Lord Budha Private I T I v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18247 of 2018 ====================================================== Lord Budha Private I T I At & Post-Fatwah, Distt.-Patna (Bihar) through Authorised person Anjani Kumar S/o Dharam Bijay Kumar At-Sanjay Nagar, Road No.08, Post-G.P.O., Patna, P.S. Jakkanpur, Distt.-Patna Bihar Application Number:- PHH13001973 .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1.The Union of India through Joint Director, Govt. of India Ministry of skill Development and entrepreneurship Directorate General of Training Room No.105 near Pusa ITI Pusa campus, Pusa New Delhi-110012 2.The Director General of Training Ministry of skill Development and Entrepreneurship and Govt. of India New Delhi 3.The Director General of Appellate Committee National Skill Development Authority (NSDA) Kaushal Bhawan, Karol Bagh New Delhi 4.The Chairman Sub-committee NCVT Portal Chairman of Govt. of India, New Delhi

5. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Labour Resource Department, Directorate Employment Training, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bishwa Bijay Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Priya Gupta, Advocate.

Mr. Parul Prasad, Advocate.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has filed an application/appeal for grant of accreditation and affiliation before the Director General of Appellate Committee, National Skill Development Authority (NSDA), New Delhi. This is not in dispute that 30.04.2018 was the last date for submission of application/appeal and that application by the petitioner was submitted on 17.06.2018 i.e. after the time limit has expired.

Patna High Court CWJC No.18247 of 2018 (2) dt.11-09-2018 2/2 Learend counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that it was because of the poor net connectivity, the appeal could not be filed within time. He further submits that the institution was given the assurance by the authorities that time shall be extended for a reasonable period.

Be that as it may, what I noticed that the petitioner's application has been rejected as being time barred. This is not being disputed that the appeal was time barred. In such circumstance, I do not find any illegality in the impugned action of the Respondent.

Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. The petitioner shall, however, be at liberty to apply afresh in future. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Amit/- U