AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Karnataka State Public Service Commission
(''KPSC'' for short), has called in question, the order dated
24.07.2017 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal
(''KAT'' for short), in Applications No.1514 to 1520/2017,
whereby, the KAT, has directed the KPSC to consider the
candidature of the respondents herein for the posts of
''Typists''.
We have heard Shri Reuben Jacob, learned Counsel
for the petitioner; Shri M.B. Naragund, Senior Advocate for
the respondents No.1 to 7 and Smt. Prathima Honnapura,
learned AGA for respondent No.8.
The principal contention urged by Shri Reuben Jacob
is that, the qualification prescribed by the KPSC for the
posts of ''Typists'' is, pass in PUC or a Diploma in Commercial
Practice or equivalent. The respondents herein, have
obtained a Certificate in ''Job-Oriented Pre-University
Diploma'' from the State Council of Vocational Education.
They have undergone the prescribed course in different
trades, such as, maintenance and repair of domestic
appliances, electrical wiring etc. Therefore, they are not
eligible for consideration for the posts of ''Typists''.
Shri Reuben Jacob, further argued that the KAT erred
in law in holding that the Certificates obtained by the
respondents be treated as equivalent to PUC.
Per contra, Shri M.B.Naragund, learned Senior
Counsel, supporting the impugned order, submitted that the
Certificates held by the respondents herein are issued by
the State Council for Vocational Education. He drew our
attention to a foot note contained in the Certificate, which
reads as follows:-
"In Testimony whereof this Job-Oriented Pre- University Diploma is awarded with the privilege to use the title P.U.C. Diploma in Vocational Education."
Drawing support from the above extracted note, Shri
Naragund, argued that the Certificate is admittedly issued
by the State Government, with a testimony that the holder
of the said Certificate, shall enjoy the privilege to use the
title ''PUC-Diploma in Vocational Education''. He further
submitted that, the said Certificate is a sufficient
qualification to get admission for degree courses, such as,
B.A., B.Com., BB.M., etc. In support of this contention, he
adverted to a Notification dated 29.08.2000, issued by the
Bangalore University, appended as Annexure-R1 to the
statement of objections filed by the contesting respondents.
In substance, Shri Naragund, argued that the
Certificates held by the respondents are equivalent to PUC
Certificates and therefore, eligible for consideration for the
posts of ''Typists''.
Smt. Prathima Honnapura, learned AGA for the State,
contended that, the Certificate held by the respondents is
not exactly a ''PUC Certificate'' and therefore not equivalent.
We have carefully considered the submissions made
by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the records.
Admittedly, the qualification prescribed by the KPSC
for the posts of ''Typists'' is PUC or equivalent. The
respondents have been accorded with the privilege to use
the title ''PUC-Diploma in Vocational Education''. A perusal of
the Notification issued by the Bangalore University, relied
upon by Shri Naragund, gives a clear and unexceptional
impression that, the Certificates in question are adequate
enough to seek a degree course. Therefore, in our view, a
Certificate, which qualifies admission into an University
must be held equivalent to a PUC Certificate.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, we see no error in
the order passed by the KAT, directing the KPSC to consider
the cases of the respondents for the posts of ''Typists'' on the
strength of the Certificates issued by the State Council for
Vocational Education.
Resultantly, these writ petitions must fail and are
accordingly dismissed.
Petitions dismissed.
We make no order as to costs.