Delhi High Court
Balaji Private Iti vs Directorate General Of ... on 8 October, 2015
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 9190/2015
BALAJI PRIVATE ITI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharawat, Advocate
versus
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF EMPLOYMENT
& TRAINING & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Ms.
Medha Arya and Ms. Rishika katyal, Advocates for
R-1 with Mr. P.S.Verma, Asstt. Director of
Training, Mr. Sushil Kumar, Dy. Director, DGT and
Mr. A.K. Tyagi, Asstt. Director.
Mr. Vikas Chopra, Advocate for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
ORDER
% 08.10.2015
1. Mr. Digpaul has brought an affidavit dated 08.10.2015 to court
which is sworn by Mr. P.S. Verma, Assistant Director of Training,
Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of
India.
1.1 A perusal of the affidavit would show that the principal
objection to grant of affiliation to the petitioner-institute i.e. Balaji
Private ITI, is that, the electricity connection is in the name of Shri
Maharana Pratap Health Care Foundation; which is a trust. This aspect
has been noted by me in the previous orders as well.
1.2 It is in this connection that I had asked Mr. Digpaul, the learned
counsel for respondent no.1, to obtain necessary instructions and have
an affidavit filed. In paragraph 10 of the affidavit, the deponent, Mr.
P.S. Verma, has stated as follows :-
"..10. That in the past the affiliation has been granted to the
institutes where the electricity connection as either in the name
of the Trust / Society or the Institute, provided proper meter
has been installed at the premises with no option of sharing for
any other purpose..."
1.3. To be noted, the assertions made in paragraph 10 by the
deponent makes it clear that it is not as if affiliations have not been
granted in the past where electricity connections are there in the name
of the trust or a society. The only caveat which is attached, is that, a
proper meter installed, with no option of sharing.
1.4 I would take it, that the last part would mean that the load
available should not be used for any other purpose.
2. Mr. Sharawat has taken me through the proforma form that an
institute is required to file for the purposes of grant of affiliation. This
proforma is required to be filled up by the concerned institute for the
purposes of facilitating the preliminary inspection of its facilities.
Therefore, the proforma requires the concerned institute to declare
information with regard to the various aspects, including aspects
concerning infrastructure. The portion of the proforma form which
relates to infrastructure apart from seeking details with regard to the
land and building also requires disclosure of information with regard to
"power and supply". The information which is required vis-a-vis
power supply and which is asked for under heading-Vb reads as
follows :-
"..(V). Infrastructure
xxx
(b). Power Supply
(Note : Electrical Connection should be in the name of the
ITI / Management / Owner of premises)
xxxxx
xxxxx
xxxxx
(Note : The energy supplied by DG set is to be measured by
installing Digital / Electronic meter at suitable location. This
energy meter is to be which is to be sealed by the State
Directorate Officers during preliminary inspection to avoid
any tempering)
Enclosures :
(i). For existing institutes : Electricity bill indicating
connected load is required to be produced (details of existing
trades, units should also form part of the inspection report to
assess the required electrical load).
(ii). For new institutes; meter sealing report indicating
sanctioned load or if meter sealing report does not have
sanctioned load, copy of the sanctioned load, proof of
payment of dues for the same along with meter sealing report
should be produced / submitted.
(iii). Where the institute is in the rented / leased building,
the electric connection should be in the name of the owner of
the institute / management and the mutual agreement between
landlord and the institute / Management / Society as, the case
may be, should be produced alongwith the current bill.
(iv). Declaration by the owner of the institute that the
sanctioned load is for ITI only / shared with any other
institute..."
(emphasis is mine)
2.1 The aforesaid would show clearly that the electricity connection
may be either in the name of the institute or the management or the
owner of the premises.
2.2 There is, therefore, no doubt in my mind that even in the
ordinary course, the objection with regard to the electricity connection
being in the name of the trust, was not sustainable. As a matter of fact,
Mr. Sharawat has brought to court, information downloaded from the
website of Ministry of Labour and Employment, Directorate General
of Employment and Training, which adverts various instances, where
the electric connection is shown as being in the name of the society and
not in the name of the concerned institute.
2.2 The examples to which reference has been made in the
downloaded information are :- Vivekananda Private Industrial Training
Institute; in this case the electric connection is in the name of
Ramakrishna Vivekananda Mission; Shri Ram Private Industrial
Training Institute; in this case the electric connection is in the name of
Kayam Singh Lok Seva Sanstan; and Shri Ganesh Private Industrial
Training Institute; in this case the electric connection is, in the name of
Upma Shukla, Shri Ganesh Udhyogik Prakshishn Sanst.
2.3 These instances only fortify what is stated before me by Mr.
Sharawat.
2.4 I may only indicate that in paragraph 13 of the affidavit filed by
Mr. P.S. Verma, an apprehension has been expressed based on the
electricity bills submitted by the trust, that power is being consumed
for some other purposes.
3. Having regard to the fact that an affidavit has already been
submitted by the trust that the entire power load of 25 KW would be
used for the purposes of the petitioner-institute, according to me, this
should not have been an impediment.
3.1 As to what was happening previously was, in a sense, taken care
of by the affidavit. Nonetheless, since the matter is reached the court,
Mr. Sharawat, to put the matter beyond doubt and further controversy,
has submitted has he will have an affidavit filed in the form of a
undertaking with the court which will contain, inter alia, the following
averments :-
(i). That the entire load of 25 KW, which is available to the trust,
will be utilized only, for the purposes of the petitioner-institute.
(ii). There will be no diversion of the load for any other purpose.
(iii). In case other institutes are to be set up under the umbrella of the
trust, prior permission of the respondents will be taken for load
sharing, if necessary and feasible.
3.1 Mr. Sushil Kumar, Dy. Director, DGT, Mr. P.S.Verma, Asstt.
Director of Training, and Mr. A.K. Tyagi, Asstt. Director are present in
court. I have asked them if, they, want any other safeguard to put in
the affidavit, they, as also Mr. Digpaul has conveyed to me that these
safeguards would suffice.
4. Accordingly, the matter is disposed of, with a direction to the
petitioner-institute to file an affidavit in the aforesaid lines, in court, in
the course of the day. A copy of the affidavit will be furnished to Mr.
Digpual. The respondents will thereafter process the petitioner-
institute's case for affiliation for the academic year 2015-2016.
4.1 No further orders are called for, in the captioned petition. The
captioned petition is accordingly, disposed of.
5. Dasti.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
OCTOBER 08, 2015
yg
