Allahabad High Court
Sukhveer And 59 Others vs The Union Of India And 3 Others on 10 August, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:161456 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6232 of 2023 Petitioner :- Sukhveer And 59 Others Respondent :- The Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Jai Prakash Rai,Rahul Kumar Mishra,Sanjay Maurya With Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15131 of 2023 Petitioner :- Pintu Yadav And 16 Others Respondent :- The Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Jagannath Maurya,Sanjay Maurya,Tabassum Hashmi With Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15133 of 2023 Petitioner :- Abhinash And 58 Others Respondent :- The Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Jagannath Maurya,Sanjay Maurya And Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15134 of 2023 Petitioner :- Abhishek Sharma And 20 Others Respondent :- The Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Jagannath Maurya,Sanjay Maurya,Suman Jaiswal Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
1. Compliance affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard Shri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Jai Prakash Rai for respondent nos.1, 2 and 5, Shri J.N. Maurya for respondent no.3, Shri Sanjay Maurya for respondent no.4 and perused the record.
3. The issue involved in all the connected writ petitions is same and, therefore, these writ petitions are being heard together and decided by a common judgement.
4. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
" (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 25.01.2023 passed by the respondent no.2, a copy whereof is contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition;
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 & 3, respectively, to open NCVT MIS (DGT) & RVPPUP (state council for vocational training, I.T.I. Aliganj, Lucknow, U.P.) should be made so that online data of I.T.I. Examination 2022- 23 of the Petitioners (first year trainee of two years course) may be uploaded in respect of the institutions where they taken their admission after completing entire formalities and depositing the prescribed fee of Rs. 250/- on the official website respondent no.3 for registration and Rs. 10,000/- towards course fees with the college-respondent no.4:"
3. The limited grievance of the petitioners in the present case is that though they applied within time i.e. on or before 29.10.2022 seeking admission in the respondent-Institution (I.T.I.), for one or the other reason, the respondent no.4-Institution could not and did not upload data on the website of respondent no.3 before 30.10.2022 which was notified as the last date for the said purpose. The grievance, therefore, is that on account of inaction on the part of respondent no.4, the petitioners have suffered and their academic careers in the concerned course have come under jeopardy.
4. Various affidavits have been exchanged in the present case.
5. This Court took lot of pains in appreciating the rival contentions of the parties and passed a very detailed order on 23.05.2023 which is reproduced as follows:-
"Shri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead "National Council for Vocational Training through its Director, Employment Exchange Building, Pusa Campus, New Delhi" as co-respondent No.5 in the array of the parties to the writ petition during the course of the day.
Compliance affidavit filed by the respondents No.1 and 2 is taken in the record.
Supplementary affidavit-I and supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner are taken in the record.
Affidavit in reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 filed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and affidavit in reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2 filed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 as well as counter affidavit in reply to the second supplementary affidavit dated 23.02.203 filed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 are taken in the record.
Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, Principal of Institution is present before the Court.
Personal appearance of the Principal of Institution is exempted unless otherwise ordered by the Court.
Heard Shri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Jail Prakash Rai, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2-Union of India, Shri J.N. Maurya, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3-SCVT and Shri Sanjay Maurya, learned counsel for the respondent No.4-ITI.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2-Union of India is taken in the record.
The respondent No.4-ITI is duly affiliated and recognized by the respondent-National Council For Vocational Training (NCVT), Director General of Training, Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India and also the State Council For Vocational Training, Uttar Pradesh, ITI campus, Aliganj, Lucknow. Briefly the case of the petitioners in the writ petition is that they had applied for admission in various courses being run by the respondent No.4-Institution (ITI). Their applications for admission were duly processed and admission fee was also deposited. The petitioners were thereafter permitted to attend the classes for the academic sessions. However, the petitioners were prevented from appearing in the examination on the footing that the relevant details of the petitioners were not uploaded on the website of the respondent No.3-State Council For Vocational Training, Uttar Pradesh, ITI campus, Aliganj, Lucknow and hence the data was not migrated to the National Council For Vocational Training (NCVT). The students were consequently not eligible for appearing in the examination and were restrained from entering the examinations.
The affidavit filed by Shri Jay Prakash Rai, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2-Union of India discloses that the respondent No.4-Institution (ITI) is affiliated to the National Council For Vocational Training (NCVT) as well as concerned State Directorate. They have deposited the fee and permitted to attend the classes for the academic session.
