1 CGHC010394522024 2026:CGHC:37209 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8035 of 2024 Prashant Gavel S/o Premanand Gavel Aged About 31 Years R/o House No. 46, Street No. 03 Anant Vihar Colony Mova Near Chaitanya Tower Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 492014 ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary Skill Development Training And Technical Education And Employment Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Secretary Skill Development Training And Technical Education And Employment Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director Directorate Of Employment And Training Department Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Joint Director (Establishment ) Training Wing Employment And Training Depratment Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 5 - Scrutiny Committee Directorate Employment And Training Department Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 6 - President Document Verification Committee Raipur Zone Office Of Joint Director Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Through Its Controller Vyapam Bhawan North Block Sector - 19 Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 8 - Union Of India Through Ministry Of Skill Development And Entrepreneurship Government Of India Kaushal Bhawan New Moti Bagh New Delhi 9 - Directorate General Of Training Through Its Director General 7th Floor Kaushal Bhawan Near Safdarjung Railway Station Chanayapuri New Moti Bagh New Delhi Delhi ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. DR Minj, Dy. Advocate General For Respondent No.7 : Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J Order on Board (19th August, 2026) This petition is delinked from WPS No.7152/2023, 8566/2023, 4333/2024 and 11957/2025. 3 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 3. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging rejection of his candidature by Director, Directorate of Employment and Training, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, for the post of Training Officer (Wireman) on the ground that his experience certificate is not as per requirement of the advertisement. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that respondent No.3/Director, Directorate of Employment and Training, Raipur, issued an advertisement dated 5.5.2023 (Annexure P/2) for recruitment on various posts of Training Officers including Training Officer (Wireman). The petitioner submitted his application for the post of Training Officer (Wireman) against OBC category and successfully participated in the written examination. He secured 79.293 marks and obtained 4th rank in the combined merit list (Annexure P/11). However, at the time of documents verification, the petitioner’s candidature was rejected on the ground that his experience certificate is not as per requirement of the advertisement. Hence this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed application under OBC category for the post of Training Officer (Wireman) and in the written examination secured 4th rank as per combined merit list of all the candidates (Annexure P/11). As per amended advertisement dated 13.5.2023 (Annexure P/3), there were 4 total six vacant posts of Training Officer (Wireman), out of which 02 were for UR category, 01 for SC, 02 for ST and 01 for OBC category candidate. In the combined merit list (Annexure P/11), the petitioner had secured 4th rank, therefore, he was entitled to get appointment but his candidature has been rejected only on the ground that his experience certificate from ITI is not from relevant trade and secondly, the experience certificate from Govt. Poly Bhatapara is not enough whereas as per Annexure P/17 i.e. experience certificate issued by the office of Principal, Govt. Polytechnic, Bhatapara, Distt. Balodabazar- Bhatapara, the petitioner had performed teaching in Electrical Department of Govt. Polytechnic, Bhatapara from 20.1.2023 to 25.5.2023 and as per experience certificate (page 63 of the petition) issued by the Director, Kamlakant Shukla Private ITI, Devri Road, Bhatapara, he had performed teaching from 15.3.2022 to 19.1.2023 in Electrician Trade. Learned counsel further submits that said Kamlakant Shukla Private ITI, Devri Road, Bhatapara is granted affiliation vide order dated 25.8.2014 (Annexure P/18) issued by the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Directorate General of Employment and Training, New Delhi. Referring to Annexure P/19 i.e. Office Memorandum dated 30th June, 2023 issued by the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Directorate General of Training, New Delhi and Prospectus (page 77 of the petition) issued by the aforesaid Directorate, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per said Office Memorandum and Prospectus, issued by the 5 Directorate General of Training, which is the apex body of ITIs, Electrician/Wireman has been directed to be treated as applicable CTS trades. Therefore, the experience certificate submitted by the petitioner cannot be rejected on the ground that experience is not from relevant trade. Being so, the instant petition deserves to be allowed and the relief sought for by the petitioner may be granted. 6. The respondents/State have filed its reply. Learned counsel for the State, referring to its reply, would submit that experience certificate submitted by the petitioner, which was issued by the Govt. Poly, Bhatapara, itself shows that the petitioner as a part-time Lecturer was teaching only for a period of four months i.e. from 20.1.2023 to 25.5.2023 whereas experience of one year was required. In the advertisement it has been provided that engineering graduate should have minimum one year teaching experience in the concerned trade/branch and for diploma holder, it was two years. Though the petitioner has also submitted experience certificate issued by the Director, Kamlakant Shukla Private ITI, Devri Road, Bhatapara, wherein he is said to have performed teaching from 15.3.2022 to 19.1.2023 in Electrician Trade but he applied for the post of Training Officer (Wireman) which is a different trade, therefore, his candidature has rightly been rejected by the respondent authorities. He further submits that even under the Chhattisgarh Industrial Training (Non- Gazetted, Class-III Service Recruitment) Rules, 2013, Electrician and 6 Wireman have been contemplated to be different trades. Lastly, he submits that the Office Memorandum dated 30th June, 2023 (Annexure P/19) speaks about minimum qualification and not about experience and as such, the petitioner does not have minimum teaching experience in Wireman trade. Therefore, the instant petition being without any merit is liable to be dismissed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. The principal question which arises for consideration is whether the experience certificates produced by the petitioner could legally be rejected on the grounds that the experience in the Electrician trade was not relevant for the post of Training Officer (Wireman) and that the experience certificate issued by Government Polytechnic, Bhatapara (Annexure P/17) and the experience certificate issued by the Director, Kamlakant Shukla Private ITI, Devri Road, Bhatapara (page 63 of the petition), were insufficient to satisfy the prescribed requirement. 