Disposed

Raja Ram Singh v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Oct 2013CWJC/11592/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner challenged the registration of a new institute by a respondent using a confusingly similar name. The Court directed the Director, Employment and Training to consider the petitioner's grievance and dispose of the representation within ten weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Director, Employment and Training to dispose of the petitioner's representation within ten weeks.

Raja Ram Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2013) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11592 of 2011

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Raja Ram Singh, S/O Late Deo Charan Singh, R/O Village- Mahawat, P.O.+ P.S.- Daudnagar, Distt.- Aurangabad, at present residing at MohallaVir Kuanwar Singh Nagar, New Area, Aurangabad and holding the post of Director Adarsh I.T.I., Jasauia Mor, Growth Centre Aurangabad.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner.

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Department of Labour Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶9

The Director, Employment and Training, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶10

The Principal, Industrial Training Institute, Gaya

¶11

The Director General, Employment and Training, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India, New Delhi

¶12

The Regional Director, R.D.A.T. (E.R.), Mos Building (F-Wing), First Floor, D.F. Block, Sector-1, Salt Lake City, Kolkata

¶13

Ramanand Pandey S/O Not Known to the petitioner, R/O VillageDhanibar, P.O.- Kishunpur, P.S.- Amba, Distt.- Aurangabad

¶14

.... .... Respondents.

¶15

====================================================== Appearance :

¶16

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy For the Respondent/s : Mr. G.K. Agrwal Ga10

¶17

Mr. S. N. Pathak, Sr. SC CG

¶18

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶19

6 25-10-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶20

The petitioner is Secretary of Sahyogi Samiti, Club Road, Aurangabad, a Society registered under Society Registration Act.

¶21

The Society has established a training institute bearing Adarsh Training Centre, Growth Centre, Aurangabad in the year 1995. It has due permission of Director, Employment and Training, Bihar for giving training in three Trades, namely,

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.11592 of 2011 (6) dt.25-10-2013

¶23

2 / 3

¶24

Mechanical, Fitter and Electronic faculties. The standing Committee of NCVT, Delhi has also granted recognition to the Institute in the year 2001 for providing training in the trade of Electrician and Electronics Mechanical.

¶25

The petitioner’s institution was subsequently granted due affiliation and permission in others trades as well by the Director General, Employment and Training, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, New Delhi.

¶26

The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent no.7 has opened Industrial Training Institute with the same name, namely, Adarsh Industrial Training Centre at Auragabad. The said Centre has also applied for permission and affiliation from NCVT.

¶27

The Principal of the petitioner’s institute also filed a complaint before various authorities in this respect. A showcause notice was issued to respondent no.7 and an enquiry was also made, which revealed that respondent no.7 has given the same name to the institution, as given by the petitioner, with an ill motive.

¶28

In view of the complaint and notice, respondent no.7 filed an application for changing the name of the institute as Super Adarsh Industrial Training Centre, Patna More, Aurangabad.

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.11592 of 2011 (6) dt.25-10-2013

¶30

3 / 3

¶31

Counsel for the respondents submits that respondent no.7 has changed the nomenclature of the institute. He submits that the address of Institute is Patna More, Aurangabad, whereas that of petitioner’s institute is Jasauia More, Aurangabad.

¶32

The petitioner submits that respondent no.7 has only tried to camouflage the whole issue by materially retaining the same name and only adding the word “Super” with an intention to deceive and to cash on petitioner’s reputation.

¶33

In case, if the petitioner files a fresh representation with respect to his grievance before the Director, Employment and Training, Labour Resources Department, Bihar, Patna, he would dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after due notice to respondent no.7.

¶34

With the aforesaid direction, this application is

¶35

disposed of.

¶36

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J)

¶37

Uday/-

Raja Ram Singh v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Ram Singh v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

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

Md.Firoz Alam @Md.Firoz Alam K Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Chandra Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandra Kishore Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Renu Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Malti Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Bibi Kaushar Jahan @ Most.Kaus Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.