Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yuva Private Industrial Training ... vs The Quality Council Of India Thr on 12 January, 2017
1 WP 8738/16
12/1/17
Shri Anuj Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vivek Khedkar, Assistant Solicitor General for
respondents.
The inaction on the part of the respondents to grant permission to start ITI Course for the session 2016-17 is assailed herein.
Perusal of P/3 indicates that the respondents after noticing deficiencies and shortcomings in the infrastructure and other facilities available with the petitioner-institute have informed the petitioner-institute that the same be rectified failing which the application for permission to start course of ITI for session 2016- 17 shall become inconsequential.
As this juncture, learned counsel for the respondents intimates that more than half of the session 2016-17 is over and the same is going to terminate in February, 2017 when the examination is scheduled to be held.
In this view of the matter, it is submitted that relief as prayed for at this juncture, cannot be granted to the petitioner who can always apply for seeking fresh permission for the next session 2017-18, if law permits.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for short adjournment to seek instruction.
List tomorrow, i.e. 13/1/2017.
(Sheel Nagu) (S.A.Dharmadhikari)
Judge Judge
(Bu)