APHC010726482012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.19396 OF 2012 Between: K.A.V. Satya Narayana …Petitioner AND The Chief Managing Director, E.P.D.C.L., Visakhapatnam and three others. …Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. A.Padma Counsel for the Respondents: Sri V.V.Satish Ld. Standing Counsel For A.P.E.P.D.C.L. The Court made the following order: 1. The petitioner is challenging the Memo No.SE/O/VZM/Adm/ PO/JAO/D.No.176/12, dated 20.01.2012 issued by the third respondent, whereby rejected the representation of the petitioner to consider his diploma as an additional -2- W.P. No.19396 of 2012 qualification and to make necessary entries in the service register. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had obtained permission from the third respondent to pursue a diploma in Electrical Engineering from Rajasthan Vidyapeeth (Deemed) University. The third respondent has issued ‘no objection certificate’. The petitioner passed a diploma in Electrical Engineering in Grade B. On account of his qualifications, he is entitled to the post of Sub-Engineer. In this regard, the petitioner requested the authorities to make the necessary entry of his additional educational qualification in the service register on 07.11.2011. The petitioner filed W.P. No.31923 of 2011 aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents for not considering the appointment of the petitioner by transfer or by direct recruitment for the post of Sub-Engineer without rejecting the candidature on the ground that the petitioner possessed a Diploma issued by the Rajasthan Vidya Peeth Deemed University, Rajasthan. Pending disposal of the writ petition, this Court, vide order, dated 03.12.2011, granted -3- W.P. No.19396 of 2012 interim direction as desired by the petitioner. In pursuance of the said orders, the petitioner made a representation, which was rejected vide proceedings dated 20.01.2012, which is challenged in the present writ petition. The respondents have rejected the request of the petitioner stating that the certificate obtained by the petitioner is not recognised as per the service rules and other orders for the company which are in force. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner ought to have appeared in one- time examination conducted by A.I.C.T.E. It is also submitted that A.I.C.T.E. conducted the said examination on the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and that those candidates who cleared in the first attempt were extended the benefit and their additional educational qualification was recorded in their respective service records. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not yet furnished his certificate of passing the A.I.C.T.E. examination and that in the event the petitioner furnishes the same, the respondents -4- W.P. No.19396 of 2012 shall duly consider it and make necessary entries in the service register. 4. Considering the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition is disposed off with the following directions. (i) The petitioner shall submit a copy of the certificate clearing the A.I.C.T.E. examination conducted in 2018. (ii) Upon furnishing the same, the respondents are hereby directed to make necessary entries of the additional educational qualification of the petitioner in his service record and extend the benefits as the petitioner is eligible for. 5. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH. N BV