Shri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners had legitimate expectation from all the respondents that after their admission their applications would be fully processed and they would be permitted to appear in the examinations.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.4-Institution (ITI) has not denied the case of the petitioners in the counter affidavit insofar as their eligibility to be admitted to the technical courses, deposit of fee and regular attendances are concerned.
Only ground set up by the respondents for denial of permission to the petitioners to appear in the examination is that the respondent No.4-Institution (ITI) could not upload the details of the petitioners as the server of the respondent No.2 was poor.
Supplementary Counter affidavit filed by Shri J.N. Maurya, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondent No.3-SCVT is taken in the record.
It is contended by Shri J.N. Maurya, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondent No.3-SCVT that on the relevant dates the server of the State Government for vocational training was functioning and the details of a number of candidates were uploaded on the portal. As far as action against the institution is concerned it is beyond the jurisdiction of the respondent No.3-SCVT and the respondents No.1 and 2-Union of India alone has the exclusive jurisdiction to initiate the same.
In the affidavit of the respondents No.1 and 2-Union of India prima facie it appears that the respondent No.4-Institution (ITI) indulged in malpractices and there were regulatory failures on part of the State and NCVT as well. These facts need to be determined in an inquiry.
The procedure for taking out inquiries into such irregularities in admission or other malpractices is prescribed vide notification dated 14.11.2022. The procedure is extracted hereunder:
"A. In case of receipt of complain, a show cause notice would be issued to the concerned ITI by the RDSDE/State Directorate.
B. On receipt of the show cause notice, the concerned ITI would be given a time of twenty working days to send a reply to the show cause notice.
C. The newly constituted SSDEC will examine the reply to the show cause notice within a span of twenty working days and will conduct the joint inspection of the premises.
D. Subsequent to the joint inspection, the report prepared after joint inspection is placed before the SSDEC committee for final decision. The final decision in respect to the affiliation or de-affiliation of the ITI will be taken by the SCAA Committee falling under the purview of DGT."
In the wake of preceding discussion, the writ petition can be taken to its logical conclusion only after inquiry report is submitted by the concerned officials.
Considering the fact that the respondent No.4-Institution (ITI) has made an allegation regarding failure on server. It will be appropriate that the respondent No.3-Executive Director of the State Council For Vocational Training, Uttar Pradesh, I.T.I. Campus, Aliganj, Lucknow shall personally conduct an inquiry alongwith nominated officials from the Government of India.
The Court would like to observe that both the respondent-State and the respondents-Union of India ought to have treated the grievances of the petitioners made in the writ petition as a prima facie complaint against the respondents No.4-Institution (ITI) or their officials.
However, the Court now directs the concerned respondents to constitute an inquiry committee forthwith headed by the Executive Director of the State Council For Vocational Training, Uttar Pradesh, I.T.I. Campus, Aliganj, Lucknow and proceed in accordance with law after issuing show cause notice to the institution. The inquiry report shall be submitted by the next date of listing.
It is made clear that the authorities shall not influenced by any observation made in this order and shall conduct an inquiry independently.
In the meantime, both the respondent-State as well as respondents-Union of India shall consider the case of the petitioners for admission to alternative ITIs and make an appropriate offer in this regard to the petitioners as a special case in the next session which commences from July, 2023.
The superintendence of the regulatory bodies of the Government of India as well as the State Government over the affiliated ITI seems to be rather weak. Both the concerned authorities shall take appropriate steps for keeping a strict vigil to ensure that the ITIs are maintain appropriate standards and do not cheat the students.
In case ITIs are permitted to flout the norms of technical standards with impunity and the regulatory authorities fail to take timely action, the laudable scheme of the government of Skill India will fail.
The respondents No.1 and 2-Union of India as well as respondent No.3-SCVT shall file their personal affidavits in this regard with report.
Put up this matter on 26.07.2023 in the list of fresh cases. "
6. There are various features of the aforesaid order; one for directing holding of inquiry into the conduct of respondent no.4 and the other taking care of the interest of the petitioners for their adjustment in some other private I.T.I. Institution in the next session which commences from July, 2023.
7. Before the said order was passed, another order dated 09.05.2023 was passed by this Court which reads as follows:-
"Shri Sanjay Maurya, learned counsel for the respondent no.4-Institution prays for and is granted ten days and no more time to file counter affidavit to the writ petition as well as the response to the affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India as the State.
