Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaDivision BenchDismissed

OP(KAT) No.558/2023 and OP(KAT) No.16/2024, State of Kerala v Lekha.V; State of Kerala v Sindhu.K.J & Semeena.B

Case / Petition Number:OP(KAT) 558/2023; OP(KAT) 16/2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • A. Muhamed Mustaque
  • Shoba Annamma Eapen
Judgment Date
2024-03-18
Court Decision / Holding
With the above observations, the original petitions are dismissed.
Final Disposition
Dismissed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • State of Kerala represented by its Secretary, Department of Medical Education, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram; Director of Medical Education, Directorate of Medical Education, Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram; Departmental Promotion Committee represented by its Convener, Medical Education Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram

Respondents

  • Lekha.V
  • Sindhu.K.J
  • Semeena.B

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Senior Government Pleader, Vineetha B.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • T.C. Suresh Menon
  • • B. Deepak

Case Synopsis & Summary

The judgment concerns two OP(KAT) petitions filed by the State of Kerala challenging a Kerala Administrative Tribunal order and seeking to bar or restrict consideration of candidates for the post of Senior Scientific Assistant in the Medical Education Department whose postgraduate qualifications were obtained through distance education. In OP(KAT) 558/2023, Lekha V. contends that her PG degree in Neurohistology (M.Sc.) obtained via distance education should be evaluated for eligibility, while the State argues it does not meet the required practical experience typically associated with regular courses. In OP(KAT) 16/2024, Sindhu K.J. and Semeena B. make a similar challenge, arguing that their distance-mode PG qualifications should be treated as equivalent to regular degrees. The Kerala High Court notes the Tribunal concluded no distinction between distance and regular modes under the applicable rules and notified regulations, recognizing equivalence based on the Universities’ recognition. The State relies on the need for a regular-mode qualification, the specific wording of the special rules, and DPC notes; conversely, the respondents rely on the UGC’s Regulation 22 (2020) and the 2014 Specification of Degrees to assert equivalence, and on Thulasibai (2011) for non-distinction. The Court ultimately dismisses the petitions, noting that while the Government may amend rules to require regular degrees, in the absence of such explicit differentiation the Tribunal’s approach and UGC guidance prevail.

Provisions of Law Cited

Regulation 22 of the University Grants Commission (Open and Distance Learning Programmes and Online Programmes) Regulations, 2020UGC notification on Specification of Degrees, 2014G.O. (MS) No.1260/61/H&LD, 1961

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Equivalence of qualifications between distance education and regular mode degrees
  • Non-distinction principle in the absence of explicit rule differentiation
  • UGC recognition of open and distance learning degrees as equivalent to conventional degrees
  • Judicial recognition of the possibility for government to amend special rules to require regular-mode degrees

