Mata Kari Devi Pvt. Industrial Training Institute I.T.I. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2942 of 2015 ===========================================================
1. Mata Kari Devi ( Pvt.) Industrial Training Institute ( I.T.I), Daula Chak, P.O. - Pawapuri, District - Nalanda through its Principal Amardeep Kumar son of Awdhesh Prasad Sinha, Resident of Village - Nosara, P.O. - Ganpura, P.s. - Noorsarai, District - Nalanda.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The secretary, State Council for Vocational Training (S.C.V.T.), Secretary Labour Department Government of Bihar, Department of Secretariat, Patna.
3. The Director, Employment and Training, Government of Bihar, Ministry of Labour Resources, Department of Employment & Training, New Secretariat, Patna.
4. The Assistant Director, Technical Education, Directorate Employment and Training, Bihar, Patna.
5. The Controller of Examination, Department of Employment and Training, Government of Bihar, I.T.I., Digha Campus, Digha Ghat, Patna.
6. National Council for Vocational Training (N.C.V.T.) Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Shramshakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi, through its Secretary.
7. The Secretary, National Council for Vocational Training (N.C.V.T.), Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Sharmshakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg,New Delhi.
8. The Director General of Employment and Training, Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Sharamshakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar For Union of India : Mrs. Punam Kumari Singh =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 11-03-2015 A K Tripathi, J.
After having perused the counter affidavit of the Union of India and the reasons indicated therein as to why students of the institution could not be included in the semester examination, the fault does not lie at the door of the Union of India. Obviously, there is failure on the part of the State.
2. It is left open to the petitioner to take appropriate legal remedy against the State for their omission and failure to take action within time to
Patna High Court CWJC No.2942 of 2015 dt.11-03-2015 2 / 2 facilitate holding of the examination with rest of the students.
3. However, so far as prayer of petitioner for a direction for future participation in examination is concerned, that will be contingent to fulfillment of the requirement well within time. Nothing else is required to be said at this juncture now.
4. Writ application is disposed of.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) R.K.Pathak/- U