Delhi High Court - Orders
Dr Rajendra Prasad Itc vs Directorate General Of Training & Anr on 19 May, 2023
Author: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Bench: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5660/2023
DR RAJENDRA PRASAD ITC
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharawat and Mr.Ashok
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING & ANR.
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Neeraj SPC for R-1/DGT and
Mr. Vedansh Anand, Central Govt. pleader.
Ms. Pratishtha Vij and Mr. Abhinav Mukerji,
Advocates for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
ORDER
% 19.05.2023
1. The petitioner-institution in the instant petition prays for directions to respondent no.1-Directorate General of Training (DGT) to shift the data of one trainee, namely, Mr.Shailesh Kumar, admitted by the petitioner- institution in Fitter Trade for academic session August, 2021-2023 from Shift-1 to Shift-2 in the NCVT MIS portal and to issue further directions to upload the data of 20 trainees admitted by the petitioner-institution in Fitter trade for academic session August, 2022-24 in Shift-I on the NCVT MIS portal.
2. The facts as enumerated in the instant petition would show that the list of admitted trainees trade-wise was to be filled up by the petitioner- institution on the NIMI portal. The said data was then migrated to the NCVT MIS portal. For academic session August, 2021 while uploading the data of This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 16:57:26 -2- Fitter Trade against the name of candidate Mr. Shailesh Kumar instead of Shift-2, Shift-1 was erroneously mentioned which has resulted in creating an anomaly with respect to his admission process. Learned counsel for the petitioner-institution, therefore, states that if respondent no.1-DGT corrects the said data and treats Mr. Shailesh Kumar to have been admitted in Shift- 2, the second prayer made in the instant petition would automatically be satisfied. Learned counsel also relies on a decision of this court passed in the case of Amit ITC v. Directorate General of Training & Anr. 1 (Annexure P-
9).
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1-DGT opposes the submission and he states that the directions issued in Amit ITC (supra) were issued under special circumstances, on the basis of the material available in that specific case and with respect to this case, such an exercise is not permissible in view of various reasons as indicated in paragraph no.7, 8 and 11 of the reply. He also states that if the directions in the notification dated 20.12.2018 (Annexure C-1) and the notification dated 10.11.2022 (Annexure C-2) are perused, such an exercise is not permissible.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2 submits that as of now, since the relief was mainly confined to respondent no.1-DGT no counter-affidavit has been filed, however if this courts directs, she would file the counter-affidavit.
5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.
1W.P.(C) 3736/2021 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 16:57:26 -3-
6. The submission made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-institution relates to factual verification. If a particular student is admitted in a particular year and if on account of typographical error or mistake, instead of Shift-2, Shift-1 is mentioned, the same can always be corrected subject to proper verification by the appropriate authority. It is for this reason, without going into other aspects of the matter, at this stage, this court is inclined to direct respondent no.1-DGT to conduct an inquiry with the assistance of State-DGT to verify as to whether the concerned candidate was admitted in Shift-2. If, on inquiry it is found that the candidate was admitted in Shift-2, the necessary correction be carried out by the respondent no.1-DGT and the updated data be uploaded.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-institution, however, states that no inquiry is required to be conducted in view of the facts existing under the present case. However, this court is not inclined to give any finding as to whether the candidate was admitted in Shift-2 or otherwise. Such an aspect remains subject to the inquiry to be conducted by the DGT with the assistance of State-DGT.
8. Needless to state that since the examinations are likely to commence, therefore, the inquiry be conducted before the date of commencement of the examination.
9. The petitioner-institution shall be heard before passing any adverse order against it.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the instant petition stands disposed of.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 16:57:27
11. Needless to state that the inquiry be only confined to the aspect of the Shift in which the candidate was admitted.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J MAY 19, 2023/MJ This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 16:57:27