Shri Sanjay Maurya, learned counsel for the respondent no.4-Institution submits that the server of respondent no.3-SCVT server, was down on the relevant dates. Hence, names and the bio data of the candidates could not be uploaded. The respondent no. 4 shall file an affidavit stating these facts with material particulars and supporting documents. The affidavit shall also disclose the variation in the fees depicted in the receipts which are issued to the students.
The Principal as well as Manager of the Institution shall remain present in person on the next date of listing.
In this regard, the respondent no.3-SCVT shall also file an affidavit disclosing all the status of the server on the relevant dates.
Shri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner shall file a tabulated sheet of the dates on which the petitioners were respectively admitted to the institution along with all documents including the proof of payment fee.
Respondent no.1-Union of India and the State shall file affidavit disclosing all relevant facts including:
A. The procedure and eligibility for registration/recognition/affiliation of an ITI college to the Government and terms thereof.
B. Fee standards in the ITI colleges, if any, prescribed by the Government.
C. Oversight on the functioning of the ITI colleges.
D. Provision for penal/disciplinary action against the defaulting institutions.
E. Whether any enquiry or action has been initiated the respondent no. 4 institution.
Considering the urgency of the matter, put up in the top ten cases on 23.05.2023 in the list of fresh cases."
8. Therefore, this Court wanted to ascertain as to the purity of the courses run by the private I.T.I.s including the fact that, in case, the Institutions are found to be at fault or abusing their positions in connection with facilitating admissions of the students against the norms, what action is required to be taken against the office bearers of the Institutions and various other aspects. The case of the petitioners is that they have deposited the requisite fees in the institution within time and took admission and are studying in the concerned courses for the last about ten months.
9. The respondent nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 have come up with the stand that respondent no.4-Institution was committing abuse of its position as, not only, it facilitated admissions to the petitioners without uploading the data on the requisite website of respondent no.3, there are serious anomalies in issuance of fees receipts which have been annexed alongwith supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioners themselves. Learned counsel for the respondents have pointed out with reference to receipt particulars and have submitted that fees was collected even prior to filling up of forms by the candidates.
10. An interesting feature of this case is that whereas this Court in order dated 23.05.2023 proceeded to take care of the interest of the petitioners and also directed holding of the inquiry, the petitioners chose to challenge the said order by filling Special Appeal No.451 of 2023 (Sukhveer & 59 others v. The Union of India & 4 others) which was disposed off by the Division Bench of this Court by the following order dated 17.07.2023.
"1. Heard Sri Anurag Triapathi, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Jai Prakash Rai, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 5 and Sri Sanjay Maurya, learned counsel for respondent no.4.
2. This intra court appeal has been filed by 60 students who claim to have completed admission formalities for admission in ITI course in a private respondent-institution namely respondent no.4 herein. In various paragraphs of the writ petition filed by the appellants herein, they have claimed that they had completed the entire admission formalities by depositing the admission fee with the respondent-institution (respondent no.4) and were duly granted admission in ITI Course (Electricians/Fitters) against the existing vacancies. All the writ petitioners were permitted to attend regular classes of ITI (Electricians / Fitters).
3. However, despite completion of the admission formalities at the ends of the appellants, the respondent no.4- College did not upload the requisite data at the web portal for State Council of Vocational Training till the last date, which was 13.10.2022. As a result of inaction on the part of the respondent no.4-College, the petitioners were not allowed to complete the formalities of appearing in the final examination of the first year ITI course. It is categorically stated that the writ petitioners have completed the study/vocational training course for appearing in the final examination for the first year ITI course and there cannot be any dispute about their eligibility for admission, availability of vacant seats and completion of admission process. The submission, thus, is that faults lies are completely at the ends of respondent no.4.
4. With these submissions, it is argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that directions issued by the learned Single Judge to the respondent-State and the Union of India to consider the claim of the writ petitioners for admission in the next academic session causes serious prejudice to the petitioners. It is submitted that out of 60 appellants/writ petitioners herein, the petitioner no.1, Sukhveer filed Writ C No. 1039 of 2023 with the relief to issue direction to the concerned authority to open NCVT MIS Portal to upload the date of ITI examination 2022-23 (first year trainee of two years course), in respect of the institution namely respondent no.4. The said writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 21.02.2023 giving direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the writ petitioner therein.
