Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79209 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21025 of 2016 Petitioner :- Ravindra Nath And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Chand Rai,Shashi Chandra,Upendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Tyagi Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Veer Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Shashi Chandra, learned counsel for petitioners, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for respondents. 2. Petitioners have applied for post of Instructor in pursuance of GO dated 05.12.2014 and according to eligibility, petitioners were required B.Sc. (Agriculture) and a professional diploma. 3. It is not disputed that petitioners are B.Sc. (Agriculture), however, dispute is in regard to their diploma. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioners have passed 100 days training in Food Processing from Center for Food Preservation and Training established by Ministry of Food Processing Industries, New Delhi and since it was found equivalent to diploma, petitioners were not considered for appointment. 5. Requirement was a professional degree or diploma and no such course has a duration of less than 1 year, therefore, any training of 100 days would not equivalent to any diploma course. 6. Otherwise also, nature of training was very limited i.e. for processing food, probably only to cater jobs in that field only and not for post of a Instructor. 7. In aforesaid circumstances, no infirmity or illegality is found in impugned order and since petitioners’ certificates of training in question is not equivalent to course of diploma which is one of essential requirement for appointment of Instructor and since petitioners are not eligible for appointment of Instructor, therefore, relief sought cannot be granted. 8. Accordingly, writ petition lacks merit, hence, dismissed. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Sinha_N. Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad