AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this petition, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-
“1.That a writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to offer appointments to the petitioners in accordance with letter dated 22.07.2023 as contained in Annexure P-9 with all consequential benefits of pay, arrears, seniority etc.
2.That the respondents may further be directed to issue appointment letters to the petitioners from the date other similar situate persons are offered appointment.”
The issue involved in this petition is in a very narrow compass. The petitioners have been denied consideration for appointment against the post of Panchkarma Masseurs, the process for filling up which post was initiated by the respondent-State vide Annexure P-8. The reason why consideration for appointment against the post in issue has been denied to the petitioners is on the ground that they have obtained their Diplomas in Ayurvedic Nursing and Panchkarma Therapist from Institutions which are not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which is a pre-condition in terms of Rule 7 (a) (ii) of the Himachal Pradesh Department of Ayush, Panchkarma Masseurs, Class-IV (Non-Gazetted) Recruitment & Promotion Rules, 2022.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners in the present case obtained their Diplomas from Para-Medical Council (Punjab) and Tejasvani Kerala Ayurvedam Ayurveda Multispeciality Centre) Sector 69, Mohali. They participated in the process which was initiated by the respondents to fill up the posts in terms of Annexure P-8 and they were also invited in terms of Call Letter (Annexure P-9) for verification of documents. However, whereas other candidates who participated in the process alongwith the petitioners stood appointed, no appointment was offered in favour of the petitioners and when they inquired about the same, they were told that this was because they had obtained the Diplomas in Panchkarma from the Institutions not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Learned Counsel submitted that it is not as if the petitioners obtained their Diplomas from Institutions which were non-existing Institutions or that their Diplomas are forged or fabricated. He submitted that petitioners have obtained their Panchkarma Diplomas from duly recognized Institutions, which Institutions were so recognized by the Authorities which permit them to undertake the issuance of Diplomas in Panchkarma. He also submitted that the Government of Himachal Pradesh cannot sit over in judgment with regard to the veracity of such Diplomas, because these Diplomas are valid throughout the Country for the purposes of job and in terms of Article 16 of the Constitution of India, every citizen of a Country is entitled to participate in the process of appointment to a post contained, provided he or she fulfills the eligibility criteria to be appointed against the post. Thus, he submitted that the act of the respondents of not considering the petitioners for appointment against the post in issue on the ground that their Diplomas are not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, is arbitrary, violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India and not sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned Counsel also submitted that this issue is no more res integra as the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.7724 of 2021, titled Dev Raj and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another, decided on 15.09.2022, wherein also the issue was with regard to the petitioners therein having Diplomas from outside the State of Himachal Pradesh and who were being denied appointment on the ground that their Diplomas were not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, has been pleased to hold that the Diplomas possessed by the petitioners therein being issued by the Institutions, which were duly recognized by the Central Council of Indian Medicines, were valid Diplomas and a mandamus was issued to the State to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Ayurveda Pharmacist.
On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General has reiterated that in light of the fact that the petitioners have obtained the Diplomas from the Institutions which are not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, they have no right to be appointed against the posts of Panchkarma Masseurs. The instructions dated 27.04.2026 which were handed over to the Court today are also to the same effect.
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the pleadings and documents appended therewith.
It is not the case of the respondent-Department that either the petitioners were not possessing Diplomas in the concerned field or the Diplomas, on the strength whereof the petitioners were seeking appointment, are either forged or fabricated Diplomas or Diplomas which have been obtained without actually undergoing the process of training or that the Diplomas that have been obtained by the petitioners are from such Institutions which are not recognized by the apex body of that particular State which grants affiliation for the purpose of imparting education in such like Diplomas. The stand of the State is that because as per the Recruitment & Promotion Rules only those Diplomas are to be taken into consideration which are recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh and because the Diplomas of the petitioners are from the Institutions which are not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, therefore, they are not eligible for the posts in issue.
Though, this Court is aware of the fact that in the present case, there is no challenge to the relevant Recruitment & Promotion Rules, but fact of the matter is that similar issue was there before the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.7724 of 2021, titled Dev Raj and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another, wherein also the Diploma Holders were being denied consideration on the ground that as per the Recruitment & Promotion Rules, the participant should have had successful training of two years duration in Ayurvedic Pharmacist/ Diploma in Pharmacy etc. from an Institution duly recognized by Himachal Pradesh Board of Technical Education or University recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court was pleased to negate the stand of the Department by returning the following findings:-
“24.The document, on which respondent No. 2 is heavily relying upon, is letter, dated 1st October, 2021. This letter does not demonstrate that the Diplomas, which were issued by the Bihar State Faculty of Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicine prior to 2003, were not recognized by Central Council of Indian Medicines, which is the apex body for recognizing the medical qualifications in Indian medicine.
25.Moreover, it has rightly been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the fact, that before registration of the petitioners with the Board of Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicines, Himachal Pradesh, their Diplomas were duly verified, has been admitted by respondent No. 2 in the reply. Thus, respondent No. 2 cannot now raise question/doubt over the Diplomas obtained by the petitioners from Bihar State Faculty of Ayurvedic and Unani System prior to 2003, as, it was respondent No. 2, who had registered the petitioners with the Board of Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicine, Himachal Pradesh, after verifying the documents submitted by the petitioners. As per Section 35 of the Evidence Act, there is a presumption that the official acts are done with accuracy and fidelity.
26.At the cost of repetition, it would be apt to record herein that the response of the Registrar, Bihar State Ayurvedic and Unani Medical Council, Patna to letter, dated 1st October, 2021, is too short to raise any question over the Diplomas obtained by the petitioners from Bihar State Faculty of Ayurvedic and Unani System prior to 2003.
27.Considering all these facts, the writ petition is allowed and the Diplomas obtained by the petitioners from Bihar State Faculty of Ayurvedic and Unani System prior to 2003 are held to be valid, as, the said Institutes were duly recognized by the Central Council of Indian Medicines, which is the apex body for recognizing the medical qualifications in Indian medicine. Respondent No.2 is, accordingly, directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners for the post of Ayurvedic Pharmacists, if otherwise found eligible.
28.Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.”
As observed hereinabove also, in the present case also, the respondent-State could not demonstrate that the Institutions from which the petitioners had obtained Diplomas are bogus Institutions and are not duly recognized Institutions in the State. Their stand, as is also reflected in the instructions imparted to the Court today, is that only two Institutions, namely, Rajiv Gandhi Government P.G. Ayurvedic College & Hospital, Paprola, District Kangra and Regional Ayurvedic Hospital, Chhota Shima, are affiliated under SCVT by the Directorate of Technical Education, Vocational and Industrial Training, Himachal Pradesh, Sundernagar, to run Ayurvedic SPA Therapist (Panchkarma) trade/ course and as the Institutions from which the petitioners have done their Diplomas, are not recognized by SCVT, therefore, they are not eligible for consideration to the posts.
Recognition by the Government of Himachal Pradesh or the SCVT of the Government of Himachal Pradesh, cannot be a condition precedent to make a person eligible to participate in the process of appointment, if the person possesses a valid Diploma from any Institution in the Country. Yes, of course, the Department can deny consideration if the Institution from which the Diploma has been obtained is not a valid Institution, recognized by the Body of that State to confer any such Diplomas, but in the absence thereof, denial on the ground on which the present petitioners have been denied consideration, is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The act of the respondents of not considering the petitioners for appointment against the post of Panchkarma Masseurs, on the ground that their Diplomas were not recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh is held to be bad in law and respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners for the posts of Panchkarma Masseurs.
The petition stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly.