Raman Private Iti v. Directorate General Of Training And ANR.

$~92 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11825/2018 RAMAN PRIVATE ITI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Yashwant Singh Yadav, Mr. A.K.Karthik & Mr. Anubhav, Advocates

Versus

DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Gaurang Kanth, CGSC for respondent No.1

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 31.10.2018 Impugned order of 13th September, 2018 (Annexure- A1) deaffiliates petitioner but gives no reason as to why petitioner along with other ITIs has been de-affiliated. Impugned order is passed on the basis of Inspection Report, which was conducted way back in the year 2015. It is the case of petitioner that copy of Inspection Report was not supplied to petitioner and vide communication of 12th March, 2018, petitioner had sought reasons for its de-affiliation but no reasons have been provided and instead thereof, impugned order has been passed, which is arbitrary on the face of it.

On the contrary, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, supports the impugned order and relies upon Inspection Report and submits that de-affiliation was done on the basis of minutes of Page | 1

meeting of 28th August, 2018 (Annexure A-10). Despite service of advance notice, there is no appearance on behalf of second respondent.

Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order and material on record, I find that impugned order is bereft of any reason. In the facts and circumstances of this case, petitioner is permitted to make a fresh concise Representation to second respondent seeking reconsideration of the impugned order.

Counsel for petitioner submits that a brief Representation would be made to second respondent within two weeks for reconsideration of impugned order.

If any such Representation is received, then second respondent shall decide it within twelve weeks by passing a speaking order and its fate be made known to petitioner within two weeks thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies, as available in law, if need be. Till the needful is done, impugned order be not acted upon and no admissions be made by petitioner till de-affiliation issue is resolved. Second respondent be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure its compliance.

With aforesaid directions, this petition and applications are disposed of.

Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE OCTOBER 31, 2018 r Page | 2