5. Vide order dated 25.01.2023, the respondent no.2, namely the Director General of Training, Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India, New Delhi has rejected the claim of the writ petitioner no.1, namely Sukhveer stating therein that it would not be possible to consider the individual case of the petitioner as it would result in multiple petitions being filed so that the portal can be accessed once again. It was concluded therein that reopening of the portal would be disregard to the cut off date/schedule decided by the competent authority, to maintain the quality/standards of curriculum.
6. The order dated 25.01.2023 whereby the claim of the petitioner no.1, Sukhveer, has been rejected, is being challenged by 60 petitioners before us, who claim that they are similarly situated as that of petitioner no.1, Sukhveer who also took admission in the institution concerned after completion of admission formalities and undertook classes regularly. The petitioners / appellants herein are, thus, aggrieved by inaction of respondent no.4 (institution), which despite completion of the admission formalities did not upload the data by the cut off date, i.e. 30.10.2022 at the portal of SCVT, which is connected to the portal of NCVT.
7. Taking note of the above facts, we are further required to note that the learned Single Judge has initiated an enquiry against the institution concerned by observing that ITIs cannot be permitted to flout the standards and the authorities are required to take action. The learned Single Judge has also noted the defence taken by the respondent no.4-institution, which has made allegations of failure of server in the counter to the writ petition. The respondent no.3, namely the Executive Director of State Council for vocational Training, U.P., Lucknow is directed to conduct the enquiry personally along with nominated officials from the Government of India. The enquiry report is to be placed before the learned Single Judge by the next date fixed, which is 26.07.2023.
8. In the said situation, on the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that the observations in the order impugned that the appellants writ petitioners may be considered for admission in the next academic session commencing from July 2023, we do not find any good ground to entertain this appeal, inasmuch as, the claim of the writ petitioners (60 in number) that they have completed necessary admission formalities and had attended classes, would also be the subject matter of result of enquiry, instituted under the directions issued by the learned Single Judge.
9. We further provide that the Executive Director of State Council for vocational Training, U.P., Lucknow shall examine the entire record pertaining to admission granted by the institution and the course of study / training imparted by it for the academic session 2022-23 to examine the claim of the writ petitioners that they have attended classes / training / completed training in the institution concerned. The institution namely respondent no.4 is required to place the entire original record pertaining to the admission of the writ petitioners in the academic session 2022-23.
10. We further provide that, in case, the Executive Director of State Council for vocational Training, U.P., Lucknow finds fault at the ends of respondent no.4 on perusal of the record pertaining to the admission and classes run by the institution, he shall issue notice to the institution / respondent no.4 to show cause as to why cost be not imposed upon it for loss of academic session of students / writ petitioners. The question as to whether the writ petitioners would be entitled to undertake examination for the session 2022-23 particularly first year training of two years trade on the premise that they took admission in the institution concerned and completed classes/training, would be the result of the enquiry pending as on date.
11. On receipt of the enquiry report, the learned Single Judge may pass appropriate orders to redress the grievances of the appellants herein.
12. With the above observations and directions, the appeal stands disposed of. "
11. A perusal of the order of Division Bench of this Court shows that the argument of the appellants/writ petitioners against consideration of their candidature in next academic session commencing from July 2023 was turned down and the appeal to that extent was not entertained. It implies that part of the order whereby alternative arrangements were suggested by this Court in the order dated 23.05.2023 was not disturbed by the Division Bench and would be treated to be upheld.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioners has, however, relied upon 'paragraph nos.10 and 11' of the aforesaid Division Bench order and has argued that Division Bench left question of redressal of grievance of the petitioners subject to the result of enquiry proceedings which were initiated pursuant to the order of this Court, and he argues that the petitioners should be allowed to continue with their studies and directions may be issued to the respondents to upload the data on the concerned website.
13. The issue, therefore, remains to be adjudicated is that in view of the material available on record, i.e. stand taken by the concerned respondents, especially in the light of the enquiry report, whether any relief can be granted to the petitioners or not.
14. The enquiry report dated 21.07.2023 states that during the course of enquiry when Principal of the Institution was asked to submit his stand and produce documents, he produced certain documents which were analyzed by the Enquiry Committee. It is further recorded that Committee took a stand that no document, no fees receipt, dates of admission of the petitioners in the Institutions, chronological list pertaining to admissions, comparative table etc. is available with him. He also informed that the documents were stolen away and in connection thereto, a First Information Report dated 03.02.2023 (correct date 07.02.2023 as per record) had been registered under Section 379/504 I.P.C. in Case Crime No.0099 of 2023. It was further recorded in the enquiry report that attendance register of the petitioners was produced, in which, their attendance was noted. With regard to financial aspects, it has been recorded that bank account statement could not be produced as the Manager of the Institution was found to be confined behind the bars. Enquiry report further mentions that Principal of the Institution could not make available electronic record, in absence whereof, Enquiry Committee could not get knowledge about uploaded data. Regarding issue of server, it was found that server was properly working on 29.10.2022 and 30.10.2022. With regard to other aspects, it was found that some standards were fulfilled by the Institution, however, there were certain other shortcomings in the Institution. The conclusion of enquiry report shows that the Institution did not upload the requisite data on or before the last date i.e. 30.10.2022 and, therefore, the Institution as well as the Managing Committee is responsible for the negligence committed.
15. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that whatever are the issues in between the respondents, the petitioners are not responsible for the same as they had applied within time. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon judgement of Delhi High Court passed in W.P. (C) No.3187 of 2023 (ITI CLUB OF INDIA v. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING & ANR.) alongwith W.P. (C) 7351 of 2023 (BARDHAN PVT. ITI & ANR. v. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING & ANR.) and has argued that under identical circumstances, the Delhi High Court had granted relief to the concerned petitioners and the requisite data was also uploaded by the concerned Institution.
16. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that there are serious flaws in facilitating admission to the petitioners. A perusal of various receipts enclosed with the supplementary affidavit discloses that the fees was collected from the petitioners even before facilitating admission to them. The enquiry report makes it clear that the Institution was at fault or negligent in uploading the data within time despite the fact that the server was properly functional on the relevant dates. The enquiry report is specific to the aspect that neither the Manager nor Principal could produce satisfactory data, details recorded both in the hard copy or in the electronic form so as to satisfy Enquiry Committee with regard to the sanctity and purity of the admission facilitated to the students. The question that the F.I.R. was lodged by wife of Manager of the Institution against some office bearers of the Institution or some unknown, against whom, the allegations that they had forcibly stolen certain documents from the Institution does not impress the Court, insofar as the question involved in the present case is concerned. The question which this Court in the previous orders wanted to be answered from the students as well as petitioners was as to whether the admission was facilitated to the petitioners in accordance with the norms and standards.
17. Merely because the petitioners have been admitted by the respondent-Institution, at its own, without intervention of respondent no.3 or without uploading the data, the admissions would not become lawful merely because of the reason that students have been permitted to study for the last more than ten months.
18. Insofar as the alternative arrangements suggested by this Court under order dated 23.05.2023 to accommodate the petitioners in other private I.T.I.s in ensuing session w.e.f. July 2023 is concerned, once the Division Bench made no interference in the special appeal, rather, made it clear that fate of the petitioners would be dependent upon the result of enquiry, after investigation of each and every aspect of the matter in relation to the issue involved, I cannot hold that the admissions facilitated by the respondent no.4 were in accordance with the procedure prescribed.
19. Insofar as the judgment of Delhi High Court in W.P. (C) No.3187 of 2023 (ITI CLUB OF INDIA v. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING & ANR.) alongwith W.P. (C) 7351 of 2023 (BARDHAN PVT. ITI & ANR. v. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING & ANR.) is concerned, the same was on its own facts where no such issue was involved which is involved in the present case in pursuance of various orders passed by the learned Single Judge as well as by the Division Bench and the case before the Delhi High Court is simply to the effect that there was some delay in uploading the data and under such circumstances, Delhi High Court directed uploading of data.
20. Admittedly, the petitioners have not been allowed to appear in the concerned examinations. It has been informed that one year of the course is already over and the examinations have already been held in July-August 2023 and result is to be declared shortly. It is further informed by the respondents that performance of candidates in the theoretical as well practical tests decides their marking and performance.
19. This Court cannot ignore the fact that private I.T.I.s cannot act as per their own whims and fancies and facilitate admissions to the students keeping the respondent nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 is dark and once, result of the writ petition has been made subject to the enquiry which this Court directed and enquiry report though reads in favour of the petitioners on some aspects it does not attach full sanctity to the admissions facilitated to the petitioners.
20. Considering the overall circumstances of the case, I do not find any good ground to grant any relief to the petitioners.
21. All the writ petitions are accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 10.8.2023 Jyotsana (Kshitij Shailendra, J.)