Disposed¶57

Vajirao IAS Academy Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC5 Mar 2025W.P.(C)/2787/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court directs Special Secretary, DSCST to verify and release pending payments to coaching institute under Jai Bhim Mukhyamantri Pratibha Vikas Yojna, following earlier order in connected matters.

What did the court decide?

Directions to Special Secretary, DSCST to conduct verification and hearing within specified timelines and release payment if due. ¶57

Vajirao IAS Academy Pvt. Ltd. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~103

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2787/2025

¶4

VAJIRAO IAS ACADEMY PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Roma Bhagat, Mr. Rohan Sharma and Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Advs.

¶5

versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Ms. Chandrika Sachdev and Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advs.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 05.03.2025

¶8

CM APPL.13222/2025 (Exemption)

¶9

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶10

Application stands disposed of.

¶11

W.P.(C) 2787/2025

¶12

The present petition raises a grievance as regards non-payment of the petitioners’ entitlement under the Jai Bhim Mukhyamantri Pratibha Vikas Yojna.

¶13

It is noticed that in the context of certain connected matters [W.P. (C) 702 of 2025 and other connected matters] filed by petitioners aggrieved with denial of benefit/s under the aforesaid scheme, this Court, vide order dated 28.01.2025, ordered as under:

¶14

“1. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioner seeking that the respondents be directed to implement “Jai Bhim Mukhyamantri Pratibha Vikas Yojna” dated 09.09.2019 in letter and spirit. The said scheme was introduced to provide quality coaching for economically disadvantaged SC/ST/OBC/EWS candidates to enable them to compete in

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/03/2025 at 12:11:33

¶16

competitive examination for selection in various government services.

¶17

2. Attention has been drawn to the salutary object/s of the scheme and the fact that the scheme contemplates that the coaching fees in respect of the enrolled students is to be borne by the Department for the Welfare of SC/ST/OBC/Minorities, Government of NCT of Delhi.

¶18

3. The order dated 09.09.2019, issued by the respondent / GNCTD, fixed the duration of the coaching and a maximum ceiling of coaching fee to which the institution would be entitled, per candidate. Various criteria were fixed for enrolment of the students, including that there would be a ratio of at least 75% of students from government schools. It was also prescribed that students belonging to SC/ST/OBC/EWS residing in Delhi, and having passed 10^th and 12^th standard from the schools in Delhi with total income of not more than Rs.8 Lakhs per annum, will be eligible under the scheme. For students having family income of upto Rs.8 Lakhs per annum, full coaching fees was to be provided / borne by the GNCTD. The scheme also contemplates that the income, caste or any EWS certificate duly issued by the office of the concerned District Magistrate should be obtained from the students by the empanelled institute.

¶19

4. Pursuant to the scheme, a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) was entered into with the concerned institutes who are petitioners in these batch matters. The MoA clearly sets out the duration thereof, the courses and quantum of fees which would be borne by the department, the eligibility criteria for candidates / students and also the funding pattern.

¶20

5. Clause VII (v) of the MoA specifically provides as under:

¶21

“(v) The first instalment amounting to 50% of course fees and full stipend for course will be released to the institutes after enrolment of candidates and on receipt of their details in the prescribed format. The second instalment of Grant-in-aid would be released (in shape of reimbursement) to the coaching institutes on production of Utilization Certificate, complete details of stipend paid to students coached and details of expenditure made, audited accounts certified by a Chartered Accountant, details of courses conducted and number of students coached and after receiving a satisfactory inspection report from the designated officers of the Department.”

¶22

6. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent / GNCTD has acted in abject disregard of the aforesaid stipulation and even the first instalment amounting to 50% of course fees was not paid to any of the

¶23

¶24

petitioners in the present batch of petitions.

¶25

7. Aggrieved by the non-adherence with the scheme and the terms of the MoA, the petitioners raised grievances, time and again with the concerned authorities, however, the concerned authorities paid no heed to the same. Finally, a meeting was convened on 13.12.2024 by the Special Secretary (DSCST) with the representatives of various institutes to discuss outstanding issues regarding release of their entitlement under the aforesaid scheme. The minutes of the said meeting reads as under:

¶26

“Minutes of Meeting

¶27

Minutes of meeting held on 13.12.2024 at 3:00 PM with the representatives of Institutes under the Chairmanship of Special Secretary (DSCST) to discuss the issues related with the coaching conducted by Institutes under the “Jai Bhim Mukhyamantri Pratibha Vikas Yojna” - Meeting No. 4 .

¶28

The Spl. Secretary, DSCST welcomed all the members and the following points/issues were discussed in the meeting:

¶29

I. Following participants expressed their anger dissatisfaction and frustration that they have not been paid for more than 02 to 03 years for the coaching imparted due to non-release of funds and stipends to the students and said that Mr. Virender Kumar. IAS (Retd.) who was the then Secretary (DSCST) for more than 01 year delayed the payments:

¶30

(i) Sh. Shailesh, Vice President, Chanakya IAS Academy.

