Gauhati High Court
Central Institute Of Paramedical ... vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 16 September, 2019
Author: Ujjal Bhuyan
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan
Page No.# 1/9
GAHC010105892018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 3294/2018
CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF PARAMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE
SOCIETY
NEW MEDICAL STOTES BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, A.T. ROAD, JORHAT-1,
REP. BY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER SHRI RANJIT BARUAH.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, SKILL, EMPLOYMENT
AND ENTERPRENEUSHIP DEPARTMENT, ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWHAATI-06,
KAMRUP (M).
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT
ASSAM
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
KAMRUP (M)
3:THE DIRECTOR
EMPLOYMENT AND CRAFSTMEN TRAINING
ASSAM
REHABARI
GUWAHATI-6.
4:UNION OF INDIA
REP.BY THE MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT SHRAM SHAKTI
BHAVAN
RAFI MARG
NEW DELHI- 110001.
Page No.# 2/9
5:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
SHRAM SHAKTI BHAVAN
RAFI MARG
NEW DLEHI - 110001.
6:DIRECTOR
REGIONAL DIRECTORATE OF APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING (ER) C.G.O.
COMPLEX
MSO BUILDING
D.F. BLOCK
SECTOR- 1E WING 1ST FLOOR
SALT LAKE
KOLKATA- 700064
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B GOGOI
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
ORDER
16.09.2019 Heard Mr. B. Gogoi and Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. P. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Directorate of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam for respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Also heard Mr. S. S. Roy, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam as well as learned Central Govt. Counsel for the remaining respondents.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents for release of the bill amount of Rs. 3,60,00,000.00 to the petitioner for the services rendered as per the Skill Development Initiative Scheme.
3. Case of the petitioner is that it is a society registered under the Registration of Societies Act, 1860 having its registered office at Jorhat. It is known by the name of Central Institute of Paramedical Technology and Science Society (petitioner society hereinafter). It was Page No.# 3/9 set up in the year 2009 with the objective of imparting paramedical and related skill development training. It is affiliated to the National Council for Vocational Training (Medical and Nursing) and is also registered under the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India. According to the petitioner society, it has the necessary infrastructure for imparting such training.
4. Govt. of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment has started a scheme called Central Development Initiative Scheme which is based on modular employable skills. In so far State of Assam is concerned the scheme is being implemented through the Directorate of Employment and Craftsman Training, Assam.
4.1. Training under the Skill Development Initiative Schemes (briefly the scheme hereinafter) is provided by the various vocational training providers like the petitioner society. Enrollment of such provider of such skill development is through online application. Petitioner society having fulfilled all the required criteria and having the necessary infrastructure applied for registration online before the Directorate of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam. In this connection, necessary inspection was carried out whereafter the vocational training provider i.e. the petitioner society was granted registration on payment of bank guarantee. Petitioner society was granted approval for imparting 11 training courses for skill development covering the following subjects:-
"i) Basic of Anatomy & Physiology
ii) Dresser
iii) Midwifery Assistant
iv) Dental Ceramic Assistant
v) Dental Ceramic Technician
vi) Pharmacy Assistant
vii) Health Care Multipurpose Worker,
viii) Nursing Aides
ix) Laboratory Assistant
x) Radiology Technician
xii) Laboratory Technician."
Page No.# 4/9
5. Regarding methodology of training, it is stated that for such training there has to be online registration of candidates and training imparted. On completion of training examination schedule is to be notified online whereafter examinations should be conducted. After declaration of results and considering the number of passed out candidates, bills were to be prepared and submitted to the Directorate of Employment and Craftsman Training online.
6. Petitioner society started imparting training in the 11 courses to the enrolled trainees for the year 2014 onwards. Examinations were conducted from time to time by the assessing body whereafter results were declared. Depending on the number of passed out candidates bills were submitted by the petitioner society to the Directorate as per rates provided under the scheme.
7. It is stated that Govt. of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment issued a letter dated 17.07.2014 addressed to Principal Secretaries, Directorates and Commissioners of all States/Union Territories dealing with implementation of the scheme. In the said letter, it was mentioned that while reviewing the performance of the scheme it was noticed that many vocational training providers had imparted training to more than 500 persons in one place in one year which appeared to be on the higher side. It was observed that such vocational training providers should be re-inspected to ascertain the training facilities to train such a large number of persons in one year. Alongwith the said letter a list of vocational training providers which had trained more than 500 candidates in one year was annexed which included name of the petitioner society.
8. Petitioner has stated that no such inspection was carried out in so far petitioner society is concerned.
9. Be that as it may, following training, examination and passing out of candidates, petitioner society submitted a number of bills dated 15.05.2014, 25.11.2014, 11.11.2014, 08.12.2014 and 03.03.2015 for a total amount of Rs.3,60,00,000.00. While the said amount Page No.# 5/9 was not paid, petitioner society came to learn that during the financial year 2017-2018, Govt. of Assam in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department had sanctioned an amount of Rs.686.03 lakhs for clearance of liabilities of vocational training providers and assessing bodies under the scheme.
10. Despite sanctioning of said amount no payment was made to the petitioner society.
11. Aggrieved, present writ petition came to be filed seeking the reliefs as indicated above. This Court by order dated 08.06.2018 had issued notice.
12. Respondent No. 3 representing Directorate of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam in his affidavit has admitted that petitioner society was registered as vocational training provider to offer courses on the 11 subjects under the Skill Development Initiative Scheme (SDIS). It is stated that as per letter of Director General of Employment and Training, Govt. of India dated 17.07.2014, the institute run by the petitioner society gave training to 2501 candidates in one year which seemed to be on the higher side. Following the same, a direction was issued by the Directorate of Employment and Craftsman Training on 08.09.2014 for inspection of the vocational training providers which had given training to more than 500 trainees in one year including the institute of the petitioner society. Accordingly, the institute run by the petitioner society was inspected by the Principal of Industrial Training Institute, Tinsukia who thereafter submitted report on 05.11.2014 stating that the infrastructure was found to be insufficient for practical training. Following the inspection report Directorate of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner society on 23.12.2014 followed by suspension order on 02.01.2015. Sri Ranjit Barua, Administrative Officer of the institute run by the petitioner society submitted representation dated 19.06.2015 for withdrawal of suspension. It is clarified by respondent No. 3 that on the basis of inspection report registration of the vocational training provider of the petitioner society was suspended due to poor training infrastructure whereafter training batch number was withdrawn and kept in abeyance. Respondent No. 3 has stated that an amount of Page No.# 6/9 Rs.55,57,280.00 has been paid to the petitioner society against bills submitted for the financial years 2014-15 and 2015-16. It is further stated that Government of Assam has requested the Directorate to arrive at a balanced decision on the administrative claims of the vocational training providers like the petitioner society and thereafter to clear the claims in chronological manner for which an amount of Rs.686.03 has been sanctioned.
12.1. Respondent No. 3 has further stated that for proper verification a Committee was constituted for disbursal of the sanctioned amount. Committee pointed out that Govt. of India in its letter dated 03.12.2014 had directed to take action against vocational training providers which had trained more than 500 candidates per year.
13. Respondent No. 1 in his affidavit has stated that Govt. of Assam in the Labour and Employment Department had asked the Directorate on 20.02.2018 to take a conclusive decision as to admissibility of the claims made by vocational training providers and thereafter to clear those claims in a chronological manner.
14. Petitioner has submitted rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit of respondent No. 3. In the rejoinder affidavit stand taken is that the scheme prescribes intake of minimum 20/30 students in a batch but there is no limit prescribed in the scheme that number of candidates trained in a year should be below 500 and that in the event the number exceeds 500 registrations would be cancelled or suspended. Contention of respondent No. 3 that providing training to 2501 candidates in one year was on the higher side has been described as untenable. It is stated that petitioner society has not been given any show-cause notice till date. The institution run by the petitioner society was suspended on 02.01.2015. But despite representation suspension has not been revoked for which petitioner society had to stop imparting training leading ultimately to closure of the institute in July, 2015. In the rejoinder affidavit petitioner society has stated that an amount of Rs.55,57,280.00 has been paid to the petitioner during the suspension period. But the arrear amount of Rs.3,60,00,000.00 has not been paid. It is contended that when an amount of Rs.55,57,280.00 could be released to the petitioner society during the suspension period, there could be no justifiable reason for not Page No.# 7/9 releasing the remaining amount.
15. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties are on pleaded lines. Therefore, a detailed reference to the same is considered not necessary. However, submissions so made have been duly considered.
16. Before adverting to the rival contentions it would be apposite to refer to the Skill Development Initiative Scheme (already referred to as the scheme) based on modular employable skills framed by Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India. In this connection, an operations manual was issued by the Govt. of India in December, 2014.
17. As per National Skill Development Policy, India has set up a target of creating 500 million skilled workers by 2022. Director General of Employment and Training, Ministry of Labour and Employment is the nodal body for formulating policies etc under the aegis of the training advisory body called National Council of Vocational Training. In fact, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India launched the Skill Development Initiative Scheme in May, 2007. Objective of the scheme is to provide vocational training to the people by optimally utilizing the infrastructure available in Government, private institutions and industry. Existing skills of persons can also be tested and certified under the scheme. One of the key features of the scheme is that Central Government facilitates, funds and promotes training while industry, private sector and State Governments provide training to the persons. Another key feature is that testing of skills of trainees is by independent assessing bodies which are not involved in training delivery which is to ensure an impartial assessment by the employer itself. Various procedures have been laid down providing for assessment schedule of the vocational training providers. Furthermore the maximum number of batches of trainees a registered vocational training provider can take up on a day shall be prescribed by the state directorate. Payment towards all reimbursement claims were required to be settled within 30 days from the date of receipts of the bills.
18. Having noticed the above, it is seen that Govt. of India in the Ministry of Labour Page No.# 8/9 and Employment vide its letter dated 17.07.2014 noted that while reviewing the performance of the scheme it was found that there were many vocational training providers which had trained more than 500 persons in one year which seemed to be on a higher side. It was observed that such providers should be re-inspected to ascertain the training facilities capable of training such large number of persons in a year.
19. Materials on record further discloses that Govt. of Assam in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department had written to the Directorate on 20.02.2018 to clear the claims of vocational training providers and assessment bodies by ensuring utilization of the sanctioned amount of 686.03 lakhs and thereafter to submit utilization certificates. From the affidavit of respondent No. 3, it is seen that registration of the vocational training provider of the petitioner society was suspended on 02.01.2014 which suspension order is continuing till date despite representation submitted on behalf of the petitioner society. From the affidavit it further appears that an inspection of the vocational training provider of the petitioner society was carried out by the Principal, Industrial Training Institute, Tinsukia alongwith Superintendent of Regional Training Institute for Women, Tinsukia on 05.11.2014. As per their report, it is stated that petitioner society had imparted training to 2501 candidates till the date of preparation of report which was confirmed from the object wise list of placement of the candidates submitted by the petitioner society to the Directorate. However, infrastructure was found to be insufficient. Matter was left to the Directorate for taking a decision. It has also come on record that an amount of Rs.55,57,280.00 has been paid to the petitioner society against bills for the years 2014-15 and 2015-16 i.e. after the vocational training provider was placed under suspension.
20. From the conspectus of facts narrated above what is discernible is that respondents have not disputed the fact that petitioner society had imparted training to 2501 trainees. What is however contended is that the infrastructure for providing such training was insufficient. Though the vocational training provider of the petitioner society was placed under suspension on 02.01.2015 an amount of Rs.55,57,280.00 was paid to the petitioner society thereafter for the training provided. Govt. of Assam had instructed the Director to take a final decision in the Page No.# 9/9 matter one way or the other and thereafter to submit report with utilization certificates because unless utilization certificates are submitted by the Director and thereafter by the Govt. of Assam subsequent funds would not be realized by the Central Govt.
21. Therefore, in the opinion of the Court, withholding of the amount due to the petitioner society by the Directorate on the ground that vocational training provider of the petitioner society is under suspension cannot be justified. More than 4 years have gone by since the suspension order was passed on 02.01.2015 but no final decision has been taken. This has not only adversely affected the petitioner society but also utilization of funds by the Directorate itself in the State of Assam.
22. Accordingly and in the light of the above, respondent No. 3 is directed to take a decision regarding suspension of the vocational training provider of the petitioner society and release of the outstanding dues of the petitioner society within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, having regard to the discussions made above.
23. Whatever decision is taken the same shall be communicated to the petitioner as well as to the Govt. of Assam in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department.
24. Writ petition is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant