The central legal point established in the judgment is that organizations awarded work under government schemes must be properly empanelled or approved by the relevant government authority, and the State must adhere to the guidelines and approved bodies for implementing such schemes.

DeepakGupta, J.

The Central Government has a scheme, known as the Multisectoral Development Programme, the MsDP in short, run by the Ministry of Minority Affairs, Government of India. The purpose of this programme is to provide vocational training and imparting development skills to the young persons belonging to the minority communities. Funds are provided by the Central Government to the State Governments for implementation of the MsDP. In this regard, we may make reference to the letter dated 28.01.2014, AnnexureR/1 to the reply filed by the Central Government, the Union of India. The relevant portion reads as follows:

2.(ii) The Skill Training Programme should be implemented through reputed skill training organizations which may be empanelled for the purpose of either by the Central Government or the State Government through a transparent process.

* * * *

“You may also consult the Department of the State Govt. dealing with the subject of Skill Development.”

Along with this reply, there are 3(three) lists attached which given the names of the organizations/institutions/agencies which have been selected for this purpose.

2. A bare reading of Clause 2(ii) quoted hereinabove, would clearly indicates that the States are required to implement the Skill Training Programmes through reputed skill training organizations. These organizations can be empanelled either by the Central Government or the State Government. It is however, clear that a transparent process has to be followed. The list of organizations/institutions/agencies selected by the Ministry of Minority Affairs, Government of India for 12th Five Year Plan was enclosed and the names are mentioned in the three lists referred to above. A mandate is given to the States to select any organization from these lists based on relevant criteria and after following proper procedure.

3. According to us, the only interpretation which can be given to this Clause is that the State can only choose one of the organizations/institutions/agencies selected by the Ministry of Minority Affairs, Govt. of India and whose names find mention in one of the three lists and the State cannot choose any other persons. We may however make it clear that if the State after following some proper procedures makes a list of certain empanelled organizations it may have the power to do so. Obviously, the Central Government will also have some say in the matter and will have to approve the empanelment made by the State. The Central Government is the final authority to decide whether the organization is actually competent enough to carry on this work or not.

4. Coming to the facts of this case, a notice was published in various newspapers inviting Expression of Interest fromthe empanelled organizations/institutions/agencies of Ministry of Minority Affairs, Govt. of India for skill development training. The words used are empanelled institutes/organizations. The relevant portion of the Notice inviting Expression of Interest reads as follows:

“Under the above context, this EOI is invited from the empanelled training institute/organisation to submit technical proposals for imparting skill development training to the minority youths.”

* * * *

20. REQUIREMENT OF THE TRAINING INSTITUTE/ORGANIZATION.

The following are requirements of the training institute:

A) The Institutes/Organizations shall have minimum 5 years experience.

B) The Institutes/Organizations shall be empanelled under Ministry of Minority Affairs, Government of India.

* * * *

K) The institutes/organisation must have to submit supporting documents regarding empanelment of Ministry of Minority Affairs, Government of India for imparting skill development training under MsDP.

Note : The details as mentioned above must be submitted with the bid along with supporting documents.”

5. After having gone through the letter dated 28.01.2014, we are of the view that these conditions are not strictly in accordance with the guidelines laid down in the letter dated 28.01.20