JUDGMENT S.PANDA, J. Since common questions of law are involved in all these writ applications, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Different Industrial Training Centres and the students of Manorama Institute of Industrial Training and Engineering, Chandikhole in the district of Jajpur, affiliated to Director General of Employment and Training (for short ‘DGET’) are the petitioners and have challenged the action of the opposite parties in disallowing some of the students to appear in the All India Trade Test Examination, 2011 even though those students are within the permissible units sanctioned in favour of the Institutions in Fitter and Electrician trades. 3. The students/trainees have taken admission in the academic session 2009-2011 and after admission, the institutions submitted all the documents for registration. The opposite parties did not verify the said documents. However, they verified the documents and issued registration number on 30.6.2011 by which time the trainees had prosecuted their studies and after completion of the courses, they were entitled to appear in the All India Trade Test Examination, 2011 which was scheduled to be held on 22.7.2011. The trainees filled up their forms and also deposited the examination fees in shape of Bank Draft with the opposite parties, which were also accepted by them. However, the opposite parties on 1.7.2011 circulated the registration numbers through their web-site in respect of some of the trainees and left out the other trainees both in Fitter as well as in Electrician trades. Therefore, the institutions on behalf of those trainees and the students in WP(C) No.19374 of 2011 filed these writ applications challenging the above action of the opposite parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the sanctioned unit, the institutions admitted the trainees and have given them training and on completion of the course, the trainees are eligible to appear in the test and all the certificates/documents of the trainees submitted for verification and issuance of registration numbers by the opposite parties. However, those documents were not verified in time and before the test, the opposite parties rejected some of the documents of the trainees without issuing egistration numbers to them on some flimsy ground. The learned counsel further submitted that had the opposite parties intimated the same sufficiently before the examination, the institutions could have taken action and explain/clarify those discrepancies. However, those documents were not verified in time and before the test, the opposite parties rejected some of the documents of the trainees without issuing egistration numbers to them on some flimsy ground. The learned counsel further submitted that had the opposite parties intimated the same sufficiently before the examination, the institutions could have taken action and explain/clarify those discrepancies. But without giving an opportunity to explain all those facts, the opposite parties have unilaterally denied to give registration numbers to those trainees. Therefore, interference of this Court is necessary for violation of non-compliance of natural justice. 5. By an interim order, this Court allowed the trainees to appear in the examination which is subject to the result of the writ applications. 6. The opposite parties have filed their counter affidavit. So far as sanctioned unit and affiliation are concerned, those are not disputed. However, the learned counsel for the opposite parties submitted that a Training Calendar was prepared for smooth implementation of Craftsman Training Scheme (CTS) confirming to National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) Norms & Standards in ITIs/ITCs. The said calendar specified regarding admission in private ITIs/ITCs which is extracted below: “In the cases of private ITIs, the identical date lines are to be strictly followed. Also admission should be made only in the trade/units which are NCVT affiliated as on the date. No admission should be made in anticipation of getting approval from NCVT.” 7. Learned counsel for the opposite parties further stated that the DGET in its letter dated 5.5.2009 intimated to all the State Commissioners/Directors dealing with craftsman training to give wide publicity for the admission seekers to confirm and satisfy themselves before seeking admission in any trade that the trade/unit in the Industrial Training Institutes (Govt./Industrial Training Centres (Pvt.) (ITIs/ITCs) is affiliated to NCVT. Accordingly, DGET published an advertisement in the local dailies and the petitioners should have followed the guidelines of DGET. He further submitted that some of the trainees have not completed two years course; rather, the institutions have admitted them just before the test in 2011. Therefore, the opposite parties have not issued registration numbers in favour of those trainees. However, it was fairly admitted by the learned counsel for the opposite parties that the documents submitted by the petitioners were not verified within the time fixed in Training Calendar and Planner. 8. Therefore, the opposite parties have not issued registration numbers in favour of those trainees. However, it was fairly admitted by the learned counsel for the opposite parties that the documents submitted by the petitioners were not verified within the time fixed in Training Calendar and Planner. 8. From the above facts and circumstances and the submissions made by the parties, it appears that the certificates and other documents of the trainees, who have taken admission, were submitted to the opposite parties for verification and issuance of registration numbers. However, the opposite parties have neither given any reason after receiving the documents nor verified the certificates and other documents of the trainees within the time stipulated in Training Calendar and Planner. 9. The Principals of the Institutions submitted the detail list of the trainees, who have been admitted to the course but the opposite parties without verifying those documents within the stipulated period and without affording opportunity to the institutions to clarify any discrepancy, have rejected their applications to issue registration numbers. These institutions are affiliated institutions and the trainees have the requisite qualification to take admission as prescribed in the training manual for Industrial Training Institutes and Centres. The Principals also certified that the students have completed the course as per the schedule. Therefore, before rejecting the applications to issue registration numbers, the opposite parties should have given the petitioners an opportunity of hearing in compliance of the principle of natural justice. 10. As a part of the Government’s National Skill Development Mission, National Skill Development Corporation was set up to implement Government’s National Policy on skill development. It has a target to skill 500 million people by 2022. At present, the skill capacity of the country is about 5 million, a deficit of more than 7 million annually who are not getting any training to be employable. To achieve the target, the Government is encouraging public/private partnerships to set up institutions to train people in different skill sectors. The present institutions are some of such institutions. 11. Taking into the difficulties faced by the petitioners as discussed in the above paragraphs, the action taken by the opposite partiers at a belated stage and the difficulties faced by the trainees, this Court directs the opposite parties to take step for submission of list of trainees for on-line admission and issuance of registration numbers as per the Training Calendar and Planner. The time schedule shall be strictly adhered to by the institutions as well as the opposite parties so that in future, this type of difficulty will not arise. 12. Since the students of the petitioners’-institutions and the petitioners in WP(C) No.19374 of 2011 have already appeared in the All India Trade Examination, 2011, the opposite parties are directed to grant registration numbers in favour of those trainees who have appeared in the said All India Trade Test Examination, 2011 pursuant to this Court’s order, publish their results and issue certificate to those trainees who have become successful in the said examination. The writ petitions are accordingly allowed. Writ petitions allowed.