ARUN JOSEPH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is stated to be a student of the Government I.T.I., Chalakkudy; and his singular plea is that the curriculum of the course be ordered to be re-designed by the respondents, thus rendering only five days of the week to be working, with Saturdays and Sundays being holidays.

(2.) Sri.Sherry J.Thomas - learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the afore plea of his client, pointed out that the syllabus of the I.T.I. has been now revisited under the National Skill Qualification Frame Work Scheme, and that the hours of training have been reduced to 1200 hours from the earlier 1600 hours. He submitted that, therefore, his client preferred Ext.P1 representation before the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Kerala, specifying the manner in which the working hours can be modulated, thus allowing two days of week to be holidays; but that this has been rejected by the Government through Ext.P2 order, merely saying that if his request is to be allowed, then the number of casual leave for the employees will have to be reduced to 15 from 20 presently entitled. He says that, the reasons in Ext.P2 are not good enough to reject Ext.P1, because, what he projected was a method, whereby, students would be in a position to engage in other "permissible courses along with the I.T.I. for better job perspective" (sic). He thus prayed that Ext.P2 be set aside and the Government be directed to reconsider Ext.P1 in terms of law.

(3.) Smt.Vidya Kuriakose - learned Government Pleader, in response, submitted that the intention of the petitioner appears to be very confutative, because, even though, in the 1st paragraph of the memorandum of this writ petition, he says that "he is an industrious student intending to do additional permissible courses along with the I.T.I. for better job perspective" (sic), in Ext.P1, what he has stated is that the financially backward students can use Saturdays and Sundays to work and "obtain resources for physical and mental pleasure" (sic). She submitted that, in any event, a student cannot dictate the manner of the course or the methodology of the curriculum; and, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. She concluded saying that, nevertheless, the Government had considered Ext.P1 on its merits, but has rejected the petitioner's request because of the reasons that are stated therein. She, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.