Delhi High Court - Orders
Jmd Private Iti vs Directorate General Of Training on 28 September, 2020
Author: Jayant Nath
Bench: Jayant Nath
$~A-4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 2529/2020 and CM No. 23985/2020
JMD PRIVATE ITI ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Sanjay Sharawat, Adv.
versus
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING ..... Respondent
Through Mr.Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC
with Ms. Mannu Singh and Ms.Indira Goswami,
Advs. for DGT
Mr.Achint Kumar, Adv. for Mr.Manoj Kumar
Singh.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
ORDER
% 28.09.2020 This hearing is conducted through video-conferencing.
1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-
"[a] Issue a writ of mandamus and direct the Respondent to delete/remove the unauthorized changes made by it in the information/data on the NCVT MIS portal [like mobile number etc] concerning the Petitioner on 24.02.2020 and restore the original data which existed prior thereto and bring the same in consonance with the data furnished by the Petitioner on. NCVT MIS portal at the time of registration and creating the user id and password; and [b] Issue a writ of mandamus and direct the Respondent to furnish to the Petitioner user id and password and with a further direction to it to activate/operationalise the NCVT MIS portal of the Petitioner to enable it to upload the data of the trainees and to do all other activities to enable the trainees to appear in the examinations commencing w.e.f 08.04.2020; and [c] Issue a writ of mandamus and direct the Respondent to complete the above mentioned activities well before 13.03.2020 as the activity of downloading the hall tickets commences from the said date as per communication dated 28.02.2020 issued by the respondent; and [d] Issue a writ of mandamus and direct the Respondent to evolve a rational guidelines and procedure for blocking and unblocking the NCVT MIS portal used by the Petitioner and affiliated UI's and to notify the same at the earliest;"
2. The facts show that essentially the dispute pertains to control of the Trust which has established the petitioner, namely, Mahabhodi Educational and Social Trust. The present writ petition is filed by Mr.Ashutosh Ranjan, the alleged Vice President of the Trust.
3. Learned counsel has entered appearance for Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh who has filed an application for being impleaded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would be appropriate that this writ petition be treated as a representation by the respondent. In my opinion, that would be the correct procedure.
5. Let the respondent deal with the present writ petition as a representation of the petitioner. If deemed necessary, the respondent shall call the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh for a personal hearing. The representation may be disposed of as per law communicating a decision to the petitioner and to Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent states that the parties were already called but the petitioner did not appear. In case, the party/parties don't appear when called for a hearing, the respondent is free to take an appropriate decision as per law.
7. The petition stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
JAYANT NATH, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2020 rb