Kalinga Industrial Training Centre v. State of Orissa
2005-11-17
A.S.NAIDU, P.K.MOHANTY
body2005
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT A. S. NAIDU, J. : Kalinga Industrial Training Centre has filed this Writ application inter alia praying to accept the inspection report dated 11.3.2000 and to quash the order bearing No. 12363 dated 28.7.2000 passed by the Director of Technical Education & Training, Orissa, Cuttack, vide Annexure-8, de-affiliating the petitioner Institute form the National Council of Vocational Training, New Delhi in consonance with the de-affiliation order dated 14.7.2000, Annexure-8, issued by the Director General of Employment & Training, opposite party No.5. 2. On receiving rule, a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties taking the stand that with the objective of maintaining quality of training at the National level it is desirable to ensure that all ITIs/ITCs which enjoy National status in respect of affiliated trades/units continue to maintain the prescribed norms and standard. The trades/units are as per the prescribed procedure of NCVT and if the facilities are found deficient or inadequate to keep the unit operative , affiliation already granted is to be withdrawn. It is admitted that considering the availability of infrastructure facility, tools, equipments, instructors, three phase power supply, etc. the petitioner Institute was granted affiliation of the following trades/units in phased manner :- 1. Welder 24 (12+12) 2. Hair & Skin Care 16 3. Fitter 96 (48+48) 4. Electrician 64 (32+32) It is stated that periodical inspection of Director of Technical Education and Training, Orissa, which is done to ensure the facilities basing on which affiliation of trades/units was grant¬ed. On such inspection of the petitioner Institute, certain deficiencies being detected, a show-cause notice was issued and in response to that the petitioner Institute stated in its letter No.7.1.2000 (Annexure-5) that the Institute had been partly damaged by super-cyclone and as such certain deficiencies had been there. So, after observing all the paraphernalia for de-affiliation and as the petitioner Institute was fully aware of its deficiencies but could not meet the same prior to visit of the Standing Committee on 16.6.2000 though adequate opportunity was given to it on the basis of the recommendation of the Stand¬ing Committee which inspected the Institute on 16.6.2000, the trades specifically mentioned in Annexure-8 were de-affiliated by NCVT, New Delhi. 3.
3. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petition¬er countenanced the averments made in the counter affidavit of the opposite parties and submitted that as students have been admitted in the Institute in specific a trade, the authorities have acted illegally and with material irregularity in de-affili¬ating the said trade. After going through the materials on record we feel that the provision for opening a trade is very clear. Contravention thereof or not following the same is definitely will certainly create a controversy. That apart, it would be illegal for the Institute to admit students in a particular trade without the said trade is recognized or affiliated by the author¬ities concerned, and thereafter put forward a claim that the students should continue in such trade bereft of affiliation being accorded. Such submission by the learned counsel for the petitioner has no legs to stand and cannot be accepted. If ade¬quate infrastructure is not available, the authorities have a right to withdraw affiliation of a trade. Once such order of withdrawal/de-affiliation has been passed, the Institute is precluded form getting students admitted in the trade/unit in question. We are satisfied that no equity can be claimed by the petitioner institution which has failed to provide necessary infrastructure like tools, equipments, instructors, etc. which are mandatorily required for imparting education in a particular trade. As we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order Annexure-8, we are not inclined to interfere with the same and consequently we dismiss the Writ application. P. K. MOHANTY, J. I agree Application dismissed.