9. It is not in dispute that the petitioner participated in the selection process pursuant to the advertisement dated 05.05.2023, as amended on 13.05.2023, and secured 79.293 marks, obtaining 4th rank in the combined merit list. There were six posts of Training Officer (Wireman), including one post earmarked for the OBC category. The sole impediment to consideration of the petitioner's candidature was the 7 rejection of the experience certificates produced by him at the stage of documents verification. 10. The record would show that the petitioner produced two experience certificates. Annexure P/17, issued by the Principal, Government Polytechnic, Bhatapara, certifies that the petitioner worked as a Part-time Lecturer in the Electrical Department from 20.01.2023 to 25.05.2023. The other certificate, placed at page 63 of the writ petition and issued by the Director, Kamlakant Shukla Private ITI, Devri Road, Bhatapara, certifies that he worked as a Training Officer in the Electrician Trade from 15.03.2022 to 19.01.2023. The affiliation of the said ITI by the competent authority under the Government of India is also borne out from Annexure P/18. Thus, the experience claimed by the petitioner cannot be discarded merely on the ground that it was obtained from an unaffiliated or unrecognised institution. 11. So far as the objection regarding the duration of experience is concerned, it is true that the experience at Government Polytechnic, Bhatapara, by itself, is for a period of about four months. However, the candidature of the petitioner cannot be examined by isolating this certificate from the other experience certificate produced by him. The petitioner had also worked as Training Officer in the Electrician Trade from 15.03.2022 to 19.01.2023. Therefore, the experience disclosed by the two certificates, read together, satisfies the requirement of at least 8 one year of teaching experience applicable to an engineering graduate. The rejection of the candidature on the ground that the experience from Government Polytechnic, Bhatapara, alone was insufficient, without taking into consideration the other duly produced and otherwise valid experience certificate, is therefore unsustainable. 12. The next and more substantial objection of the respondents is that Electrician and Wireman are distinct trades and, consequently, experience in the Electrician Trade cannot be treated as relevant experience for appointment to the post of Training Officer (Wireman). This contention, though apparently supported by the nomenclature of the two trades under the applicable Recruitment Rules, cannot be accepted in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13. Annexure P/19, namely the Office Memorandum dated 30.06.2023 issued by the Directorate General of Training, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India, assumes significance in this regard. This Office Memorandum has been sent to all the Principal Secretaries/Secretaries/Director(s)/ and Commissioners dealing with Vocational Training/Skill Development/ Craftsmen Training Scheme; all Regional Director(s), DGT, MSDE; and all Principals/HOOs of National Skill Institutes (NSTIs & NSTI(W)s)/Institute of Training of Trainers (ITOTs) (Government & Private) on the subject regarding Mandating National Craft Instructor Certificate (NCIC) under Craft Instructor Training Scheme (CITS) as an 9 essential qualification for recruitment of Vocational Instructors in the Industrial Training Institutes (Government & Private). The said Memorandum contains the CTS-CITS Mapping List. At Serial No.12 thereof, the CITS Trade of Electrician has specifically been mapped as applicable to both the CTS Trades of Electrician and Wireman. The same position is also reflected in the Prospectus issued by the Directorate General of Training. Thus, the competent apex authority dealing with vocational training and ITI trades has itself recognised the applicability of the Electrician CITS Trade to both Electrician and Wireman CTS Trades. 14. The Court is conscious of the submission of the learned State counsel that the said Office Memorandum principally deals with qualifications and does not expressly prescribe the nature of experience required under the advertisement. Nevertheless, the Mapping List cannot be rendered wholly irrelevant while determining whether experience gained by a candidate in the Electrician Trade is experience in a relevant trade for the post of Training Officer (Wireman). Once the competent national authority has, for the purpose of vocational instructor training and recruitment, specifically mapped the Electrician CITS Trade to both Electrician and Wireman CTS Trades, it would be unduly technical and contrary to the object of the recruitment process to hold, without any further basis, that teaching experience in the Electrician Trade is wholly alien or irrelevant to the Wireman Trade. 10 15. It is also pertinent that the rejection order, Annexure P/1, proceeds on two grounds, namely, that the ITI experience was not from the relevant trade and that the experience from Government Polytechnic, Bhatapara, was insufficient. For the reasons stated hereinabove, neither of these grounds can be sustained. The respondents failed to consider the totality of the teaching experience produced by the petitioner and adopted an interpretation of “relevant trade” which is inconsistent with the CTS-CITS Mapping issued by the competent Directorate General of Training. 16. Consequently, this Court is of the considered opinion that the rejection of the petitioner's candidature suffers from an error of law and cannot be sustained. The petitioner cannot be denied consideration for appointment merely because his teaching experience was in the Electrician Trade when the authoritative CTS-CITS Mapping recognises the applicability of the Electrician CITS Trade to the Wireman CTS Trade as well. His experience certificates, when considered cumulatively, also disclose the requisite period of experience. The impugned action has, therefore, resulted in an unjustified exclusion of the petitioner from consideration despite his having secured 4th rank in the combined merit list. 17. On the basis of aforesaid discussions, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner (Annexure P/1) is hereby quashed. The 11 respondent authorities are directed to reconsider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Training Officer (Wireman) by treating his experience certificates in the manner indicated hereinabove. If, upon such reconsideration, the petitioner is found otherwise eligible and falls within the zone of selection in accordance with his merit position, the applicable Recruitment Rules and other conditions of eligibility, he shall be considered for appointment to the said post, in accordance with law. No order as to cost(s). 18. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Sd/ (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Khan MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Digitally signed by MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Date: 2026.08.25 14:15:17 +0530