¶31

(ii) Sh. Ankit Pahuja, Director, Pahuja Law Academy Pvt. Ltd. (iii) Sh. R.H. Khan, Managind Director, Dhyeya IAS (iv)Sh. R. Kumar, Head, Aastha, IAS

¶32

(v) Sh.Niraj Sinh, Managing Director, GS World IAS

¶33

(vi) Sh. Suhail Ahamad, Secretary, GS Mentors

¶34

(vii) Sh. DharamveerSeharan, President, Bright Brain Academy (viii) Sh. AjabLihare, Ajab’s Academy Pvt. Ltd.

¶35

(ix) Sh. Manish K. Gautam, Chief Executive Director, Alternative Learning System Ltd. (ALS)

¶36

(x) Sh. Pradeep Mishra, General Manager, Vajirao and Reddy Institute Pvt. Ltd.

¶37

(Action Deptt. of SC/ST)

¶38

2. That the institutes stated that they have no objection to the transfer of the stipend directly to the students account.

¶39

(Action: DD (Scholarship) to put up a note)

¶40

3. A proforma with the annexures was given to 10 institutes and

¶41

¶42

they were directed to submit this in this Department on or before 31.12.2024 with the requirements, as per the MOA. This is to process the pending payment. (Action: Coaching Institutes) ”

¶43

8. No follow up action is stated to have been taken by the DSCST pursuant to the said meeting.

¶44

9. In the circumstances, the present petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking appropriate directions for release of their payments for which they are entitled to under the scheme in question and in terms of the concerned MoA.

¶45

10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents have been following a policy of pick and choose as regards release of entitlement inasmuch as in case of some institutes, the necessary payments have been released by the respondents as far back as in 2022. However, no payment whatsoever has been released to the petitioners despite their having rendered the requisite services pursuant to the MoA entered into with the DSCST.

¶46

11. Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute that the concerned respondents are obliged to pay the requisite amount, if admissible under the scheme and as per the MoA entered pursuant thereto. However, he submits that the same is subject to scrupulous verification and furnishing of requisite information by the petitioner, as may be sought by the concerned department.

¶47

12. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they have no objection to providing all relevant documents / information in their possession, in any format as may prescribed by the respondent.

¶48

13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking note of the positive step taken by the Special Secretary, DSCST in convening a meeting on 13.12.2024 with a view to resolve the controversy, it is directed that each of the petitioners herein shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing by the Secretary, DSCST and a decision shall be taken as regards release of the monetary entitlement of each of these petitioners, in terms of the scheme in question, after proper verification.

¶49

14. Learned counsel for the petitioners has already undertaken, on instructions that all relevant documents in their possession, as may be sought by the DSCST, shall be duly provided by the petitioners. Let the process of submission of the said documents be completed within a period of five weeks from today. The same shall be scrutinized by the

¶50

¶51

DSCST and a hearing shall be afforded by the Special Secretary to the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter. After this exercise, the requisite payment, as may be found due and payable to the petitioners shall be released forthwith. In case it is found that the petitioners are not entitled to release of payment, or if there is any deficiency / deduction in payment (vis-a-vis the amount claimed), a reasoned order shall be passed, clearly setting out the basis thereof.

¶52

15. It is hoped and expected that the DSCST shall take expeditious steps to resolve the grievances of the petitioners and to ensure that the object of the scheme is not undermined or frustrated.

¶53

16. With the aforesaid directions, the present petitions are disposed of.

¶54

17. In case the petitioners are aggrieved with the outcome of the aforesaid exercise, they shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies.”

¶55

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner in the present proceedings stands on a better footing than the petitioners in the above cited case inasmuch as the requisite verification exercise has already been done qua the petitioner.

¶56

Needless to say, the same shall be taken into account by the Special Secretary and the remaining exercise qua the petitioner as contemplated in the aforesaid order dated 28.01.2025, shall be conducted by the Special Secretary in accordance therewith.

¶57

The present petition stand disposed of in the above terms. Pending application also stands disposed of.

¶58

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶59

MARCH 5, 2025/ cl

¶60

This is a digitally signed order.

¶61

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/03/2025 at 12:11:33

Vajirao IAS Academy Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vajirao IAS Academy Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lemon Electronics Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Jayanti Real Estate Developers Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 13(3) New Delhi & Anr.

Pacific International (through Proprietor Rahul Nakra) Vs Ds Goods and Services Tax (Ward 64) & Anr.

Chandra Rani Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Sushil Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Satya Gujral Vs Delhi Development Authority

Imrana Vs the Special Secretary (Home- Fsl) & Ors.

Himanshu Garg Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes & Anr.

Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

New Gen It Technologies Limited Vs Airport Authority of India and Anr.

B S R and Associates LLP & Anr. Vs National Financial Reporting Authority Government of India

Amar Singh Vs Delhi Transport Corporation

Anwar Shekh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Imrana Vs the Special Secretary (Home- Fsl) & Ors.