AJAY KUMAR & Ors. v. LINION OF INDIA & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
application are disposed of
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. With the above directions, the petition and the pending application are disposed of.
Judgment
Through Ms. Anjana Gosain with Ms. S. Fatima. Advocate VETSUS LINION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms. Barkha Babbar, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDIIAR ORDER 20.08.2010
In response to the order dated l gth July 2010 passed by this Court on the previous date, a detailed note has been submitted by Ms. Barkha Babbar, learned counsel for the Respondents 1 and 2 which is taken on record.
First, it is subrnitted that the expenditure for the training pl'ogramme of Rp..500/- per person per day for 16 weeks (i.e. 80 days) is borne by the Ministry of Tourism. In other words, a sum of Rs. 40,000/- is paid by ihe Ministry of Tourism for training each candidate. In order to obviate any difficulty in the Ministry having to spend a sum of Rs. 40,000/- each for training of 28 candidates, wP (civil) No. 3432/2070 Page 7 ol 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. t/ Ms. Gosain, learned counsel for the Petitioners states that these 28 candidates will bear their own expenses for the training. u
As regards the capping on the number of Regional Level Guides ('RLGs') , it is stated that projections made at the meeting held on 10th November 2006 to analyse and gauge the requirement of RLGs showed that as on date there were T32Licenced RLGs for the Northern Region. The projection of additional requirement for the year 2006 itself was 300 and then for the following years, the additional requirement was as under: Year 2007 2008 2009 20r0 Total Number 300 350 450 500 ), a
If one goes by the above projections, as of date .i.e. 2010 the number of licenced RLGs ought to have been more than.2500. Ms. Gosain, on instructions, states that as of date the number of RLGs for the Northern Region is just around 2000. The addition of 28 more RLGs, if they qualiff in the training programme conducted wP (civil) No. 3432/2070 t' 7 .\ J=\ by the Ministry of Tourism followed by the exam, will ,ro,, V therefore, be in excess of the requirement of RLGs as projected by the Ministrv of Tourism itself.
In the note submitted to this Court, it is stated by the Respondents that in the event this Court directs that the 49.5% marks secured by each of the 28 candidates should be rounded off to 50Yo, then a separate training programme for a batch of 28 candidates would have to be conducted bv the Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management ('IITTM'), Gwalior and "sueh training would be for 16 weeks duration and not of 8 weeks duration. "
It is also stated that the 28 candidates, as and when they qualif,i ( for issuance of RLGs licences on successful completion of the training followed by the exam, cannot be made part of the Linguist Guides training programme, which has been held pursuant to the advertisement in the vear 2008. Ms. Gosain states that the Petitioners would be satisfied if a separate training programrne is held for 28 candidates for the purpose of their quali$ring for being issued RLG licences and thev will not state any claim for licences as Linguist Guides. WP (civil) No. 3432/2070 '\ -\ -d f \)
In that view of the matter, this Court directs that for each of the 28 candidates who have secured 49.5% marks, their marks will be rounded off to 50Yo in terms of the law as already been discussed by this Court in its previous order dated 19th July 2010. For these 28 candidates, a separate training programme will be conducted by the IITMM, Gwalior for a period of 16 weeks. The expenditure for the training at the rate of Rs. 500/- per person per day would be borne by each of the 28 candidates themselves. The training programme should preferably commence between 15th Septernber and 25th September 2010. Upon successful completion of the training followed by the exam, the successful candidate shall be issued licences as RLGs. They will not seek licences as Linguist Guides.
Operative part
With the above directions, the petition and the pending application are disposed of.
Order be given dasti. AUGUST 2O,2OIO wP (civil) No.3432/2070 \--F \_/ .p S.MURALIDHAR, J
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: application are disposed of
Which court decided this case, and when?
Delhi High Court, on 10 Nov 2006. The bench was S MURALIDHAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.