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the essential requirement for the post of Senior Scientific Assistant includes practical experience associated with the regular course. They argue the special rules and notifications contemplate qualifications earned through regular mode, and that distance-education degrees cannot be treated as equivalent for appointment. They rely on the Division Bench decision in Thulasibai (2011) to emphasize that no distinction should be inferred unless the rules expressly provide it, while acknowledging that UGC guidance (Open and Distance Learning Regulations 2020, Regulation 22, and the 2014 specification) recognizes some equivalence. The State submits that absence of explicit equivalence requires amendment to the rules, and urges that the Tribunal’s interpretation be corrected to reflect that regular-mode degrees are the sole eligible qualifications. They suggest that without such amendment, the petition cannot succeed.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that their distance-education PG degrees are recognized by UGC as equivalent to regular degrees and therefore eligible for consideration. They point to Regulation 22 of the UGC Open and Distance Learning Regulations (2020) and the UGC 2014 specification, arguing that the rules do not differentiate based on mode of acquisition when a degree from a recognized university is involved. They rely on Thulasibai’s reasoning that lack of a rule-based distinction should not bar eligibility and that the Government can follow UGC guidance and still recognize equivalence. They assert that denying eligibility solely on distance-mode qualifications would be contrary to the UGC framework and equal opportunity, and urge the Tribunal’s decision to stand, maintaining that the petitioners be considered for promotion/appointment.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
State of Kerala and Others v. Thulasibai and Others2011 (3) KHC 65PositiveThe respondents relied on this Division Bench decision to argue that special rules do not distinguish between regular and distance modes unless explicitly stated; the court endorses the principle that lack of express distinction allows eligibility, and notes the potential for amendments to rules.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against OP(KAT) No.558/2023 and OP(KAT) No.16/2024, State of Kerala v Lekha.V; State of Kerala v Sindhu.K.J & Semeena.B and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN** **MONDAY, THE 18[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1945** **OP(KAT) NO.558 OF 2023** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2023 IN OA NO.815 OF 2021 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **------** ## **PETITIONERS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 695001.** - **2 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,KERALA, PIN – 695011.** - **3 THE DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, MEDICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 695001.** **BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.VINEETHA B.** **RESPONDENT:** **LEKHA.V, AGED 50 YEARS,** **W/O. SIVARAMAN, RESIDING AT QUARTERS NO.D18, MEDICAL COLLEGE STAFF QUARTERS, MEDICAL COLLEGE.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695011, WORKING AS CURATOR IN MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN: 695001.** **BY ADVS. T.C.SURESH MENON B.DEEPAK(K/532/2012)** **THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.03.2024, ALONG WITH OP(KAT).16/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** OP(KAT) No.558/2023 2 **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN MONDAY, THE 18[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1945** ## **OP(KAT) NO. 16 OF 2024** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2023 IN OA NO.871 OF 2021 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **-----** ## **PETITIONERS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 695001.** - **2 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 695011.** **BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.VINEETHA B.** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 SINDHU.K.J, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O.HARIDASSAN NAIR.C, WORKING AS LABORATORY ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF BIOCHEMISTRY, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT KOLITHATTIL, MUNDAIL, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 695141.** - **2 SEMEENA.B, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O RAJ.M.H., LABORATORY ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF PHYSIOLOGY, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, GANDHI NAGAR P.O, KOTTAYAM, RESIDING AT IQNAAH, AMALAGIRI P.O, KOTTAYAM. PIN-686561.** **BY ADVS. T.C.SURESH MENON B.DEEPAK** **THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.03.2024, ALONG WITH OP(KAT).558/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** OP(KAT) No.558/2023 3 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **[OP(KAT) Nos.558/2023 & 16/2024]** ## . **A.Muhamed Mustaque, J** The State has come up with these original petitions challenging the common order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (for short, the 'Tribunal'). The respondents were the applicants. The respondent in O.P.(KAT) No.558/2023 is working as Curator and the respondents in O.P.