Enter College / University / City name:

Home > Punjab > Computer Centres > Mohali (SAS Nagar) > DOEACC


DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar), Punjab


Contact


DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar), Punjab
Mohali (SAS Nagar)
Punjab, India



DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar) Punjab is a recognised institute / college.
DOEACC is situated in Mohali (SAS Nagar) of Punjab state (Province) in India. This data has been provided by www.punjabcolleges.com.
Contact Details of DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar) Punjab are : 671067, 671259



Courses

DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar) Punjab runs course(s) in Computer stream(s).


Approval details: DOEACC is affiliated with Government Ayurvedic College, Patiala


Stuff



Images / newspaper cuttings related to DOEACC

Accounts Asstt (DOEACC)
Job Vacancy: 8th March, 2015
Accounts Asstt


Data base Administrator (Job Vacancy)

Multimedia and Animation course (Admission Notice)

Database Administrator (Job Vacancy)

IT Asstt and Data Entry Operator (Job Vacancy)

Skill Development Program in ESDN (Advertisement)

Sub centre manager (Job Vacancy)

PGDCA course (Admission Notice)

PGDCA course (Admission Notice)

Accounts Asstt (Job Vacancy)


Media coverage of DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar) Punjab, Punjab

DOEACC accreditation for institute

The Department of Electronics Accreditation of Computer Courses (DOEACC) has granted full-fledged accreditation for ‘A’ level course to the city-based GCS Computer Tech.

With this, the institute has become only the third in Punjab to be granted full accreditation by the DOEACC for starting ‘A’ level course, which is an advanced diploma level course, equivalent to the Postgraduate Diploma in Computer Applications (PGDCA).According to Mr Gurmeet Singh, managing director, GCS Computer Tech Private Limited, “This achievement of ours is the result of our dedicated efforts of more than two years and we are committed to fulfil our mission to provide quality and latest education.”

The institute is already associated with Punjab Technical University as the regional service provider for graduate and postgraduate courses such as BSc (IT), MSc (IT), PGDCA, MCA, MBA etc.

Mr Singh said, “The eligibility for the ‘A’ level course is graduation or ‘O’ level course which are already being run by the GCS.

Those completing the course will be eligible for lateral entry into the third semester of MSc (IT) course of the PTU. The course prepares students for taking up career as a programmers, web content Developers, web administrators or as training faculty.”

The DOEACC society is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology of the Central Government responsible for imparting computer and IT education in the non-formal sector.

Jain institute gets A level accreditation

The DD Jain Institute of Computer Sciences, Kidwai Nagar, has been awarded A-level accreditation by the DOEACC Society, an autonomous body under the Union Ministry of Information Technology and Communications. This makes the institute the only computer institute here which is entitled to conduct DOEACC CCC, O and A level tests. The institute Director, Mr Naresh Puri said the screening committee of the DOEACC conducted the inspection in April.

Mr Puri said that it was a good opportunity for the Ludhiana students, since after the USA, now Japan has opened its doors for DOEACC and CAIT (Central Academy of Information Technology) ‘A’ level qualifiers. Students clearning ‘A’ level are not required to produce evidence of work experience to obtain visa for Japan. They can also qualify for jobs in Japanese multi-national companies across Asia and other parts of the world, he said.

Centre not to shift courses

The Centre for Design and Advanced Computing has decided to postpone the shifting of its DOEACC courses from its campus in SAS Nagar to the Regional Computer Centre in Chandigarh for six months. The decision has been taken following a protest by over 100 students doing these courses in CDAC who refused to be shifted from here to Chandigarh.

The shifting of various DOEACC courses being run by the Central Electronic Design and Technology of India, SAS Nagar, to the RCC, Chandigarh, was an outcome of CEDTI’s merger with the CDAC, Pune, that took place in February. In March, students of the A, B, and O level courses were told that they would have their classes in RCC and would also have to shift campus. Students protested against this stating that the RCC lacked a hostel and also did not have enough infrastructure.

The students demand is justified as most of these students are from other states, many of them hailing from the northeast. “We had the option of joining the RCC earlier also but we chose the CEDTI because of its facilities. And now we are being told to shift which is unfair,’’ said a student.

Army gets tough on study leave

Army officers who fail to make the grade in courses pursued by them while on a study leave will have up to give up their salary for the duration they were undergoing the said course. The directive comes after the Army found that it was unable to employ the supposed expertise the officers had inculcated after undertaking some professionally oriented courses.

Sources said a recent policy letter issued by the Directorate-General, Military Training (DGMT), has directed that officers taking up computer courses while on study leave should sit for and pass examinations conducted by DOEACC, failing which they should surrender the salary earned for the leave period.

