High Court
Case Details
WP(C) 3181/2013 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. U.K. Nair, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M. Bhag abati, learned State counsel. Also perused the materials available on record. Th e issue involved in both the writ petitions being one and the same, they have be en heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The matters pertain to selection and appointment of Inspector of Handloo m and Textiles for which the petitioners are aspirants. They are diploma holders in Textile Chemistry and Design which they have obtained from undergoing 3 (thr ee) years course of diploma from the Residential Girls Polytechnic, Golaghat. Th e issue involved is as to whether the said diploma course can be said to be equi valent to the diploma course in Textile Technology and / or Handloom Technology of minimum 3 (three) years duration recognized by the State Counsel for Technica l Education. There is no dispute that the institution from which the petitioners have obtained their diploma and for that matter the diploma which the petitione rs have obtained, is recognized by the SCTE and AICTE for technical education.
Decision
The petitioners involved in both the writ petitions have appeared in the selection and as per the interim direction of this Court, the result of the sam e are required to be kept in a sealed cover untill the decision in the writ pet ition. Referring to the Annexure-6 letter dated 30.5.2013 addressed to the Direc tor of Handloom and Textile by the Director of Technical Education, which is quo ted below, it is the stand of the petitioners that the diploma in Textile Chemis try and Design being equivalent to that of diploma in Textile Technology and / o r handloom Technology, the candidatures offered by the petitioners are required to be accepted with consequential consideration for selection. (cid:28)GOVT. OF ASSAM OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, ASSAM, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI-19 No. TEM-2/2012/2104 Dated Guwahati, the 30/5/12 From : Dr. A. Bora, Director. To : The Director, Handloom & Textiles, Ambari, Guwahati-1. Sub : Regarding Qualification for the post of Inspector, etc. Handloom & Textiles. Ref : Memorandum dated 30th May, 2013. Sir, With reference to the subject cited above, and in view of the memorandum received from some Diploma in Textile Chemistry & Design (TCD) passed out stude nts from Residential Girls’ Polytechnic, Golaghat, I have the honour to inform y ou that the 3 (three) years Diploma course in Textile Chemistry & Design conduct ed at Residential Girls’ Polytechnic, Golaghat is having almost same syllabus i. e. course contents with that of 3 (three) years Diploma Course in Textile Techno logy conducted at Assam Textile Institute, Guwahati under this Directorate. Both the courses are approved by AICTE. As such the said Diploma in Textile Chemistr y & Design may be considered as equivalent to the Diploma course in Textile Tech nology offered by Assam Textile Institute, Guwahati-1 in the matter of requisite qualification required for the post of Inspector, etc. under the department of Handloom & Textiles. This is for favour of your information and necessary action. Yours faithfully, Sd/- Director of Technical Education, Assam, Kahilipara, Guwahati-19. (cid:29) In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No.2 i.e. the Director of Handloom & Textiles, it has been stated thus :- (cid:28)4. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph 3 of the wri t petition the deponent begs to state that the syllabus prescribed for the 3 yea rs Diploma Course of Textile Technology offered by the Assam Textile Institute a nd the syllabus prescribed for the 3 years Diploma course in Textile Chemistry a nd Design offered by Girls Polytechnic, Golaghat. But the subjects like spinning is not included in the syllabus prescribed by the Residential Girls Polytechnic , Golaghat which considered as most essential subject for the posts of Inspector of Handloom & Textiles and Demonstrators of Handloom & Textiles. The syllabus in 3 years Diploma in Textile Chemistry and Design has give n more emphasis on Textile Chemistry only. The Director of Technical Education, Assam is the competent authority to explain the matter in details as regards the syllabus prescribed for both the courses in the Assam Textile Institute and Res idential Girls Polytechnic, Golaghat. Since the Diploma holders of Residential Girls Polytechnic do not have r equisite educational qualifications as required for the posts of Inspector of Ha ndloom & Textiles and Demonstrators of Handloom & Textiles, their candidatures f or the aforesaid posts cannot be considered and they are not eligible for the po sts. Besides, the Directorate of Handloom & Textiles, Assam have been making recruitments against the vacant posts of Inspector of Handloom & textiles and De monstrators of handloom & Textiles several times issuing advertisements vide No. DHTE.118/97/41 dated 18-07-1998 and No. DHTE. 60/2010/5 dated 01.10.2010. But n one of the Diploma holders of the Residential Girls Polytechnic, Golaghat had ev er objected against those advertisements or filed any case in the Court of law c laiming their eligibility for the aforesaid posts. 6. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph 5 of the wri t petition the deponent begs to state that in the aforesaid 2 advertisements as stated by the Petitioners, the qualification of 3 years Diploma in Textile Chemi stry and Design offered by the Residential Girls Polytechnic, Golaghat were not included as the requisite educational qualification for the posts of Inspector o f Handloom & Textiles and Demonstrators of Handloom & Textiles. The petitioners had submitted their applications against the aforesaid a dvertisements but their candidatures were not considered due to non fulfillment of the eligibility criteria for the posts of Inspectors of Handloom & Textiles a nd Demonstrators of Handloom & Textiles. 7. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph 6 of the wri t petition the deponent begs to state that some of the petitioners and other dip loma holders had submitted a representation dated 05.04.2013 to the Respondent N o.2, the Director of Handloom & Textiles, Assam on 06.04.2013 and accordingly, t he Director of Handloom & Textiles, Assam had sent the representation to the Res pondent No.1, the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, handloom Texti les & Sericulture Deptt. vide letter No. DHTE.226/2012/104 dated 13-05-2013 for taking a decision on the matter. It is a fact that the Director of Technical Education, Assam vide letter No. TEM-2/2012/2104, dated 30-05-2013 had informed the Respondent No.2 voluntar ily stating that the 3 Years Diploma Course in Textile Chemistry and Design cond ucted at the Residential Girls Polytechnic, Golaghat is almost having same sylla bus i.e. Course contents with that of 3 years Diploma Course in Textiles Technol ogy conducted the Assam Textile Institute, Ambari, Guwahati. (cid:29) From the above, what is seen is that the Director of Handloom & Textiles has also referred to the above quoted letter of the Director of Technical Educa tion in which it has been stated that both the Diplomas are almost having the sa me syllabus. In paragraph 4 quoted above (2nd sub-para), the Director of Handloo m & Textiles has also admitted that the Directorate of Technical Education, Assa m, is the competent authority to decide the issue as to whether both the courses in Assam Textile Institute and Residential Girls’ Polytechnic, Golaghat, is one and the same. The said aspect of the matter having already been decided as comm unicated by the above quoted letter dated 30.5.2013, it is the case of the petit ioners that they are required to be treated at per with the diploma holders of T extile Technology and /or Handloom Technology. On perusal of the said affidavit it also appears that the course in resp ect of which the dispute has been raised is the subject of spinning and as to wh ether the same is contained in the diploma course of the petitioners or not. In this connection, referring to the course contents of both the Institutions, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that even the said subje ct does not form part of the syllabus of diploma in Handloom Technology, which i s a prescribed qualification in the advertisement. Mr. M. Bhagabati, learned State Counsel submits that since the matter re quires consideration by the experts on the subjects, the matter be left open to the sound discretion of the authority in consultation with the Director of Techn ical Education. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the aut hority to take a decision in the matter consistently with the observations made in the above quoted letter dated 30.5.2013 of the Director of Technical Educatio n, Assam. If need be he shall be consulted in the matter. Thereafter the authori ty shall take a final decision. Till such decision is taken, the results of the selection may not be declared.