Judgment :- Petitioners in this Original Petition are Association of Industrial Training Centres of Kerala and Indu Jairaj, Proprietrix of Hi-Tech Industrial Training Centre, Mulanthuruthy. First petitioner is an association of the owners/managements of Industrial Training Centres in Kerala. The Association is formed and is functioning for the redressal of the grievances and for the better functioning of the private Industrial Training Centres in Kerala. The Industrial Training Centres are private sector Industrial Training Institutes which are imparting training to candidates appearing for All India Trade Tests of the Government of India under the Craftsmen Training Scheme. According to the petitioners, similar institutions run by the Government are called Industrial Training Institutes (I.T.Ts.) while those institutions in the private sector are called Industrial Training Centres (I.T.Cs.). Industrial Training Institutes are affiliated to the National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT). The standard laid down by the Council, syllabus, etc. have to be followed by the Training Institute. Original Petition has been filed challenging Exts. P1 and P2. Ext. P1 is a circular issued by the Department of Industrial Training, Kerala. This circular refers to a decision of the Government of India by which, the staff of private I.T.Cs. affiliated to NVCT should be paid a minimum of 2/3rd of the salary being paid to the faculty/staff members of equivalent level of Government I.T.Is. with immediate effect. Ext. P1 further states that decision was taken on the basis of the recommendation of the 31st NCVT meeting held on 31-11-1995 and conveyed vide Government of India letter dated 16-8-1996. It is further stated that the norms regarding payment of salary is a pre-condition for getting permanent affiliation. Ext. P1 is accompanied by the details of the salary. Ext. P2 is a communication from the Joint Director of Training, Ministry of Labour, Government of India. It refers to the meeting of NCVT held on 30th November, 1995 and its recommendation that a minimum of 2/3rd of the salary being paid to a Government servant of equivalent level should be paid to the staff members of the private I.T.Is. It says that the Government has accepted the recommendation of the council. It also reiterates that the affiliation will be snapped, if the salary is not given. Grounds stated in the Original Petition is that minimum wages can be fixed only under the Minimum Wages Act. It says that the Government has accepted the recommendation of the council. It also reiterates that the affiliation will be snapped, if the salary is not given. Grounds stated in the Original Petition is that minimum wages can be fixed only under the Minimum Wages Act. No notification is issued under the Minimum Wages Act nor any opportunity given to the petitioners nor the procedure of the Minimum Wages Act followed.A counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent-Director of Training. In paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit, it is stated as follows : "ITI/ITC courses are conducted all over India under norms fixed by N.C.V.T. and N.C.V.T. is the authority to sanction affiliation to the ITC's and ITI's. Detailed norms in respect of workshop space, area for theory class, infrastructural facilities, machinery and equipment, tools, qualification of staff, staff pattern etc. are fixed and descriptively explained in the Training Manual. The norms regarding minimum salary to the staff was fixed after much deliberations in the meeting held on 30-11-1995. This was done in order to get better service of qualified personnel in ITC's. It is further stated that the Minimum Wages Act does not apply to the institute in question. Two impleading petitions have been filed, C.M.P. Nos. 283 of 1998 and 456 of 1998. C.M.P. No. 283 of 1998 is filed by the Quilon District ITC Employees Federation and another. According to them, the staff will be benefitted by the present notification. At present, there is no uniform scale of pay for the employees so far as private institutions are concerned. In the other impleading petition, petitioner is the All Kerala ITC Staff Association. They also raised the same contention as the petitioners in C.M.P. No. 283 of 1998. Another impleading petition is filed as C.M.P. No. 40132 of 1998 by one P. K. Gopalakrishnan. He is the Instructor of Sree Jagannatha ITC, Tellicherry. According to that petitioner, there is nothing illegal in directing the petitioners to pay salary as directed in Ext. P1 and P2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents. The remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is a discretionary remedy. It is a case where the orders were passed by the Central Government and State Government directing the management of private ITC to pay at least 2/3rd of the salary that is being paid to the Government Teachers. The remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is a discretionary remedy. It is a case where the orders were passed by the Central Government and State Government directing the management of private ITC to pay at least 2/3rd of the salary that is being paid to the Government Teachers. Many contentions are raised stating that the minimum wages are to be fixed under the Minimum Wages Act. On a perusal of the Act, it is clear that the present dispute does not come under the Act. Counter affidavit refers to the meeting of the NCVT and also the discussions of the representatives of the employers and employees. It is as a result of the discussion that a decision had been taken in the 31st meeting held on 31-11-1995. No further affidavit or statement has been filed denying this. The management, after having agreed, cannot go back. Further, as per the decision in K. Krishnamacharyulu v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering - A.I.R. 1998 SC 295 : (1998 Lab. IC 405). In the above decision, it is held as follows (at p. 406 of Lab. I.C.) :"The question is : When there is no statutory rule issued in that behalf, and the Institution, at the relevant time, being not in receipt of any grant-in-aid; whether the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. In view of the long line of decisions of this Court holding that when there is an interest created by the Government in an Institution to impart education, which is a fundamental right of the citizens, the teachers who teach the education gets an element of public interest in the performance, the element of public interest requires to regulate the conditions of service of those employees on par with Government employees. In consequence, are they also not entitled to the parity of the pay scales as per the executive instructions of the Government ? It is not also in dispute that all the persons who filed the writ petition along with the appellant had later withdrawn from the writ petition and thereafter the respondent-Management paid the salaries on par with the Government employees. Since the appellants are insisting upon enforcement of their right through the judicial process, they need and seek the protection of law. Since the appellants are insisting upon enforcement of their right through the judicial process, they need and seek the protection of law. We are of the view that the State has obligation to provide facilities and opportunities to the people to avail of the right to education." In the present case, the State has issued necessary circulars or orders directing the private managements to pay at least 2/3rd of the salary given to the Government Teachers. Petitioners cannot shirk from their duties to pay the salary as directed by the Government. As held by the Supreme Court, petitioners are running institutions imparting education to the public. Public are availing of the benefit of education from the institutions. Hence, they are bound to pay salary as directed by the Government.This Court is competent to direct the private educational institutions to pay salary at the same rate which has been issued to Government institutions. Training Manual says that elaborate provisions have been made regarding the imparting of craftsmen training centre. It also lays down the staff pattern for the training institutes. The terms and conditions of affiliation shows that the institute should adopt the standards laid down by the National Council for Vocational Training in the matter of syllabi, scale of tools and equipment, shop layouts, methods of training and trade testing in force from time to time. The requisite number Of instructional staff and supervisory staff should be provided. They should be qualified and should possess experience for their posts. Unless a good salary is paid, the institute will not get competent Teachers. Further, the payment of substantial salary is a sine qua non to get the maximum services from a Teacher. Taking into all these circumstances, I am of the view that this case does call for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence the Original petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.