Madhya Pradesh High Court
V Tech Private Iti Thru.Smt.Deependra ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 July, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
W. P. No.5457 of 2017
(V-Tech Private ITI vs. State of MP & others)
Indore, dated : 17.07.2018
Shri A. S. Garg, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. Poorva Mahajan,
learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri P. M. Bhargava, learned Dy. A. G. for the respondent Nos.1 to 3
- State.
Shri Deepak Rawal, learned ASG for the respondent No.4. Heard.
By this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashment of order dated 11.08.2017 passed by the Joint Director, National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT), Jabalpur by which petitioner's institution has been de-affiliated.
2. According to the petitioner, the Principal of Government of ITI, who has re-inspected the petitioner institute on 19.07.2017 was competent to inspect the premises in the light of minutes and guidelines issued by the respondent No.4.
3. The powers of inspection has been vested with the Committee constituted by the Director but the inspection has been carried out by the Principal, which is in violation of the minutes and guidelines.
4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Private Unaided ITI having its affiliation since December, 2012. The Private ITI has been governed by the Director General of Employment and Training, New Delhi, which is a department of Union of India and the respondent Nos.1 to 3 are following the rules and directions as framed by the Director, NCVT, New Delhi, for smooth functioning as well as for quality check. As per the direction of the Director, Skilled Development, Government of MP, vide their letter dated 14.07.2016, inspections have been conducted across the MP and the petitioner institution has been inspected on 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE W. P. No.5457 of 2017 (V-Tech Private ITI vs. State of MP & others) 09.08.2016. In the light of aforesaid direction, inspection has been conducted by the duly constituted Committee and inspection report has been prepared by 4 members Inspection Committee. During the inspection, it has been revealed that there were so many discrepancies in the petitioner institution. After conducting proper inspection by the competent authority, the inspection report has been sent to the Director, Skilled Development, Jabalpur vide letter dated 06.09.2016.
5. On the basis of inspection report, a show cause notice dated 27.01.2017 has been issued to the petitioner institution calling for explanation in regard to discrepancies. A reminder was issued on 17.02.2017 and again explanation in respect of discrepancies in the petitioner institution has been sought within a period of 15 days.
6. The reply to the show cause notice has been filed by the petitioner institution contending therein that the petitioner institution has cured most of the discrepancies and some patty issue will be cured soon. Thereafter, further inspection has been carried out by the competent authority and vide letter dated 19.07.2017, verification report has been submitted which revealed that the petitioner institution has failed to cure the discrepancies which were found in the institution and the verification team has recommended for de-affiliation of the institution and in the light of verification report and recommendation of the Committee, the petitioner institution has been de-affiliated vide impugned order dated 11.08.2017 (Annexure-P/1).
7. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to item No.2 of Annexure-P/8, which is at page-30 and item No.7 of Annexure-P/7, which is at page-26 and submitted that all the deficiencies have been cured. He submitted that inspection was carried out by the 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE W. P. No.5457 of 2017 (V-Tech Private ITI vs. State of MP & others) Principal, who was competent to carry inspection and no deficiency was found and prayed for quashment of the order.
8. Per contra, learned Dy. AG has drawn our attention to item No.3 (Annexure-P/8) which deals with de-affiliation of institutes, post engagement of QCI and submitted that the Principal has no right to inspect the petitioner premises rather only with the Committee constituted by the Director is empowered to inspect the premises and therefore, entire inspection report is void ab-initio as has been made by the incompetent person. Item No.3 of the minutes reads as under :-
Item No.3 : De-affiliation of institutes, post engagement of QCI As the work of accreditation has been assigned to QCI, DGET has stopped nominating the NCVT representative for inspection due to which queries have been raised by various institutes and State directorates regarding de-affiliation process of trade/units in ITSs.
The Director of Training informed the members that de-affiliation procedure has been given in Appendix - XX of Training Manual for Industrial Training Institute/Centres and was further amended in the 38th meeting of National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) vide Order No.DGE&T-19(6)/2010-CD dated 01st October, 2010 which is reproduced as under :
1. Whenever, Secretary NCVT finds it necessary to carry out evaluation of any ITI/ITC, Secretary NCVT shall request the concerned State Director to constitute a Committee and to carry out inspection for evaluation within a period of 6 weeks. In case, State Director fails to constitute such committee and facilitate inspection of institute within stipulated time period, such committee would be constituted by Secretary NCVT which would carry out necessary evaluation.
