Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jai Dauji Jan Kalyan Shiksha Prasar Evam ... vs Union Of India Thr on 26 February, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
W.P. No. 8150/2016
(Jai Dauji Jan Kalyan Shiksha Prasad Avam Paryavaran Samiti
Vs.
Union of India and others)
Gwalior, 26/02/2018
Shri Shailendra Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel
for the petitioner.
Shri Raghvendra Dixit, learned Government
Advocate for respondent/State.
Shri Vivek Khedkar, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondents/ Union of India.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard.
Petitioner, a society registered under Madhya Pradesh Registrikaran Adhiniyam 1973, imparting vocational education through Industrial Training Institute is aggrieved with the guidelines issued by State of Madhya Pradesh through its Department of Technical Education and Skill Development which is in the form of Training Brochure: Admission Session August 2015. The grievance is against the stipulations contained in clause 18.2 which mandates that the training fee per apprentice per year from the private ITI would be Rs. 1,500/-. It is urged that the apprentices in the Government ITI are charged Rs. 100 per semester and Rs. 200 per semester for further chance. Accordingly, relief is sought for directions to respondents No. 3 and 4 to reduce the online examination fees for the academic year 2015- 16 and refund the excess amount, so that it can be 2 refunded to the students. To strictly adhere to the instructions by Director General, Employment and Training, Ministry of Labour, Government of India. To not to allow theory examination centre contrary to the instructions issued by the Directorate General Employment and Training (referred to as DGE&T).
As regard to the relief for direction to not to charge the examination fees for the academic session 2015-16 and refund the excess fees. Evidently, the petitioner has already realized the fee from respective students. And since none of the students have come forward to challenge the charging of fees, we are not inclined to cause any indulgence, even when the petitioner contends that the students will be refunded the said amount. As no detail has been given of the students who appeared in the examination.
As to allegation regarding charging of higher examination fee, the petitioner has compared with the stipulations laid down by the National Council for Vocational Training in its 41 st meeting held on 30/04/2014 as contained in the letter dated 19/12/2014. However, close reading of the clause which contains stipulations regarding examination fee stipulating Rs. 75/- per student per semester, would reveal that stipulation relates to reimbursement to the DGE&T to meet out the expenses involved in printing, packing, dispatch, collection and evaluation of OMR sheets. Whereas, the amount spend for conducting examination by the State is left to be borne by the State. The very communication dated 3 19/12/2014 stipulates in paragraph 2 which is reproduced:-
"2. Examination Centers:-
(a) Theory Exams:-
As per minutes of 41st meeting of NCVT and vide letter No.l DGE&T - 19/03/2014-CD, dated 15.05.2014 to all state directorate, it was informed that all theory papers exams will be conducted in Government/Government aided Institutions. The examination center allotted should be within 25 km of the ITI where the trainee is undergoing training and with a maximum cap of 500 candidates per examination center. To observe this distance limit, relaxation for holding examination in other examination center would be given by DGE&T on recommendations of the State Directors. Also in every examination room, at least one invigilator must be from Government Institute/ Polytechnic/ college.
However, due to increased no's of Private ITI's it is becoming difficult to conduct the Theory exams in Government ITIs/ Government aided Institution; Schools, because of limited infrastructural facilities and thus causing the increased no of examination days. In order to resolve the issue while deciding the examination center the State Directorate will first exhaust the possibilities of making the Government ITIs/ Govt. aided Testing Centres and then they can make Private ITI's as a Testing centre with a intimation to DGE&T and subjected to the following condition :-
a. Pvt. ITIs should have all the Infrastructural facilities.
b. No private ITIs will be made as self testing centre.
c. Private ITI must be NCVT Affiliated & having minimum of 8 units.
d. The students of two ITIs made as a testing center should not be mutually interchanged. e. The students of any ITIs should not be allowed in same trade testing center consecutively for two years.
f. The private ITIs should not have more than 500 students and within the vicinity of 25 km of ITI where the trainees are undergoing training.4
g. All trade testing centers should have one govt. official must be appointed as examination superintendent (not below the rank of Instructor).
(b) Practical Exams:-
In addition to the conditioned mentioned for theory exam center, the Pvt ITI made as a testing for Practical exams must also have a relevant trade with 100% availability of tools, equipment's and Machinery in working condition."
Evidently, no provision is made to compensate the State Government to meet out the expenses to be incurred in arrangements for theory examinations and practical examinations for the students of Private ITIs. It is to meet out the expenses incurred for conducting the SCVT (State Council for Vocational Training) Online Examination of second semester.
