Full Text
W.P.(C) 4292/2015
ASCEND PRIVATE ITI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Sanjay Sharawat and Mr Ratish Kumar, Advocates.
Through; Mr Dev. P. Bhardwaj, CGSC for R-1.
Mr Vikas Chopra, Advocate for W-2 with Mr Amit Rohilla, Officer ofR-2.
BHAVITHA PRIVATE ITI Petitioner
Through: Mr Sanjay Sharawat and Mr Ratish Kumar, Advocates.
Through: Ms Anubha Bhardwaj with Mr Dev.
P. Bhardwaj, CGSC for R-l/UOI.
Mr Vikas Chopra, Advocate for W-2 with Mr Amit Rohilla, Officer ofR-2.
06.05.2015
ORDER
1. Issue notice.
2. The learned counsels for the respondents accept notice.
3. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal. 2015:DHC:11831
4. The petitioner in W.P (C) 4292/2015 (hereafter also referred to as the 'Ascend Institute') has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under "(a) Issue a writ of mandamus and direct the Respondent no.2 to accept and register the application of the Petitioner online application user ID No.PTGl5018406 dated 10.04.2015] for seeking accreditation for setting up new Private Industrial Training Institute [ITI] with an intake of 2 units with 3 shifts for Electrician trade with a ftirther direction to process and decide the same in accordance with law for August, 2015 academic session"
5. Briefly, stated the relevant facts pertaining to W.P.(C)4292/2015 are that the Lovem Education Society established an Industrial Training Institute (hereafter 'ITI') in District Telangana for imparting training for the Electrician trade, that is, the Ascend Institute. As per the prevalent Rules and Policy, an ITI is required to submit an application for recognition with the Quality Council of India (hereafter 'QCI') through online mode via the QCI portal. There is no provision for submitting hard copies of the application. The fee for processing the application has also to be paid online.
6. QCI invited applications from various ITIs for accreditation and the same were accepted online from 04.04.2015 to 10.04.2015. The QCI portal was, accordingly, opened at 00:01 AM on 04.04.2015 and was closed at 00:00 midnightof 10.04.2015.;
7. The Ascend Institute asserts that it started the process of filing the application at 10:00 AM on 10.04.2015. As the first step, it generated the application user ID and password; the details ofwhich are as under:- Application User ID: PTG15018406 Dated: 10.04.2015
8. Thereafter, the AscendInstitute commenced uploadingthe application form and other documents. It is asserted that approximately 100-150 pages were uploaded, however, the volume of documents and the connectivity posed a severe constraint. It is asserted that the connectivity in the concerned district ofTelengana was not good and, therefore, it took a considerable time to upload the necessary documents. To add to the problems, there was hailstorm/rainfall in that area on that day and this also disruptedthe internet services. The Ascend Institute asserts that despite mitigating circumstances it uploaded almost the entire form and after completing the entire process reached the stage of making payment through the online payment gateway. According to the Ascend Institute, this stage was reached at about 11:50 PM on 10.04.2015 and the process for making online payment was commenced. However, this also took a considerable time and was eventually completed at 00:07 AM on 11.04.2015 i.e. there is delay of 7 minutes in making the payment.
9. It is stated that because ofthe delay, the application was not accepted. Although the Ascend Institute took immediate steps to contact the respondents and its representatives also visited their office, the Ascend Institute did not receive any satisfactory response to its grievance.
10. The facts obtaining in W.P.(C) 4306 of 2015 are similar except that the petitioner therein - Bhavitha Private ITI, could not effect the online payment despite several attempts. Admittedly, attempts were made by Bhavitha Private ITI to make payment online till 2.00 AM on 11.04.2015 but the same were in vain.
11. The learned counsel appearing for the QCI states that the process of making the application and online payment could have been carried out simultaneously and it was not necessary for the petitioners to have waited for the application to be uploaded completely before starting that process. He further submits that the application filed by the petitioners were also not complete inasmuch as the details of tools had not been filled up. ThuSj according to the QCI, the respective applications of the petitioners had not been received by the QCI. The learned counsel for QCI has referred to the screen shots of the online applications, which indicate that most of the details regarding tools had not been filled up.
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners disputes the aforesaid contentions and has drawn the attention of this court to the clarifications issued by the QCI to frequently asked questions (FAQ's) which indicate that the payment gateway would be available only after the application is completed. He submits that, in any event, this is how the petitioners had understood the process as explained bythe QCI. Thelearned counsel for the petitioners fiirther submits that inthe event any deficiency inthe application form is found, the same wouldbe immediately corrected. He submits that in the normal course, the QCI does provide an opportunity to all applicants to correct deficiencies at every stage.
13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
14. It is not disputed that the petitioners commenced uploading the application forms online around 10:00 AM as asserted in their respective petitions. It is also not disputed that the payment was made by the Ascend Institute at the time as indicated - 00:07 AM on 11.04.2015. In case of Bhavitha Private ITI, it is admitted that several attempts were made by the said petitioner to make payment online - the last one being around 02:00 AM on 11.04.2015 - but the same did not go through, apparently, due to certain technical difficulty.
15. It is clear jfrom the above that the petitioners had commenced the process of submission of their applications within the prescribed period and there is no reason to disbelieve the petitioners that the process had got delayed due to bad connectivity. It also cannot be ignored that the petitioners had pursued throughout the day for submission of their applications. The respondents also do not dispute that the connectivity inthe concernedregion ofTelenganawas disrupteddue to inclementweather. It is also admitted that the petitioners had made immediate efforts to contact the QCI in order to persuade QCI to accept their applications.
16. Thus, the only question to be considered is whether, in the given mitigating circumstances, the petitioners ought to deprive of an opportunity to apply for recognition by the QCI.
17. In my view, the QCI cannot be faulted for fixing a rigid time schedule. Clearly, the window to apply online was sufficiently large; the apphcations were accepted from 04.04.2015 till 10.04.2015. The petitioners ought not to have waited for the last date to attempt uploading their applications. Surely, the petitioners would have known about the cormectivity in their region and ought to have taken timely action.
18. Having stated the above, it is not possible to be completely obHvious of the ground realities. In the present case, there is no doubt that the petitioners had tried their best to file their respective applications with the QCI. Plainly, the reasons for which their applications could not be filed were beyond their control.
19. In my view, it would be appropriate that if the QCI takes note of the mitigating circumstances and permits the petitioners to submit their applications. In the given circumstances, it is directed as under:- (a) That the petitioners would approach the concerned officers of the QCI with the complete details of tools in the format of the online application. (b) The petitioners would also produce the necessary evidence to satisfy the concerned officials of the QCI that the petitioners had purchased tools prior to the last date of submission of their applications. The concerned officer of QCI shall examine the same and if it is found that the petitioner's application is in order the same may be accepted and considered by the QCI.
20. The petitions are disposed ofwith the aforesaid directions. Dasti under the signatures of Court Master. MAY 06, 2015 MK/RK VIBHUBAKHRU, J