LAWS(P&H)-2011-1-494

RAKESH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

Decided On January 25, 2011
RAKESH Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of all the eight writ petitions i.e CWP No. 7089 of 2010 titled Rakesh v. State of Haryana and Ors. CWP No. 7096 of 2010 titled Parveen v. State of Haryana and Ors. CWP No. 7110 of 2010 titled Hans Raj v. State of Haryana and Ors. CWP No. 7111 of 2010 titled Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana and Ors. CWP No. 7113 of 2010 titled Satpal v. State of Haryana and Ors. CWP No. 7116 of 2010 titled Bhupinder v. State of Haryana and Ors. CWP No. 7143 of 2010 titled Jai Bhagwan v. State of Haryana and Ors. and CWP No. 7165 of 2010 titled Naveen Kumar v. State of Haryana and Ors., by a common order as in all the writ petitions, the question of law involved is the same.

(2.) The short grievance of the Petitioners herein is that they are students of ITI course being run by the Respondents which course is of one year and commenced in January 2009. They attended the classes upto January 2010. As per the requirement, they were to attend a total of 80% lectures so delivered. In the said session, 261 lectures were delivered and the lectures attended by all the Petitioners are given below: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_494_LAWS(P&H)1_2011_1.html</FRM>

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners contends that with reference to the shortage of nine lectures, the Respondents do not have any hard and fast rule to condone the shortage of lectures in the cases of students who have been found to have attended less than requisite number of lectures and the power to condone vests with the Director, who in ordinary circumstances, can condone the shortage upto one percent and in the given set of circumstances condone more in the eventuality of the person explaining the cause which prevented him from attending the requisite number of lectures.