"3.1.3 'kkldh; vkbZ-Vh-vkbZ esa vxLr 2015 esa izosf'kr ,oa izFke lsesLVj ds fu;fer izf'k{k.kkFkhZ rFkk vxLr 2014 ds r`rh; lsesLVj ds fu;fer izf'k{k.kkFkhZ;ksa ls dksbZ ijh{kk 'kqYd ugha fy;k tkosxk mDr izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa ds ijh{kk 'kqYd dk Hkqxrku izkpk;Z] laLFkk dh laLFkk fodkl fuf/k ls djsaxsA tcfd 'kkldh; vkbZ-Vh-vkbZ- ds vuqrh.kZ ijh{kkFkhZ;ksa o izkbZosV vkbZ-Vh-vkbZ- ds izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa ls ijh{kk 'kqYd fy;k tkosxkA 'kkldh;@izkbZosV vkbZ-Vh-vkbZ- ds izkpkZ;kssa }kjk izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dh ik=rk iksVZy ij vafdr djus ds mijkar ik= izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dh ijh{kk 'kqYd x.kuk dj dqy 'kqYd 'kqYd jkf'k o pSd uacj ¼ftl pSd ls ijh{kk 'kqYd dk Hkqxrku fd;k tkuk gS½ iksVZy ij Mkyuk vko';d gS blds mijkar gh izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dh ik=rk ykWd gksxh o ijh{kk 'kqYd jkf'k dk pSd rhu fnol ds vanj la;qDr lapkyd ds dk;kZy; esa Hkstuk lqfuf'pr djs rFkk la;qDr lapkyd lIrkg Hkj ds vanj tksuoj ,DtkbZ dj ,eihlhosV vkfQl es Hkstuk lqfuf'pr djsaxsA vkidks fofnr gh gS fd ukWu bathfu;fjax VªsMks esa F;ksjh dk ,d iz'u i= gksrk gS rFkk bathfu;fjax VªsMks esa nks F;ksjh isij gksrs gSA vr,o ukWu bathfu;fjax VsªM ds izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dk ijh{kk 'kqYd jkf'k :- 400@& gksxk rFkk bathfu;fjax VªsMks dk ijh{kk 'kqYd jkf'k :- 800@& gksxkA ;fn ijh{kk 'kqYd esa la'kks/ku gksrk gS rks i`Fkd ls le; & lhek ls iwoZ lwfpr dj fn;k tkosxkA 5 Whereas in respect of failed students of first semester following fees has been charged vide order No. dkSfola@vkWuyk ijh{kk@NCVT tqykbZ&vxLr 2016@2887@ tcyiqj] fnukad 09@06@2016 .
2-3- ijh{kk 'kqYd& e/;izns'k 'kklu foKku ,oa izks|ksfxdh foHkkx ea=ky; ds i= Øekad ,Q 5&1@2014@56 Hkksiky fnukad 28-04-2016 }kjk ,e-ih- vkWuykbZu ds ek/;e ls iznku dh tkus okyh fofHkUu foHkkxksa dh lsok gsrq fy;s tkus okys iksVZy 'kqYd ds fu/kkZj.k gsrq 'kqYd fu/kkZj.k lfefr dh cSBd fnukad 5-12-15 esa jkf'k :- 350@& izfr isij izfr izf'k{k.kkFkhZ fu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gSA rn~uqlkj bathfu;fjax O;olk; tSls& bysDVªhf'k;u] fQVj] bR;kfn] ftues nks iz'ui= gksxs] dk ijh{kk 'kqYd jkf'k :- 700@& izfr izf'k{k.kkFkhZ ,oa ukWu bathfu;fjax O;olk; tSls & dksik] LVsuks] bR;kfn] ftuesa ,d iz'ui= gksxk] dk ijh{kk 'kqYd jkf'k :- 350@& izfr izf'k{k.kkFkhZ dk Hkqxrku ,eihvkWuykbZu dks djuk gksxkA blh izdkj izFke lsesLVj esa vuqrh.kZ iz'u i=ks esa lfEefyr gksus ds fy, izfr iz'u i= :- 350@& jkf'k dk Hkqxrku fd;k tkuk gksxkA 2.3.1 ijh{kk 'kqYd dk vkWuykbZu Hkqxrku& iksVZy ij izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa ds lR;kiu ds le; gh ijh{kk 'kqYd dk vkWuykbZu Hkqxrku fd;k tk;sxkA 'kkldh;@izk;osV vkbZ- Vh-vkbZ ds izkpk;ksZa }kjk O;olk; okj leLr ik= izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dk lE;kiu djus ds ckn] dqy Hkqxrku jkf'k dh x.kuk dj] mDr jkf'k dk vkWuykbZu Hkqxrku djsaxs ,oa "submit" cVu dks fDyd djsaxsA rRi'pkr gh lR;kiu dk;Z iw.kZ gksxkA vkWuykbZu Hkqxrku gsrq Hkqxrku ek/;e,oa izfØ;k ifjf'k"V&2 ij layXu gSA"
Since the examination is to be conducted by the State body, the charge of fee to meet out the expenses cannot be faulted with.
In view whereof, since no relief can be granted, petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.
(Sanjay Yadav) (Rajendra Mahajan)
Judge Judge
shubh*
Digitally signed by SHUBHANKAR MISHRA
Date: 2018.03.06 17:13:54 +05'30'