(KAT) No.16/2024 are working as Laboratory Assistants in the Medical Education Department. Vacancies arose in the post of Senior Scientific Assistant in the Department through by transfer appointment. The prescribed qualifications in the notification are as follows: “First or second Class in M.Sc. Zoology and the experience in Neurohistology.” 2. Admittedly, the party respondents possess the above qualifications. However, they were not considered holding as they have obtained post-graduation through distance education. The Tribunal noted that there is no distinction between a post-graduation obtained through OP(KAT) No.558/2023 4 distance education and regular mode as per the special rules and in notification, therefore, the respondents are eligible for consideration. 3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that one of the essential requirements in post-graduation is experience in practical as offered in the regular course. Since the respondents obtained post-graduation through distance education mode, it cannot be treated as equivalent to the post-graduation obtained through a regular mode. It is submitted that the special rules as well as the notification only intended for the qualification obtained through regular mode and not by way of distance education. It is further pointed out that DPC noted that in the absence of equivalency obtained by the respondents, their qualifications cannot be considered as equivalent. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents placing reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in State of Kerala and Others v. Thulasibai and Others [2011 (3) KHC 65] and argued that special rules do not make any distinction between a post-graduate degree obtained OP(KAT) No.558/2023 5 through regular mode and one obtained through correspondence/distance education. Therefore, there is no requirement to obtain equivalency certificate and also the respondents cannot treat the post-graduate degree obtained in regular mode and through the distance education mode as distinct and different. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners further relied on a public notice issued by UGC, produced as Annexure A16 in O.P.(KAT) No.558/2023, which reads thus: “The Regulation 22 of the University Grants Commission (Open and Distance Learning Programmes and Online Programmes) Regulations, 2020 stipulates as under: “ Equivalence of qualification acquired through conventional or Open and Distance Learning and Online Modes :- Degrees at undergraduate and postgraduate level inconformity with UGC notification on Specification of Degrees, 2014 and postgraduate diplomas awarded through Open and Distance Learning mode and/or Online mode by Higher Educational Institutions, recognized by the Commission under these regulations, shall be treated as equivalent to the corresponding awards of the Degrees at undergraduate and postgraduate level and postgraduate diplomas offered through conventional mode.” OP(KAT) No.558/2023 6 6. It is to be noted that the respondents obtained post graduation from the Universities recognized by UGC. If UGC recognizes the post-graduate degree obtained by the respondents as equivalent to the regular course, there is no scope for making a distinction between the two such courses. No doubt, the State being an employer can amend the special rules and incorporate that only candidates who obtained post-graduate degree through regular mode alone would eligible for appointment. So far no distinction is made in the special rules and it cannot be concluded that both courses are distinct and separate, especially in the light of the fact that UGC recognized both courses as equivalent. This court in Thulasibai 's case (supra) had taken the view that so long as such distinction is not drawn in the special rules, the Government cannot deny the promotion to a candidate merely citing that the acquired eligibility was obtained through distance mode. We make it clear that it is open for the Government to amend the special rules to insist that only such candidate who obtained post-graduate OP(KAT) No.558/2023 7 degree through regular mode is alone eligible for appointment. With the above observations, the original petitions are dismissed. Sd/- **A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE** Sd/- **SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE** ln OP(KAT) No.558/2023 8 ## **APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 16/2024** ## **PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.H1/17814/2007/DME DATED 11.08.2014 OF 2ND PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.H1/30072/15/DME DATED 07.12.2015 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 17.08.2013 OF UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS.** - **ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE GO (MS) NO.1260/61/H&LD DATED 18.11.1961.** - **ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.H2/1857/2020/DME DATED 22.01.2021 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.H2/22264/2017/DME DATED 25.01.2021 OF 2ND PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 02.02.2021 OF THE RESPONDENTS.** - **ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.H2/21497/2014/DME DATED 08.01.2021 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE A 9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B2/25/2021/H&FWD DATED 17.03.2021 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.06.2011 IN WA NO.686/2011 OF THE DIVISIONAL BENCH OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.** - **ANNEXURE A 11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.H2/22264/2017/DME DATED 30.04.2021** - **ANNEXURE A12 TRUE COPY OF THE GO (MS) NO.272/2018/H.EDN. DATED 13.11.2018.