THE ALLAHABAD High Court has dismissed a special appeal, challenging the judgment of a single judge bench, regarding the essential qualification for recruitment of instructors in various ITIs in the State.
The verdict passed by the single judge bench has also declared the amendment, made by the State Government in regard to qualifications, as illegal.
Earlier, the Central Government had issued an order stating that the ITI instructors must have advanced training certificate otherwise the institutions would face the risk of de-affiliation.
UP followed the instruction for a few days only. The State Government, through an amendment on December 4, 2003, had reduced the essential qualifications, stating that the advanced training certificate for ITI instructors should be preferable.
The court, after hearing the counsel for the appellant and counsel for the respondents, observed: “It would not be right to permit the State of UP to have different standard for this State alone within India and to have instructors who do not have the required advanced training. A State is not permitted in an all-India matter to cut out a pocket for itself and suit its own needs even if it might be practical and of benefit to some powerful sections.
The necessity of maintaining technical standard, specially in the current days of falling standards, has been emphasised by the single judge.”
Dismissing the special appeal filed by Pawan Kumar Sagar and others, a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice AN Ray and Justice Ashok Bhushan observed: “There cannot be two opinions about what the essential qualification of a training instructor in a Government Industrial Training Institute actually is. It has everything to do with the standard of a technical institution; that is the main and guiding factor.
No doubt, it is also a qualification necessary for obtaining service, but service is not the main factor. The reason for our concluding to this effect is that the Training Instructors should be looked upon more and much more, as those entrusted with the responsibilities of maintaining the standard of instruction rather than merely as part of a labour force.”’