ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK W. P.(C) NO. 17677 OF 2009 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ------------- Indian Institute of Advance Studies (ITC) …… Petitioner -Versus- State of Orissa & others …… Opp. Parties For Petitioner : M/s. B. Routray, D.K.Mohapatra, D.Routray, S.Jena, D.Mohapatra, P.K.Sahoo, K.Mohanty & J.K.Samal. For Opp. Parties : Addl. Govt. Advocate, (For O.Ps 1 and 2) M/s. R.K.Ray, & K.C.Mishra, (For O.P. 3) ----------------------- Decided on 16.09.2010. ----------------------- P R E S E N T : THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE M. M. DAS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- M.M. Das, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner – institution seeking a direction to the opp. parties, particularly, opp. party no. 3 to publish the result of All India Trade Test, 2009 in respect of six numbers of students of the petitioner – institution of Electrician Trade, whose results have not been declared, within a reasonable time. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he petitioner-institution was granted affiliation by the National Council of Vocational Training (for short, ‘the N.C.V.T.’) in respect of four units (2 + 2) of Electrician trade and two units (1 + 1 ) in respect of Fitter trade with effect from the academic session 2007-08 onwards. On the students being given admission in both the Electrician and Fitter trades, the Principal of the petitioner – institution submitted registration proposal along with the registration fees in shape of a demand draft in respect of the 38 students in Electrician trade and 19 students in respect of Fitter trade which was received by the opp. party no. 3 on 15.11.2007. All the aforesaid students prosecuted their studies and completed their two years training within the stipulated period in the academic session 2007-08 and 2008-09. The petitioner – institution was asked to produce the original documents for verification on 29.5.2009 and, accordingly, the same was produced in respect of 36 trainees out of 38 trainees in the Electrician trade, since two of them could not submit the original certificates. During verification by the opp. party no. 3, the registration proposal in respect of 11 trainees could not be traced out in the office of opp. party no.3. 2 Those 11 students are from serial nos. 28 to 38. The petitioner – institution was, therefore, asked to submit the xerox copy of the proposal in respect of those 11 trainees so as to regularize the same. Though the petitioner – institution produced the xerox copy of the registration proposal in respect of those 11 trainees on 30.5.2009, but no registration numbers were allotted to them for which the petitioner – institution immediately moved the Secretary, SCTE & VT by letter dated 30.5.2009 under Annexure-10. As the Secretary did not take any action, even though the petitioner – institution submitted the xerox copy of the registration proposal, the Principal of the petitioner – institution requested the Chairman to intervene in the matter and to issue registration numbers in respect of those 11 trainees, whose proposal was not traced out in the office of opp. party no.3. On 10.7.2009, total 36 candidates in Electrician trade and candidates belonging to other trades were allowed to fill up their forms and they submitted their forms along with the fees in shape of Bank Draft for appearing in the All India Trade Test, 2009. The said forms along with the fees were accepted by the opp. party no.3. Admit cards were issued in respect of 34 trainees in Electrician trade in place of 36, along with Admit cards issued to trainees in other trades on 30.7.2009. One day after issuance of the Admit cards, i.e. on 31.7.2009, the All 3 India Trade Test was held and 34 numbers of trainees in Electrician trade along with trainees in Fitter trade and trainees in COPA trade were allowed to appear in the said test. However, out of 34 nos. of trainees, who were issued Admit cards in Electrician trade, 4 of them did not physically appear in the examination and, therefore, 30 candidates appeared, but the results of only 24 candidates were published and the results of six other candidates, who were allotted with registration numbers, were not published. The petitioner – institution ventilated its grievance and requested for publication of their results by sending letter dated 16.11.2009 under Annexure-5 to the Vice Chancellor, SCTE & VT, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. As nothing was done, the petitioner – institution, being aggrieved, has preferred the present writ petition for appropriate relief. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opp. party no. 3 denying the averments made in the writ petition that the aforementioned registration numbers were allotted to the said six students and stating that registration numbers were not allotted to them and, as such, they were not eligible to appear in the All India Trade Test. Annexures-2, 3 and 4 have been stated to have not been issued by the opp. party no.3. It has been further averred that the petitioner – 4 institution has submitted registration proposal for 24 students in Electrician trade on 15.11.2007 and paid registration fees for 38 students. According to the opp. party no. 3, the cut-off date for admission and for submission of registration proposal was fixed as 15.12.2007. The petitioner – institution without giving details submitted the proposal on 14.11.2007 for 27 trainees and after verification of the documents on 29.5.2009, registration numbers were allotted to 26 trainees out of 27 on 2.7.2009 as the trainee at serial no. 16 could not produce the certificate for verification. The fact that proposal for issuance of registration numbers of 11 trainees was not available is admitted by the opp. party no.3. 4. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioner – institution. In paragraph-6 of the same, the petitioner – institution has asserted that not only the petitioner – institution submitted the proposal for registration in respect of 38 trainees along with the bank draft on 14.11.2007, but also the said registration proposal was duly accepted by the opp. party no. 3 which is evident from Annexure-8 to the rejoinder affidavit. The amount was paid by the petitioner – institution for Rs. 1140/- for 38 students in shape of bank draft. From Annexure-9 to the rejoinder affidavit, it appears that the filled up forms along with the Bank Draft of Rs. 22,950/- was also 5 deposited for 36 nos. of trainees in the Electrician trade with the opp. party no. 3 which was duly accepted by it along with the amount towards fees for trainees in Fitter trade and COPA trade. The said amount was accepted by the opp. party no.3. 5. Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submitted that at this belated stage, the opp. party no. 3 cannot take a stand that registration numbers were not allotted to the six students, whose results have not been published. 6. Mr. Ray, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opp. party no. 3 vehemently urged that the writ petition involves disputed question of facts and that the registration numbers in question, which are claimed by six students, were allotted to the students of Akhandalmani I.T.C. and such students with the said registration numbers have appeared in the All India Trade Test held in the month of July, 2009 and their results have already been declared. 7. The Admit Cards issued in favour of these six students were also disputed by Mr. Ray to be not genuine. This Court called for the original admit cards, which have been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioners along with the admit cards of some of the students, whose results have already been declared. On a bare look at the said admit cards, it 6 does not appear that the admit cards in question issued to the six students are not genuine. There is absolutely no distinction between the admit cards issued to the said six students and the admit cards issued to the other students, whose results have already been published. In the admit cards, the registration numbers have been mentioned. In view of the above, the stand taken by the opp. party no. 3 cannot be accepted. 8. However, since it is an admitted case that registration proposal for 11 students sent by the petitioner – institution was not traced out, there may be some communication gap while allotting registration numbers to the six students which numbers are stated to have been allotted to the students of another institution, namely, Akhandalmani I.T.C. 9. On a holistic approach to the facts of the case and on scrutiny of the documents including the admit cards, this Court is of the view that the results of the six students, which have not been published by the opp. party no. 3 and have been wrongly withheld, should be published immediately. If, in fact, the same registration numbers allotted to the six students have been allotted to the students of Akhandalmani I.T.C., the opp. party no. 3 shall change the said registration numbers and allot separate registration numbers to those 7 students. It is, therefore, directed that the result of the said six students of the petitioner – institution, who have already appeared in the All India Trade Test , 2009 be declared within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this judgment. 10. The writ petition is accordingly allowed, but in the circumstances without cost. …………………… M.M. Das, J. Orissa High Court, Cuttack. September 16th , 2010/Biswal. 8 9