** - **ANNEXURE A13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GMCKTM/2306/2019-E5 DATED 25.02.2020 OF THE SR. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM.** OP(KAT) No.558/2023 9 - **ANNEXURE A14 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL SENIORITY LIST LAB ASSISTANT IN MEDICAL EDUCATION SERVICE AS ON 25.02.2020.** - **ANNEXURE A15 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.K2/441742/2022/DME/967 DATED 18.06.2022 OF THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF DME.** - **ANNEXURE A16 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.K2/496638/2022/DME DATED 07.10.2022 OF STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE, OFFICE OF THE DME, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** - **ANNEXURE A17 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.IDE/SCAAS/2021/1346 DATED 20.05.2022 OF THE DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS, INSTITUTE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION.** - **ANNEXURE A18 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.EN3/10790/2017/GMCT DATED 26.08.2022, OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT OF STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** - **ANNEXURE R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GMCKTM/2306/2019-E5 DATED 25.02.2020 ISSUED BY THE SENIOR AO, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM.** - **ANNEXURE R3(B) TRUE COPY OF THEM.SC (CHEMISTRY) DEGREE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.03.1999 ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM TO THE APPLICANT (REG. NO.15034, MAY 1997).** - **ANNEXURE R3(C) TRUE COPY OF THE GO (MS) NO.1260/E1/H&LD DATED 18.11.1961.** - **ANNEXURE R3(D) TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER NO.B2/25/2021/H&FWD DATED 17.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.** - **ANNEXURE R3(E) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.1-11/2019 (DEB-1) DATED 07.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (DISTANCE EDUCATION BUREAU).** - **ANNEXURE R3(F) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF GAZETTE OF INDIA DATED 23.06.2017.** - **ANNEXURE R3(G) TRUE COPY OF THE GO (MS) NO.272/2018/H.EDN.** OP(KAT) No.558/2023 10 ## **DATED 13.11.2018.** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE O.A 871/2021.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1016/2021 DATED26.05.2021.** **EXHIBIT P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 02.06.2021 IN MA NO 1016/2021 IN OA 871/2021.** **EXHIBIT P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE SECOND PETITIONER ON 16.03.2022.** **EXHIBIT P 5 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FILED ON 05.04.2022.** **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 03.06.2022.** **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 11.11.2022 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 29.06.2022 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES.** **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 27.03.2023 IN OA 871/ 2021.** OP(KAT) No.558/2023 11 ## **APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 558/2023** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION VIDE NO.H2/21497/2014/MED DATED 16.03.2016. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY NO.021M15085P00594 OF THE RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 21.04.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE NO.AU/DDE/S5/579/2015-2016 DATED 13.06.2016 CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY. ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN O.A NO.2743/2016 DATED 02.02.2017. ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER VIDE NO.G.O(RT) NO.1139/2017/H&FWD DATED 21.04.2017 ISSUED BY THE HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT.** - **ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN O.A NO.1614/2017.** - **ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.G.O(RT) NO.717/2018/H&FWD DATED 03.03.2018.** - **ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF G.O(MS) NO.272/2018/HEDN DATED 13.11.2018.** **ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. ANNEXURE A11 TRUE COPY OF ORDER VIDE** OP(KAT) No.558/2023 12 - **NO.B2/25/2021/H&FWD DATED 17.03.2021.** - **ANNEXURE A12 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF REGULATIONS OF UNIVERSITY OF KERALA RELATING TO RECOGNITION OF EXAMINATIONS AND DEGREES OF OTHER UNIVERSITIES.** - **ANNEXURE A13 TRUE COPY OF KERALA PSC APPROVED DISTANCE EDUCATION UNIVERSITIES IN TAMILNADU OBTAINED TO THE APPLICANT FROM INTERNET.** - **ANNEXURE A14 TRUE COPY OF FINAL SENIORITY LIST OF CURATORS TO BE PROMOTED AS SENIOR SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT VIDE ORDER NO.H1/32749/2016/DME DATED 26.09.2016.** - **ANNEXURE A15 TRUE COPY OF ORDER VIDENO.H1/829/2021/MED DATED 03.11.2022 ISSUED BY JOINT DIRECTOR (GENERAL).** - **ANNEXURE A16 TRUE COPY OF PUBLIC NOTICE DATED AUGUST 2022 VIDE NO.F.NO.3-5/2022 (DEB III) ISSUED BY UGC.** - **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE O.A NO.815/2021 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES A1 TO A14.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE SECOND PETITIONER ON 16.02.2022.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE RESPONDENT ON 17.12.2022 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES A15 & A16.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ON 27.03.2023.**