Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010265292017 2025:GAU-AS:3329 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5592/2017 ABHIJIT KUMAR ROY @ ABHIJIT ROY S/O. SRI MOHAN LAL ROY, ANANDA NAGAR, LANE NO. 1A, HOUSE NO. 1, ADABARI TINIALI, P.O. PANDU, GUWAHATI-12, DIST. KAMRUP M, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 9 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION ELEMENTARY DEPTT., DISPUR. 2:THE COMMISSIONER/ SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF EDUCATION ELEMENTARY. 3:THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM. 4:THE MEMBER SECRETARY EMPOWERED COMMITTEE TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST ELEMENTARY ASSAM. 5:THE MISSION DIRECTOR SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN MISSION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 6:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN MISSION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 7:THE DIST. MISSION COORDINATOR SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN MISSION DIST. DARRANG ASSAM. Page No.# 2/5 8:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG DISTRICT. 9:NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION NEW DELHI 10:THE ASSAM HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM BAMUNIMANDAN GUWAHATI ASSAM 78102 Advocate for the Petitioner : PETITIONER IN PERSON, MR. S SINHA,MRS. M D CHOWDHURY,MR. A K PAUL,MR. M DASGUPTA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S P BHATTACHARJEE (SC, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION), SC, AHSEC,SC, N C T E,GA, ASSAM,MR. S SARMA,SC, SSA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 25.03.2025 Heard Mr. Abhijit Kumar Roy, the petitioner in person. Also heard Mr. S. Bora, learned counsel for the SSA, Mr. D.K. Roy, learned counsel for the respondent No. 10, Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. I. Alam, learned counsel for the NCTE, Mr. P. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8 and Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 3. 2. The petitioner’s grievance is that that his candidature has been rejected for appointment to the vacant post of Assistant Teacher in LP School. 3. The petitioner submits that in terms of the advertisement dated 30.06.2017, a candidate was required to have at least 50% marks in Page No.# 3/5 Senior/Higher Secondary (or equivalent) with LP-TET/CTET, for being able to take part in the selection process. 4. The petitioner’s case is that though the petitioner did not have the qualification of Senior/Higher Secondary, the petitioner had a 3 year diploma in Textile Technology, which was equivalent to Higher Secondary. 5. The petitioner submits that the 3 year diploma in Textile Technology was made equivalent to Higher Secondary, vide the OM No. E.268507/1-A dated 03.03.2023 issued by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Higher Education Department. 6. The petitioner submits that as the 3 year diploma course obtained by the petitioner has been declared to be equivalent to the Higher Education, the rejection of the petitioner’s candidature, pursuant to the advertisement dated 30.06.2017, was arbitrary. Accordingly, the petitioner should be selected and appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher, in terms of the advertisement dated 30.06.2017. 7. The respondents’ counsel, on the other hand, submit that as per the OM dated 03.03.2023, the petitioner’s 3 year diploma in Textile Technology was made equivalent to Higher Secondary only w.e.f. 03.03.2023. As the petitioner did not have the required eligibility criteria at the relevant point of time, in terms of the advertisement dated 30.06.2017, there is no infirmity with the rejection of the petitioner’s application. 8. The OM dated 03.03.2023 issued by the Secretary to the Government of Page No.# 4/5 Assam states as follows:- “Office Memorandum No.e-268507/1-A Dated Dispur the 03.03.2023 Sub- Recognition of Diploma in Engineering awarded by the State Council of Technical Education (SCTE), Assam vis-à-vis Higher Secondary (10+2) Students obtaining a Diploma from the Polytechnics often face problems in the selection and recruitment in various organization, companies, etc, where the minimum qualification sought is Higher Secondary (10+2). In view of this issue, it is necessary to given recognition to the equivalent of Diploma in Engineering with that to Higher Secondary (1012) The All India Council for Technical Education (AICΤΕ) has set an equivalence of Diploma course at National Skill Qualification Frame Work (NSQF), Class Xll is considered as “NSQF Level 4, whereas, competition of Diploma in Engineering branch is considered as NSQF Level 5. Therefore, three year Diploma in Engineering awarded by the State Council of Tech (SCTE), Assam is equivalent to Higher Secondary Qualification (10+2) plus one year of Educational Qualification. In view of the above, Government gives recognition to the following: a. Equivalency of Three-year Diploma in Engineering awarded by the State Council for Technical Education (SCTE) Assam, under the Directorate of Technical Education to Class XII (Science) plus 01 (one) year of undergraduate degree in engineering, which is at National Skills Qualification Framework (NSQF) Level 5 and at Unified Credit Level 4.5 b . Diploma Holders in Engineering under the State Council for Technical Education (SCTE) Assam, are eligible to seek admission to second year of third semester of under graduate Engineering programme through lateral entry. c. The three year Diploma in Engineering under the State Council for Technical Education (SCTE) Assam is equivalent to Class Xll (Science) pass for seeking admission. d. The three-year Diploma in Engineering under the State Council for Technical Education (SCТЕ) Assam is equivalent to Class XII pass for seeking employment where the minimum qualification in Class XII.” Page No.# 5/5 9. A perusal of the above clearly goes to show that the 3 year diploma course obtained from a Polytechnic has been recognized as equivalent to Higher Secondary only w.e.f. 03.03.2023. As the said diploma course was not recognized as equivalent to Higher Secondary at the time of issuance of the advertisement dated 30.06.2017, this Court does not find any infirmity in the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner, as the petitioner did not have the required eligibility criteria at the relevant point of time. 10. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant