Dpmi Vocational Pvt Ltd vs. Union Of India & Ors.

$~J
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Judgment pronounced on: 04.09.2025
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 and CM APPL.11372/2021
+
DPMI VOCATIONAL PVT LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Neha Rathi, Mr. Kamal Kishore
and Ms. Kajal Giri, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, CGSC
along with Ms. Gurleen Kaur
Waraich and Mr. Kritarth Upadhyay,
Advocates for R-1 to R-3/UOI.
Mr. Rohit Mahajan, for Respondent
No.4.

+
W.P.(C) 6141/2021 and CM APPLs.19443/2021, 55630/2023,

56220/2024, 74261/2024, 74262/2024, 7255/2025
VIROHAN PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Adv. along with
Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Sr. Adv., Mr.
Ravi Bharuka, Mr. Anshul Pandey
and Mr. Rohit Agarwal, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF
SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC along with
Mr. Subrodeep Saha and Mr. Prabhat
Kumar, Advocates for UOI.
Mr. Rohit Mahajan, for Respondent
No.4.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 1 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
JUDGMENT


1. During the course of hearing, the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 6141 of
2021 has confined its prayers to the following reliefs -
“A. Direct the Respondent No.4/ NSDC to permit the Petitioner to
generate the certificates from the SIDH Portal for all its balance 812
students who have been admitted in the deactivated courses that are
disputed during the FY-2022-23 and FY-2023-24 in parity with the
students of DPMI Vocational;
B. Protect all its 2212 students who have been admitted by the Petitioner
pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Hon’ble Court by making
the interim orders dated 06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021 absolute.
C. Pass any order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of the
2,212 students admitted in pursuance to the interim orders dated
06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021 passed by this Hon’ble Court.”

2. As regards W.P. (C) No. 3783 of 2021, it is submitted that

approximately 6000 students have successfully completed their respective
courses under the agreement dated 06.02.2015 (entered between the
petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 3783 of 2021 and respondent no. 4/ National Skill
Development Corporation), pursuant to the interim order dated 22.03.2021
passed by this Court. The relevant portion of the interim order dated
22.03.2021, is reproduced as under -
“5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances and the pandemic
situation, since there is a higher requirement of paramedical staff, as also
since the academic year is expected to commence shortly, any admissions
which may be made by the Petitioner shall be subject to the outcome of this
writ petition, and no coercive steps shall be taken against the Petitioner, or
against any of the students of the Petitioner, till the next date of hearing.”
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 2 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

3. The said interim order has been continued since then. It is submitted
that these students have been issued valid certificates by respondent no. 4.
4. In view of the above developments, the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.
3783/2021 has expressed disinclination to further pursue the writ petition.
However, the petitioner seeks a protective direction from this Court
restraining the respondents from revoking or invalidating the certificates
already issued to its students.
5. Considering that the primary grievance raised in W.P. (C) No. 3783 of
2021 stands substantially addressed, this Court finds it appropriate to
proceed to examine in detail the factual matrix and reliefs sought in W.P.
(C) No. 6141 of 2021.
6. The petitioner, Virohan Private Limited, is a technology led
healthcare training platform, engaged in providing vocational training to
aspiring allied healthcare professionals through approved Qualification
Packs and National Occupation Standards (QP-NoS) under the National
Skills Qualification framework (NSQF). The NSQF organises the
qualifications into ten levels and all such QP-NoS that are aligned to NSQF
levels are recorded in the National Qualifications Register (NQR).
7. Respondent no. 1, the Ministry of Skill Development and
Entrepreneurship (MSDE), is responsible for overall policy coordination
related to skill development across various sectors in India. It created the
National Council for Vocational Education and Training (NCVET), i.e.,
respondent no. 3, by notification dated 05.12.2018. NCVET regulates the
NSQF-aligned QP-NoS and is tasked with ensuring quality and
standardization in vocational training.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 3 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

8. Respondent no. 2, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
(MoHFW), is charged with health policy in the country.
9. Respondent no. 4, the National Skill Development Corporation
(NSDC), is a not-for-profit public limited company where respondent
no.1/MSDE holds 49% of the shareholding, and the private sector holds
51%. NSDC supports the expansion of quality vocational training
institutions by offering funding and accreditation.
10. Respondent no. 4/NSDC, had issued funding guidelines for the
purpose of setting up and expanding training institutes and becoming a
funded training partner for any of the available courses/qualification packs
approved by NSDC. These guidelines invited applications from private
institutions to become funded training partners for a tenure of 7 years.
11. Pursuant to the funding scheme, the petitioner submitted a detailed

technical proposal outlining the number of students to be trained, the
specific qualification packs and courses to be offered, project duration,
promoter’s contribution, and the quantum of funding sought. After
evaluation, NSDC issued a revised final Term Sheet on 13.03.2020.
Subsequently, a formal Loan Agreement was entered into on 12.06.2020
between NSDC and the petitioner Institute for a tenure of seven years.
Relying on this agreement, Virohan began enrolling students in 2020 in the
approved QP-NoS-aligned healthcare courses and commenced the training
programs.
12. However, on 17.02.2021, respondent no. 3/NCVET, acting on a
recommendation from respondent no. 2/MoHFW, issued an order
deactivating 21 approved qualifications of Healthcare Sector Skill Council
(HSSC), including four key qualifications offered by Virohan, namely,
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 4 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

Medical Lab Technician (MLT), Operation Theatre Technician (OTT),
Emergency Medical Technician (EMT), and X-ray Technician (XRT). The
said courses were ordered to be removed from NQR.
13. It is submitted that these four courses formed the backbone of
Virohan’s healthcare curriculum, accounting for approximately 89% of the
total enrolments annually.
14. Although the order did protect students who had already been enrolled
and had begun their training before the issuance of the order, however, it
restrained the petitioner from enrolling any fresh students for the said
courses.
15. It is submitted that the deactivation order was passed without prior
notice to Virohan, despite its contractual obligations and existing student
base.
16. Aggrieved by the deactivation of its major training programs, the

petitioner filed the present writ petition, challenging the impugned order
dated 17.02.2021.
17. Subsequently, on 06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021, this Court passed
interim orders allowing the petitioner to admit students into the
aforementioned four deactivated courses for the next academic session,
subject to the final outcome of the petition.
Order dated 06.07.2021 is reproduced as under –
“4. The petitioner, an institute for providing vocational education and
training for paramedical personnel and allied healthcare workers, has
assailed the order dated 17.02.2021 issued by the respondent no.
3/National Council for Vocational Education and Training.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the institute was set up
after an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and
respondent no.4/National Skill Development Corporation on 12.06.2020
for imparting training and providing qualifications in the field of
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 5 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

Paramedical Sciences. He submits that the petitioner has been
scrupulously abiding by the terms of the agreement and consequently,
admitting students and imparting education of the prescribed standards.
He further submits that respondent no.3 has, however, passed an order
on 17.02.2021 whereby the petitioner stands prohibited from admitting
students in four courses offered by it namely - Medical Laboratory
Technician, Emergency Medical Technician Advanced, Operating
Theatre Technician and X-Ray Technician. By placing reliance on an
order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench on 22.03.2021 in a plea raising
similar issues being W.P.(C)3783/2021 titled as “DPMI Vocational Pvt.
Ltd. vs Union of India & Ors.”, he prays that the petitioner be permitted
to admit students in the aforesaid four courses during the pendency of the
present petition.
6. Issue notice. Ms. Monika Arora, learned counsel accepts notice for the
respondent nos.1 to 3. She prays for time to obtain instructions. Upon the
petitioner taking steps, issue notice to respondent no.4. Counter
affidavit/reply, if any, be filed within three weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if
any, be filed within five days thereafter.
7. Having perused the order dated 17.02.2021 and the terms of the
agreement dated 12.06.2020, and in the light of the fact that the whole
world is reeling under the effect of COVID-19 when there is an acute
requirement of skilled paramedical staff; it is directed that the petitioner
be permitted to admit students in the next academic session in the
aforesaid four courses also. The admissions would, however, be subject
to further orders passed in the present petition and no special equities
will be created in the petitioner’s favour on account of it being permitted
to admit students during the pendency of the petition. Till the next date,
the respondents stand restrained from taking any action against the
petitioner or the students in respect of the aforesaid four courses.”
Order dated 06.08.2021 is reproduced as under –
“1. Despite opportunity, no counter affidavit has been filed.
2. In the interest of justice, the respondents are granted further two
weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed
within four weeks.
3. In the meanwhile, the respondents will strictly comply with the interim
orders passed by this Court on 22.03.2021 and 06.07.2021. It is further
made clear that once this Court has permitted the petitioner to admit
students to their institutions, they will be entitled to take all necessary
consequential steps – which, needless to state, will also be subject to
outcome of the present petitions.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 6 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

4. List on 08.10.2021”
18. It is submitted that pursuant to these interim orders, Virohan admitted

2,212 students between 17.02.2021 and 28.03.2024 across the four
deactivated courses. Out of these, only 1,199 students were issued course
completion certificates, while the remaining 812 students were denied
certification. It is submitted that the denial came despite the students
completing their training in accordance with the contract and under the
protection of the Court’s interim directions.
19. It is submitted that the assertion of the respondents that the interim
orders dated 06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021 were applicable only to students
enrolled during the academic year 2021–2022, and that the petitioner took
undue advantage by continuing admissions for academic year 2022–2023
and 2023–2024, is incorrect. It is submitted that the interim orders were
continued through various subsequent orders and NSDC itself permitted the
petitioner to admit students into the deactivated courses on the basis of
specific undertakings provided by the petitioner. These undertakings were
accepted by NSDC.
20. It is further submitted that with effect from 28.03.2024, Virohan has
voluntarily discontinued fresh admissions to the said deactivated courses. In
light of the above, the limited relief now sought by the petitioner is a
direction to the respondents to issue course completion certificates to all
2,212 students who were enrolled during the subsistence of the interim
orders and who have successfully completed their training.
21. In response to the claim made by respondent no. 4/NSDC that it is not
responsible for the issuance of certificates and that it does not manage the
Skill India Digital Hub (SIDH) Portal, which is the designated platform for
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 7 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

issuing such certificates, the petitioner submits that these assertions are
incorrect.
22. It is submitted that in official communications dated 27.02.2022 and
02.09.2022 , NSDC categorically informed the petitioner that manual
certification had been discontinued and directed that all the certificates must
be downloaded from the Skill India Portal (SIP). These directions squarely
place the onus of enabling certification via the SIP on NSDC. Furthermore,
NSDC’s Newsletter, NSDC Connect – October 2023 , clearly affirms that the
SIP is a comprehensive digital platform aimed at synergizing and
transforming the skills, education, employment and entrepreneurship
landscape of India, developed by the NSDC under the aegis of MSDE. It is
.
submitted that SIDH platform is also controlled and managed by NSDC
This claim is reiterated on the official SIDH website
www.skillindiadigital.gov.in.
23. The petitioner submits that the entire certification process is
technologically controlled by NSDC via the SIDH Portal. It is submitted that
the certificate generated from the SIDH Portal has some unique details
which is given by NSDC through SIDH Portal and cannot be given/created
by the petitioner. Such unique details are unique candidate ID, unique
Certificate ID and unique bar code, when scanned gives a unique document
ID.
24. The petitioner further submits that respondent no. 4 has engaged in
discriminatory and arbitrary conduct in the matter of certificate issuance.
Specifically, NSDC has permitted DPMI Vocational Pvt. Ltd. (petitioner in
W.P. (C) No. 3783 of 2021) to generate certificates for students enrolled in
identical deactivated courses. However, similarly situated students of
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 8 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

Virohan have been denied equal treatment, despite being enrolled under
comparable circumstances and within the same timeframes.
25. It is further submitted that NSDC’s own data submitted in its counter
affidavit dated 01.02.2025 (in CM Application No. 74261 of 2024), reveals
ad hoc and inconsistent issuance of certificates. Students from the same
course, batch, and academic year have been treated differently. Some have
been issued certificates while others have been arbitrarily excluded, without
any plausible justification.
26. In light of the above, the petitioner submits that its students are
entitled to be treated at par
with other similarly placed students and hence
prays for appropriate directions to the respondents to issue course
completion certificates to all 2,212 students who were enrolled during the
subsistence of the interim orders and who have completed their training
successfully.
27. While objecting to the aforesaid contentions of the petitioner the
respondent no. 4 has submitted as under –
a. It is submitted that NSDC is not an admitting, assessing, awarding, or
certifying body within the national skill qualification framework.
Instead, it operates strictly as an enabler and facilitator. Training
partners such as the petitioner are independently responsible for
admissions, training, assessments, and, where applicable, certification.
NSDC’s function is limited to supporting the digital infrastructure and
coordination required for such operations.
b. It is submitted that the final certification of courses is either be done
by the Training Partner itself (through internal mechanisms) or by
external assessment agencies or Sector Skill Councils (SSCs), which
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 9 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

are duly accredited by the National Council for Vocational Education
and Training (NCVET – Respondent No. 3). NSDC merely provides
the digital platform for data integration and lifecycle tracking, such as
through the Skill India Digital Hub (SIDH) Portal.
c. It is submitted that the training partners are responsible for uploading
data to the SIDH Portal, including enrolment, training progress,
assessments, certification, and placements. Once a course is
deactivated, the petitioner cannot update training completion or
generate final certificates for that course through the SIDH Portal.
d. NSDC maintains that the interim orders dated 06.07.2021 and
06.08.2021, passed by this Court during the COVID-19 pandemic,
only permitted the Petitioner to admit students for the academic year
2021–22. The phrase “next academic session” has been interpreted to
mean only the session immediately following the date of the order i.e.,
2021–22.
e. NSDC asserts that the petitioner continued to enroll students in the
academic years 2022–23 and 2023–24 under courses that were
already deactivated.
f. It is submitted that while certificates were issued to some students
from the 2022–23 and 2023–24 batches, such certificates were either
generated by the petitioner or by third-party SSCs. NSDC denies
having issued any certificate to students admitted beyond 2021–22.
g. It is submitted that in compliance with the interim orders, NSDC
reactivated the deactivated courses on the SIDH Portal to allow
completion and certification of the 2021–22 batch. Since the duration
of some of these courses extended up to March 2024, portal access
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 10 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

was maintained until that time. However, the petitioner continued to
admit students even during 2022–23 and 2023–24, taking undue
advantage of this operational leniency.
h. It is further submitted that NSDC does not grant or withhold approval
for student admissions. All decisions regarding enrolment are taken
independently by the Training Partner.
i. It is submitted that a meeting was held on 04.12.2024 and 05.12.2024
between representatives of NSDC and the petitioner, during which
NSDC reiterated its understanding of the interim orders and clarified
that no certificates should be generated for students beyond the
academic year 2021–22.
28. Learned Counsel for respondent no. 1 to 3 has raised the following
objections –
a. The order dated 17.02.2021 issued by the Ministry is a policy decision

involving deactivation of the aforementioned courses. It was taken in
exercise of the powers vested in the respondent authorities and is not
amenable to challenge under writ jurisdiction.
b. It is further submitted that the agreement dated 12.06.2020 is a purely
contractual arrangement between Virohan Private Limited and
NSDC/respondent no. 4. The Union of India is not a party to this
agreement. It is submitted that Clauses 10 and 11 of the agreement lay
down a comprehensive dispute resolution mechanism through
arbitration, clearly ousting the jurisdiction of the writ court in such
contractual disputes. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable
and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 11 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

c. It is submitted that this Court, vide its interim order dated 06.07.2021,
had granted limited relief to the petitioner in the backdrop of the
COVID-19 pandemic. The Court expressly permitted the petitioner to
admit students only for the “next academic session” (i.e., 2021–2022)
in four specific deactivated courses. The Court further made it
explicitly clear that such admissions would be subject to final
outcome of the petition and that no equities shall arise in favour of the
petitioner by virtue of such interim arrangement.
d. It is submitted that the petitioner never sought any extension of the
interim relief beyond July 2022. Despite the absence of further
directions from the Court, the petitioner proceeded to admit students
in academic sessions 2022–2023 and 2023–2024, claiming to do so
under the garb of the interim order.
e. It is submitted that the petitioner also misrepresented facts by

