Guru Nanak ITC vs State of Punjab and Others

Ranjit Singh, J.—The petitioner/institution has applied for grant of affiliation of three trades i.e. Fashion Technology, Electrician and Computer Hardware Mechanic with National Council for Vocational Training-respondent No. 5 through respondent No. 2. This happened on 19.02.2004. The petitioner would claim that the necessary formalities were completed and thus they were entitled to permanent affiliation of these trades. It is, however, noticed that the building by the petitioner-institution was shifted from Hoshiarpur Road, Nirankari Bhavan, Shahu Market, Dasuya to Hoshiarpur Road, Ward No. 10, Mohalla Keharwali, Dasuya. Between August 2007 to August 2008, respondent No. 2 approved the admissions made by the petitioner/institution. The cases of the candidates admitted were also forwarded to respondent No. 2. Reference is made to some Memo, which was issued to the petitioner-institution regarding pre-inspection in respect of trade of Electrician, Computer Hardware Mechanic and Fashion Technology.

On 20.09.2008, respondent No. 2 constituted a Standing Committee for pre-inspection of three trades at new place where the petitioner/institution had shifted but the affiliation Committee never visited the premises of the petitioner/institution to inspect the infrastructure.

Even communication was addressed to Director, Advanced Training Institute and the petitioner had deposited the requisite amount for inspection. Reference is made to the inspection for the grant of diesel trade etc.

Though the permanent affiliation was earlier granted but since the petitioner/institution had shifted the place, it obviously would need to be inspected afresh. Permanent affiliation could only be granted once the formalities in this regard are complete. The petitioner has filed the writ petition to say that admission slips are not being issued to the institution despite approach having been made in this regard by the Principal and accordingly has filed this writ petition.

In response to notice of motion, reply has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 to disclose that the petitioner/institution has submitted two affidavits giving two different addresses and thereafter inquiry was held to verify the fact about admission location of the petitioner center. The report of the inquiry officer is annexed as Annexure R-1. As per the requirement, the petitioner was required to confirm that after shifting, the admission at the old location shall be discontinued. The new location was offered from inspection of diesel Mechanic and report was sent but place was not offered for inspection of other trades. Rather it was intimated that as and when the place is ready it will be intimated. As per the reply, no case is made out for the grant of prayer made.

It appears that the petitioner has approached this Court by making misleading assertions. Once the petitioner had shifted the location of the institution, he was required to obtain the permission and affiliation before he could make any prayer for issuance of admission slips. The petitioner-institution is not even ready for inspection for the trades for which prayer is made for grant of admission slips. Apparently, the petitioner has made an attempt to mislead. Infact this was the submission made at the time of issuance of notice of motion that inspection of the new building has already been done but admission slips have not been issued. It is seen that inspection was only done for diesel and not for the trades on which admission slips are being sought. There is thus no merit in the writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed.