Disposed

Aravali Private Industrial Training Institute v. Directorate General of Employment & Training & Anr.

Delhi HC2 Sept 2015W.P.(C)/7092/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order directs the Union of India and NABET to consider accreditation applications within the shortest possible time, subject to petitioners commencing at least four trades by August 2017, enabling current academic year admissions.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed of directing Respondents 1 and 2 to consider applications within the shortest time subject to undertaking to start four trades by August 2017.

Aravali Private Industrial Training Institute Vs… — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2015)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA

¶2

Through: Mr. RatishKumar, Adv.

¶3

versus

¶4

DIRECTORATEGENERALOF EMPLOYMENT &TRAINING&ANR Respondents Through: Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj,CGSC for R-1. Mr. Vikas Chopra, Advs. for R-2. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Mr. Ankit Shah and Mr. Puneet Parihar, Advs. for R-3/State of Rajasthan.

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER

¶7

¶8

02.09.2015

¶9

L The counsel for the petitionersstates that the respondent No.3 Govt. of State of Rajasthan,vide letter dated 31®^ August, 2015 addressedto the respondent No.l Union of India (UOI) and enclosing a copy of the InterDepartmental letter also dated 31^' August, 2015, has permitted considerationof all applicationsfor accreditationreceivedon or before 20^^ January, 2015, subject to the applicant institutions commencing imparting education in at least four trades, by August, 2017. It is further stated that the petitioner in all the three petitions had submitted the applications for accreditationbefore 20^*^ January, 2015 and are agreeableto the condition subject to which consideration of their application has been permitted and 1" thus the petitioner in each of the petitions is entitled to accreditation / consideration for accreditation. 2. The counsel for the respondent No.3 State of Rajasthan confirms the said position.

¶10

Page 2 of 4

¶11

The counselfor the respondentNo.2NationalAccreditationBoardfor Education & Training (NABET) states that though it is bound by the directions of the respondent No.l UOI but the process of grant of accreditation for the present session is already over and it is for the respondent No.l UOI to take a decision on the communications aforesaid of the respondentNo.3 State of Rajasthanand whether, in pursuancethereto, the petitioners herein are to be considered for accreditation.

¶12

Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, counsel for the respondent No.l UOI in W.P.(C) No.436l/2015 states that in view of the aforesaid stand of the A respondent No.3 State of Rajasthan, the respondent No.2 NABET would be entitled to consider the applications for accreditation of the petitioners.

¶13

However, Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, Advocate appearing for the respondent No.l UOI in the other two matters states that the respondent No. 1 UOI would have to take a decision on the aforesaid communications of the respondent No.3 State of Rajasthan. The counsel for the respondent No.2 NABET also joins in the said contention.

¶14

The counselfor the petitionerscontrovertsthat the time is over. It is statedthat the last date for admissionis 17* September,2015.

¶15

'At this stage, Mr. Dev. P. Bhardwaj, Advocate also states that the processof considerationfor accreditationcan begin.

¶16

It is obvious that the respondent No.2 NABET now has the concurrenceof the respondentNo.1 UOI to proceed with the consideration of the applicationsof the petitionersfor accreditation.

¶17

Page 3 of 4

¶18

¶19

Accordingly,these petitionsare disposedof directingthe respondents N0.I&2 to, in accordancewith lawandsubjectto the petitioners/ applicants giving undertakingto commenceimpartingtrainingqua at least four trades by August, 2017 and complying with all the requisite formalities / requirements,consider the applicationsof the petitioners for accreditation, within the shortest possible time, so that the petitioners, if found entitled to accreditation, are able to admit students in the current academic year.

¶20

Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. ^

¶21

N-
<br>

¶22

RAJIV SAHAIENDLAW, J.

¶23

SEPTEMBER 02,2015

¶24

'bs'

¶25

Page 4 of 4

Aravali Private Industrial Training Institute v. Directorate General of Employment & Training & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aravali Private Industrial Training Institute v. Directorate General of Employment & Training & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Kr. Goel Vs Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors.

Premadhar Memorial Charitable Trust Though Its Trustee Vs Union of India and Others

Dayachand Vs UOI and Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Jain Vs State of Govt. of NCT and Anr.

Sh. G.J.Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Arun Chhibber and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Klm Royal Dutch Airlines & Another Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

Rajinder Mohan Malhotra Vs Vice-Chairman, Delhi Development Authority

Dayachand Vs UOI and Ors.

Kanachur Islamic Education Trust (R) Vs the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Anr.

Khalid Imam Vs Union of India and Ors.

Bansur Private Industrial Training Institute Vs Directorate General of Employment & Training (Dge&T), Ministry of Labour and Employment & Anr.

Ramesh Negi Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Para Medical Staff Welfare Association of MCD Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation (Ndmc) & Ors.