IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 206 CWP-4351-2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.07.2025 Dal Chand and another ...Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Rahul Dev, Addl. AG Haryana. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 1. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 11.02.2010 whereby the claim of the petitioners for appointment to the post of Veterinary & Live Stock Development Assistant (VLDA) has been rejected on the ground that the diploma of VLDA possessed by them from the Janardhan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth University is not recognized. 2. The matter has been heard at some length. No specific document, on the basis whereof it may be conclusively determined that the diploma acquired by them in the year 2007 was recognized either by the Central or State Government, has been brought on record. Even though a reference has been made to the ex-post facto recognition of the Course offerred by the respondent- University prior to 2005 and the recognition granted to the degrees obtained after the year 2008 has been appended alongwith the present petition, however, a mere fact that all the courses prior MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.14 19:16 I am the author of this document 2 206 CWP-4351-2010 (O&M) to 2005 or the degrees post 2008 were recognized by the University Grants Commission, it cannot be inferred to mean that the diploma courses that were being run by the respondent-University in the year 2006 and 2007 would also be deemed to have been recognized. 3. Since the candidature of the petitioners was rejected for want of recognition of the Diploma course obtained by them from the respondent- University, a prima facie burden is to be discharged by the petitioners that the objection raised by the respondent(s), with regard to the recognition and validity of the diploma obtained by them, was frivolous, illegal and unsustainable. No other material or documents have been produced or referred to by the counsel for the petitioners. 4. In the absence of any such cogent material, the reasons assigned by the respondents cannot be faulted with at this stage. For the above said reasons, the instant writ petition is dismissed at this stage. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 09.07.2025 JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.14 19:16 I am the author of this document