar, Rajasthan, which they claimed was a Deemed University for the purpose of UGC Act, 1946 and that the said institute provided facility for distance educational learning. It was projected that the degree obtained by the writ petitioners was recognized by the Director Technical Education, Assam as well as by the Ministry of Human Resources Department, Government of India. It was projected that the concerned service rules envisaged that whenever a Diploma holder acquires a degree, he will be promoted to the vacant post of Assistant Engineer and such recruitment would be deemed to be a direct recruitment. It was projected that although other departments of the Government of Assam were promoting similarly placed persons to the vacant posts of Assistant Engineers, the Public Works Department had denied the similar benefits to the writ petitioner. In order to buttress the point, the writ petitioners heavily relied on the letter dated 07.10.2009 (enclosure to Annexure-14 of the writ petition). The Public Works Department of the Government of Assam took a different view to the effect that the B. Tech degree, obtained from distance learning institute lacked approval of the All Indian Council for Technical Education ('AICTE' for short), for which it was not a valid degree.