2. The Standing committee for evaluation should submit its report to DGE&T/Secretary (NCVT) within 07 days of the inspection. The 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE W. P. No.5457 of 2017 (V-Tech Private ITI vs. State of MP & others) recommendation of the committee would be placed before sub-committee of NCVT dealing with affiliation for consideration and decision.
3. In cases where, Standing Committee for Evaluation could not carry out inspection of institute for reason due to closer of the institute or otherwise, the Evaluation Committee will submit the facts to the NCVT and the institute would be considered for de-
affiliation/suspension of affiliation from NCVT by the sub-committee of NCVT dealing with affiliation on the basis of the report.
Deputy Director General of Training was of the opinion that inspection for evaluation is as good as inspection for affiliation. Since, the affiliation system has been changed i.e. based on accreditation of QCI (NABET); evaluation system should be in synchronized with it.
Ii was, therefore, decided to carry out evaluation of trades/units of Govt./Pvt. Institutes either on the basis of complaint received at DGET from individual or State Directorate or the institute has voluntarily requested for surrendering of trades/units by the procedure given below :
A. In the case of complaint received at DGET from individual or State Directorate:
1. Show cause notice to be issued to the institute along with copy to respective State Directorate and QCI.
a. If reply is not received within 45 days a reminder will be sent to the institute. Again, if reply is not received from the institute in 30 days, it will be considered that the institute is not interested in running trades/units.
i. Orders for withdrawal will be placed before the NCVT Sub-committee for approval and will be issued according to the decision of the sub-committee.
b. If reply is received, and if the institute is accredited by QCI (NABET) a report would be sought from QCI and same would be placed before sub-committee of NCVT dealing with affiliation. The sub-committee may accept the report or depute a team for further verification. This inspection will be 5 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE W. P. No.5457 of 2017 (V-Tech Private ITI vs. State of MP & others) excluded from the 5% verification of recommendation as per MOA.
If the institute is not accredited by QCI, institute would be required to get accreditation through QCI for continuation of affiliation.
The recommendation of the QCI will be placed before the NCVT sub-committee for decision.
B. In the case wherein the institute has voluntarily requested for surrendering of trades/units:
i. State Directorate to verify the liability of institute in terms of trainees on roll; if any, before forwarding the request for de-affiliation. ii. Orders for withdrawal will be placed before the NCVT sub-committee for approval.
9. From the aforesaid, it is clear that Standing Committee has to carry out inspection for evaluation.
10. In the present case, Annexure-R/2 is the inspection report duly conducted by the constituted Committee and inspection has been carried out by 4 members Inspection Committee. As per Schedule 1, all the 4 members have duly signed the report. In the first round of inspection, the petitioner was informed to cure the deficiencies and the petitioner has also assured to do so but when after submission of reply by the petitioner, again verification was carried out. The team has found that there is no improvement in the petitioner institution. Thereafter, a report has been submitted to D.G.T. (Delhi) and after appreciating the report along with other, D.G.T. (Delhi) has de-affiliated the petitioner institution and sent an e-mail to DTRG (Jabalpur) for taking further action.
11. Considering the provisions, which we have quoted in the preceding paragraphs, the Principal was not having any power to inspect the ITI institute of the petitioner, even otherwise, as per report, Annexure-R/1, admittedly, the Committee constituted by the State Director has inspected 6 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE W. P. No.5457 of 2017 (V-Tech Private ITI vs. State of MP & others) the institute of the petitioner and gave report wherein it has been very categorically stated that no deficiency/discrepancy was found.
12. Considering these facts, we cannot accept the contention of the learned Senior Counsel that the Principal was competent to inspect the petitioner's premises. Admittedly, no discrepancy/deficiency was cured as per the report of the Committee which has been filed along with the reply and, therefore, no case to interfere with the impugned order, as prayed is made out. The petitioner is the author of the situation. The writ petition filed by the petitioner has no merit and is accordingly, dismissed. No costs.
(P. K. Jaiswal) (Ashok Kumar Joshi)
Judge Judge
gp
Digitally signed by Geeta Pramod
Date: 2018.07.20 10:55:01 +05'30'