DOEACC is an autonomous body functioning under the central government s Department of Information Technology.

The directives come in the backdrop of officers availing study leave, ostensibly to enhance their professional skills, but using the time for pursuing other agendas. Study leave is for two years, during which an officer is entitled to draw his full salary and other benefits.

"The Army found a number of instances where officers who had undergone professional computer courses were unable to carry out their tasks when placed in IT-related appointments," an officer said. "It was then learnt that they were able to procure certificates from some privately managed computer institutes without even attending classes," he added.

This problem is generally related to computer and IT-related courses as examinations for other courses like MBA and ME/M.Tech, which can also be pursued on study leave, are conducted by universities where there is no option but to study to pass.

The Army had introduced the concept of study leave over 20 years ago, with the thought that it would give deserving officers a chance to update their knowledge and professional acumen midway through their careers and raise the overall standard of the Army.

Quite to the contrary, this facility has been misused or employed as a means to sidestep a career phase. An estimated 1,000 officers avail study leave every year, and according to reports, most of them are those who do not have much of a future in the Army. Others use it as a means to avoid serving at a particular place or under a particular commander or to continue to be stationed at the same place for reasons like children s education or constructing a house.

The main reason for this is the existing system which has failed to give higher civil education any importance, especially for promotion to higher ranks, according to a earlier report.

"It should not come as a surprise to anyone that till today not a single Chief of Army Staff or Army Commander has ever availed of study leave. Probably, no other Lieutenant-General, barring those in the technical branches, has made use of it either," the report added.

Home Secy moots library e network

All local libraries should be made online, inter-connected and assured full support of the Administration in setting up Chandigarh Library Network to facilitate members to share resources.

This was said by Mr Krishna Mohan, Home Secretary, while inaugurating the User Awareness Programme under the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT) Library Consortium Digital Information Services at the DOEACC Centre in Sector 17 here today.

He appreciated the level of computerisation of government libraries, including college libraries.

Mr Ajay Rampal, State Informatics Officer, National Informatics Centre (NIC), said the resources of information could be shared online by connecting all libraries.

He said “e-granthalaya”, library solution by the NIC, was successfully implanted in various government colleges and institutes in the city.

The Officer In charge, NIC Library, New Delhi, Mr P.K. Upadhaya, enlightened the participants about the digital information services and the need to have the consortium. Mr Rohit Singla, Director, DOEACC Centre, also spoke on the occasion.

Record enrolment for IT courses

Despite the ongoing slump in information technology education, GCS Computer Tech Pvt Ltd., the regional service provider of Punjab Technical University, has set a new record in attracting students by enrolling more than 700 students in M.SC. IT, B.Sc. Laterral Entry, PGDCA and O and A level courses of DOEACC, government of India, at their Chandigarh and Patiala centres from all over the region.

This was disclosed here today by Mr Gurmeet Singh, Manging Director, GCS Compter Tech Ltd., He said, “even an average student can improve his performance if he is provided by an enlightened and comptent faculty. Our institute has attracted not only Indian students but also students from Thailand who have found it to be of world class. Such an achievement is possible only by a combined effort of students, faculty, state-of-the-art infrastrucutre and the most important aspect i.e.environment. The American style ambience of the institute, also motivates the students to put in their best in serious studies”.

Another major achievement of GCS, Mr Gurmeet Singh said was “its 98% result which speaks volumes about the efforts put in by the students as well as the faculty”.

Fashion designing exhibition

The D.D. Jain Institute of Computer Sciences and Vocational Studies (fully accredited by the DOEACC, Government of India for ‘O’ level), behind Mini Rose Garden, Kidwai Nagar, here, today organised a two-day exhibition of fashion and textile designing. Mrs Bhawna Garg, SDM (East), here inaugurated this exhibition and appreciated the efforts made by staff and students.

Mr Narinder Kumar Jain (President), Mr Naresh Puri (Director), Mrs Kamla Jain (Principal of D.D. Jain College) and other members of the managing committee were also present in this exhibition.

Ms Kamal Sharma, incharge of the Fashion Designing Department, exhibited the garments designed by her students and hoped that this exhibition would encourages the students.

In this exhibition, various sections were allocated for different types of garments such as kids wear, embroidery, tie and dye, Western garments and night wears. Every room had been given a unique look according to its theme. This exhibition will continue for two days.

