Allahabad High Court
Urmila Devi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Deptt. ... on 5 November, 2024
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73190
Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9437 of 2024
Petitioner :- Urmila Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Deptt. Woman Child Development Lko And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Uttam Kumar Awasthi,Ved Prakash Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Shri Uttam Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. The grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is with regard to the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Anganwadi Worker from the post of Anganwadi Helper.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Anganwadi Helper in 2012 and the post of Anganwadi Worker was lying vacant for a long time and consequently, the petitioner had moved an application for being promoted to the post of Anganwadi Worker on 15.03.2024 alongwith the said application the petitioner has submitted all the eligibility qualification certificates. The Class VIII certificate of the year 2002 from H.O.S.S., Hasnanpur, Manpur, Hardoi and Adhikari Examination/Pariksha (High School) in the year 2004 and Pandit Examination/Pariksha (Intermediate) in the year, 2006 through Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya Vrindavan, Mathura was submitted for due consideration for the promotion.
4. Despite the fact that the said qualifications are equivalent to the qualifications sought by the respondents for being promoted to the post of Anganwadi Worker but her candidature was not considered and her application was rejected by means of the impugned order dated 12.09.2024 stating that the petitioner could not be granted benefit of the judgment of this Court passed in writ petition bearing Writ-A No.35352 of 2015, Gulab Tripathi versus State of U.P. and others as the petitioner was not a party in the said case.
5. It is noticed that in the case of Gulab Tripathi (supra), a Coordinate Bench of this Court had considered the equivalence of the 'Adhikari Pariksha' certificate issued by the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura and it was held that the degrees/ certificates issued by the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura prior to 2008 were valid and on the said account allowed the writ petition of the petitioner therein. The judgment of this Court dated 07.08.2015 passed in Writ-A No.35352 of 2015 is quoted here-in-below:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and have perused the record.
The petitioner, being qualified for the post of Anshkalik Anudeshak, applied for the said post on 30.1.2015 in pursuance of the advertisement dated 2.1.2015. The petitioner is graduate from Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura and he had passed Adhikari Pariksha in the year 1992, Pandit Pariksha in the year 1994 and Shiromani Pariksha in the year 1997 from Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura. His candidature has been rejected on the ground that vide Government Order dated 22.2.2008, the aforesaid Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura was derecognized and as such, his qualification cannot be accepted and for this reason he is not eligible for the post of Anshkalik Anudeshak.
This issue as to whether 'Adhikari Pariksha' certificate issued by Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura upto 2008 was equivalent to High School or not, was decided by Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in Writ (A) Petition No. 48208 of 2012 (Dhanpal and others vs. State of U.P. and others). The relevant paragraph 54 of the said judgement dated 9.10.2013 passed in Writ (A) Petition No. 48208 of 2012 is quoted as under:-
"54. In view of the discussion made above, we answer the reference thus:
(a) Adhikari Pariksha Certificate issued by the Gurukul Viswavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura, up to the year 2008 i.e. till it was recognized by the U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate Education as equivalent to High School, obtained with English as one of the subject, and passed in one year, is a valid qualification equivalent to High School, regardless of Gurukul having been declared a fake University by the UGC.
(b) The decision of the division bench in Special Appeal No. 1990 of 2011 dated 13.10.2011 (Indrawati Devi v. State of U.P. and others), which holds that "Adhikari Pariksha" certificate obtained from Gurukul Viswavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura cannot be held to be a valid degree, does not lay down the correct law."
In view of the aforesaid, since the issue that the degrees issued by Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura prior to 2008 were valid degrees, therefore, the impugned order/communicated dated 8.6.2015 passed on the basis that such certificates are not acceptable as the petitioner is not eligible for the said post is incorrect and, therefore, is liable to be set aside.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents could not dispute the aforesaid legal position.
In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order/communication dated 8.6.2015 passed by the respondent no. 4-District Basic Education Officer, Banda is quashed. The matter is remanded back to the respondent no. 4 to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Anshkalik Anudeshak on merit of educational certificates attached in his favour i.e. equivalent certificate/degree to High School, Intermediate and Graduation.
This writ petition stands allowed with the observations made hereinabove. There shall be no order as to costs."
6. From the above it is clear that the case of the petitioner is fully covered by the judgment of Gulab Tripathi (supra), accordingly, we find that the case of the petitioner and the dispute pertaining to the validity of the 'Adhikari Examination' and 'Pandit Examination' certificates issued by the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura prior to 2008 are no longer res integra and the same would a valid qualification for the purposes of promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker.
7. In the light of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12.09.2024 is quashed. The matter is remitted to the District Program Officer Hardoi to pass a fresh order considering the qualifications of the petitioner in the light of the directions issued by this Court here-in-above. Let the exercise be done expeditiously, say, within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
[Alok Mathur,J.]
Order Date :- 5.11.2024
Mohd. Sharif