suggesting that the courses were deactivated only from 28.03.2024,
whereas in reality, the courses had been deactivated from 17.02.2021
itself.
29. This Court has heard both parties at length. It is an admitted position
that the petitioner is no longer challenging the order dated 17.02.2021. In
fact, the petitioner has expressly submitted that it has ceased enrolling any
new students for the concerned courses with effect from 28.03.2024. The
only limited relief now sought by the petitioner is a direction to the
respondents to issue certificates of completion to students who have
successfully completed their respective courses, in terms of the interim
orders passed by this Court on 06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 12 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

30. Given the narrow scope of the relief presently sought, this Court finds
no merit in the respondent’s objection that the order dated 17.02.2021
reflects a policy decision (relating to the deactivation of the aforementioned
courses) and, therefore, precludes judicial review under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, in the facts and circumstances of the case. As noted,
the petitioner is not challenging the policy decision itself, but is merely
seeking issuance of certificates to the students who have already completed
their courses pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court.
31. With regard to the second objection raised by the respondent that
Clauses 10 and 11 of the agreement dated 12.06.2020, entered between
Virohan Private Limited and NSDC/ respondent no. 4, prescribe an alternate
dispute resolution mechanism, thereby ousting the jurisdiction of this Court,
it is well settled that the same will not ipso facto , oust the jurisdiction of the
Court, given that the impugned action/s affect the fundamental rights of the
concerned students as well. The legal position has been succinctly stated by
the Supreme Court in Unitech Ltd. v. Telangana State Industrial
1
Infrastructure Corporation , 2021 SCC Online SC 99 and UP Power
Transmission Corp. Ltd. v. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd. , 2021
2
SCC Online SC 383 .


1
“39......................
39.3. Article 23.1 of the development agreement in the present case mandates the parties to resolve their disputes through an
arbitration. However, the presence of an arbitration clause within a contract between a State instrumentality and a private party has not
acted as an absolute bar to availing remedies under Article 226.
39.4. If the State instrumentality violates its constitutional mandate under Article 14 to act fairly and reasonably, relief under the
plenary powers of Article 226 of the Constitution would lie.......
2
“67. It is well settled that availability of an alternative remedy does not prohibit the High Court from entertaining a writ petition in an
appropriate case. The High Court may entertain a writ petition, notwithstanding the availability of an alternative remedy, particularly:
(i) where the writ petition seeks enforcement of a fundamental right; (ii) where there is failure of principles of natural justice or (iii)
where the impugned orders or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or (iv) the vires of an Act is under challenge. Reference
may be made to Whirlpool Corpn. v. Registrar of Trade Marks and Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corpn. v. Gayatri Construction Co.,
cited on behalf of Respondent 1.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 13 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

32. In the present case, the petitioner has specifically alleged that students
admitted by it have been treated unequally and arbitrarily in comparison to
similarly placed students of other institutions. This, in the opinion of this
Court, raises substantial issues warranting the exercise of writ jurisdiction
despite the existence of a contractual arbitration clause.
33. Furthermore, the Supreme Court in M.P. Power Management
Company Limited, Jabalpur v. Sky Power Southeast Solar India Private
Limited and Others , 2023 2 SCC 703 has observed as under -
“82.9. The need to deal with disputed questions of fact, cannot be made a
smokescreen to guillotine a genuine claim raised in a writ petition, when
actually the resolution of a disputed question of fact is unnecessary to
grant relief to a writ applicant.
82.10. The reach of Article 14 enables a writ court to deal with arbitrary
State action even after a contract is entered into by the State. A wide
variety of circumstances can generate causes of action for invoking
Article 14. The Court's approach in dealing with the same, would be
guided by, undoubtedly, the overwhelming need to obviate arbitrary State
action, in cases where the writ remedy provides an effective and fair
means of preventing miscarriage of justice arising from palpably
unreasonable action by the State
.”
34. It is undisputed that, pursuant to the interim orders of this Court dated
06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021, which have continued to operate till date, the
deactivated courses were reactivated by the respondents. Relying on this, the
petitioner admitted students not only for the academic year 2021–2022, but
also for the subsequent sessions 2022–2023 and 2023–2024. The sole
controversy that now survives pertains to the interpretation of the interim
orders, specifically whether the interim orders permitted admissions only for
the academic year 2021–2022, or whether they also encompassed the
subsequent academic years.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 14 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

35. The respondents maintain that they are not obligated to allow
certification to students enrolled in the academic years 2022–2023 and
2023–2024, asserting that the interim order was limited to the “next
academic session” i.e., 2021–2022 alone. In contrast, the petitioner contends
that the respondents have already issued completion certificates to some
students from the academic years 2022–2023 and 2023–2024, while denying
the same to others. This, according to the petitioner, has resulted in arbitrary
and discriminatory treatment among students who have otherwise completed
the same courses.
36. In order to resolve this controversy, this Court, vide order dated
14.01.2025, directed the respondents to clarify whether any students
admitted in the academic years 2022–2023 and 2023–2024 had been granted
certification in respect of any of the four courses in question. The relevant
portion of the said order reads as under:
“1. In view of the urgency emphasised by learned counsel for the
applicant, let reply be filed by the respondents within a period of two
weeks from today.
2. Let the reply to be filed by the concerned respondent(s), clearly
disclose as to whether student(s) admitted in the financial year 2022–
2023 and 2023–2024 have been granted certification in respect of any of
the four courses which are the subject matter of the present petition.
3. List on 04.02.2025.
4. Subsisting interim order(s) to continue.”

37. In compliance with the said order, the respondent no. 4 filed a reply
dated 31.01.2025, thereby stating that the respondent no. 4 allowed
certificates for only those students who were enrolled in year 2021-2022 and
not for the student who were admitted subsequently in year 2022 – 2023 and
2023 – 2024.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 15 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

38. To the said reply the respondent no. 4 has annexed a detailed table
showing the number of students enrolled during the academic years 2021–
2022, 2022–2023, and 2023–2024, along with the status of their certification
[Annexure A (Colly)].
39. Upon a careful perusal of this data, this Court finds substance in the
petitioner’s grievance. The table confirms that while some students admitted
during 2022–2023 and 2023–2024 were granted course completion
certificates, others from the same academic years, though having completed
identical training, have been denied similar certification. This inconsistency
is demonstrable from following serial numbers of the annexed table :-
FOR FY 2022-2023
For Course duration less than 1 year
i.
-
Certificate given [S. No.449-453]


-
Certificate not given [S. No.518]


ii. For Course duration greater than 1 year and less than 2 years
Certificate given [S. No.14]
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 16 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

Certificate not given [S. No.15]


iii. For Course duration greater than 2 year
Certificate given [S. No.23]


Certificate not given [S. No.22]


B. FOR FY2023-2024
For Course duration less than I year
i.
Certificate given [S. No.350-353]


Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 17 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

Certificate not given [S. No.354]


ii. For Course duration greater than 1 year
Certificate given [S. No.335]


Certificate not given [S. No.334]



40. Although the respondents have emphasized that the interim order
applied only to the 2021–2022 session, it is pertinent to note that no
objection whatsoever was raised by the respondents when the petitioners
continued to admit students for the academic years 2022–2023 and 2023–
2024. It was only at a significantly belated stage, through the counter
affidavit dated 17.09.2024, that respondent no. 4 for the first time sought
vacation of the interim relief, wherein the following averment was made:-
6. It is submitted that the Petitioner is still running the deactivate
“
qualifications from Health Sector Skill Council which have been removed
from the National “Qualification Register under the garb of the interim
stay order passed by this Hon'ble Court The Respondent No. 4 is not in a
position to fund the qualifications which have been discontinued by the
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Only those qualifications which are approved by
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 can be funded by Respondent No.4. Respondent
No. 4 thus prays that the interim order may be vacated as it may have
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 18 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

cascading effect on the career of the students which have been enrolled
under the programs and for whose benefit these programs have been
carried out.

41. Furthermore, even if it is assumed that the said certificates for the
students who were enrolled in year 2022 – 2023 and 2023 – 2024, were not
issued by the respondent no. 4 and were merely downloaded by the
petitioner, this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that no objection was
raised by the respondent no. 4 with respect to the generation/downloading of
the said certificates by the petitioner.
42. Such inconsistent and unequal treatment among similarly placed
students cannot be sustained in law. Furthermore, the petitioner in W.P. (C)
No. 3783 of 2021 has submitted that their students have already been issued
certificates.
43. In Modified Voluntary Retirement Scheme of 2002 of Azam Jahi
Mill Workers Association v. National Textile Corporation Limited & Ors
the apex court has observed as under -
“9.2. …….. Right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the
Constitution of India is vested right in favour of the person who claims
equality and parity and the same is enforceable against State / State
instrumentalities in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. We find no justification at all in treating 318 ex-
employees different from those 134 ex-employees who were allotted 200
Sq. Yards of plots free of cost. We find that as such the equals are treated
unequally and therefore, when the equals are treated unequally, there is
a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution and therefore, the appellants
were entitled to the relief sought even in exercise of powers under Article
226 of the Constitution of India

.
9.3 The concept of equality before the law and equal protection of the
laws emerges from the fundamental right expressed in Article 14 of the
Constitution. Equality is a definite concept.

The concept of equality has an inherent limitation arising from the very
nature of the constitutional guarantee. Those who are similarly
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 19 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

circumstanced are entitled to an equal treatment. Equality is amongst
equals. Classification is therefore to be founded on substantial
differences which distinguish persons grouped together from those left
out of the groups and such differential attributes must bear in just and
rational relation to the object sought to be achieved.

In a given case Article 14 of the Constitution may permit a valid
classification. However, a classification to be followed must necessarily
satisfy two tests. Firstly, the distinguishing rationale has to be based on a
just objective and secondly, the choice of differentiating one set of
persons from another must have a reasonable nexus to the objects sought
to be achieved.”

44. Considering that the prayer in W.P. (C) No. 6141 of 2021 is confined
to the issuance of certificates to 812 remaining students who have duly
completed their course, and in light of the fact that certificates have already
been issued to other students from the 2022–2023 and 2023–2024 batches,
this Court finds it just and equitable to direct that certificates be issued to all
students who have successfully completed the prescribed courses.
45. Since the certificates are to be downloaded from the SIDH portal,
which is administered and controlled by respondent no. 4, the said
respondent is directed to facilitate the petitioners in downloading the said
certificates for all students who have completed their courses pursuant to the
interim orders of this Court.
46. Respondent nos. 1 to 3 shall extend all necessary cooperation to
respondent no. 4 for the issuance and authentication of the said certificates.
47. The above directions have been issued to safeguard the fundamental
rights of the students, who have expended valuable time, effort and
resources in pursuing the concerned courses. It would be wholly inequitable,
unjust and unfair to leave the said students in the lurch, without even a
certificate to show for their efforts, and despite the interim orders dated
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 20 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37

06.07.2021 and 06.08.2021, under the aegis of which the students pursued
the courses. Should the respondents be aggrieved by any aspect of the
petitioners’ conduct, they are at liberty to pursue appropriate remedies
against the petitioner before a competent forum in accordance with law.
Nevertheless, it is made clear that any action taken hereafter by the
respondents shall not, in any manner, prejudice the certificates already
issued to students for the academic years 2021– 2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-
2024, nor shall it affect the issuance of certificates to the remaining 812
students in accordance with this Court’s directions.
48. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand disposed of in terms of the above
directions. The pending applications also stand disposed of.


SACHIN DATTA, J
sv
SEPTEMBER 04, 2025/
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 3783/2021 & Connected Matter Page 21 of 21

Digitally Signed
By:SACHIN DATTA
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:09
Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:05.09.2025
04:37:37