Workshop for students

A joint workshop on computers and fashion designing was organised at the D.D.Jain Institute of Computer Sciences. The workshop was organised for students seeking admission to various courses of DOEACC (Department of Electronics Accredited Computer Centre) O and A-levels and other short-term courses on fashion designing and computers. At the workshop classes on jewellery, shoe, dress and textile designing were also organised.

The Director, Mr Naresh Puri, said response to the workshop was excellent. The students showed interest in fashion designing, he said.

REGIONAL COMPUTER CENTRE Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PATIALA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

I.T.R. No. 77 of 1995

DATE OF DECISION: 5.7.2007

Regional Computer Centre, Chandigarh …Applicant
Versus
The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala …Respondent

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the applicant-assessee.
Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate, for the respondent-revenue.

JUDGMENT
M.M. KUMAR, J.
At the instance of the applicant-assessee Regional Computer Centre, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the assessee RCC’), the instant reference has been made under Section 256(1) of the Incometax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act’), by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’).

The Tribunal has referred the following questions of law, which are stated to have emerged out of its order dated 31.1.1994, passed in ITA No. 1192/Chd/1988, in respect of the assessment year 1984-85:-

1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right to hold that the Regional Computer Centre is not a charitable institute of I.T.R. No. 77 of 1995 general public utility, entitled to exemption after assessment year 1983-84, consequent upon
simultaneous amendment of section 11 and 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?

2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the activities and object of teaching and imparting training in computer science with no profit motive as per memorandum of association, do not qualify for exemption under section 10(22) as “educational institute”?

Facts in brief may first be noticed. The assessee RCC is a Society registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860. The assessee RCC had filed its return on 28.8.1984, for the assessment year 1984-85, showing profit of Rs. 2,84,984/- with the claim of exemption under Sections 11 and 10(22) of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee RCC for exemption, vide order dated 27.2.1987, holding that the income of the assessee RCC is taxable. Accordingly, net taxable income of the assessee RCC has been assessed at Rs. 19,64,024/-.

The assessee RCC went in appeal before the CIT (A), who examined the provisions of Section 11(4A) read with 10(22) of the Act and vide order dated 29.8.1988, rejected the plea of the assessee RCC holding that it was not entitled to benefit under Section 11 of the Act because it was carrying on the activity of a computer centre by providing consultancy, taking of projects and imparting training programme with the object of promoting Computer Science.

Accordingly, it has been charging fee for that purpose. The CIT (A) further held that the benefit of Section 10(22) of the Act is also not available to the assessee RCC, inasmuch as, consultancy was a major activity of the assessee RCC and training programme represented only a small portion of its activities. It was still further held that the computer centre run by the assessee RCC could not be termed as an educational institution.

On further appeal preferred by the assessee RCC, the Tribunal while rejecting the ground of exemption under Section 11(4) of the Act observed as under:-

7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions as also the facts on record. Section 11(4) of the Act contemplates that for the purposes of section 11, “property held under trust” would include a business undertaking so held. The assessee is being treated as a trust because of the business undertaking carried on by it. Otherwise it would not be a trust at all. In our opinion, the assessee is main and predominant object
was to promote development and progress of Electronic Data Processing etc. and whether profit motive was there or not, the fact remains that the assessee has been carrying on business and by virtue of section 11(4) of the Act had to be deemed as a trust. The question to be decided is whether the insertion of sub-section (4A) w.e.f. 1.4.1984 has brought about any qualitative change in the situation or not. By going through the speech the mover of the Bill and by the plain reading of Section 11 (4A), it is clear to us that the purpose of the insertion of 1995 Section 11(4A) was to bring business income of the trusts to tax. Certain exceptions were, however, carved out.

The first exception was in respect of public religious trusts engaged in the business of printing and/or publication of books. This obviously does not
cover the case of the assessee because the assessee is neither a public religious trust nor is it engaged in the business of printing and/or publication of books. The second limb of Section 11(4A) is regarding institutions wholly for charitable purposes where the work in connection with the business is mainly carried on by the beneficiaries of the institution. While the purpose of the assessee is no doubt charitable in nature, the work in connection with the business is not mainly carried on by the beneficiaries of the institution. We, therefore, hold that whatever may be the position for the earlier years, the position for assessment year 1984-85 has to be determined in the light of the amendment of section 2
(15) and insertion of Section 11(4A) of the Act. We, therefore, uphold the finding of the learned CIT(A) that the assessee’s income is not exempt u/s 11 of the Act.

This ground is, therefore, rejected.

With regard to grant of exemption under Section 10(22) of the Act, the Tribunal has further held that one of the objects of the assessee RCC was to impart training but that was not the sole purpose. It was held that major source of income of the assessee RCC has come from consultancy work. Simply because the users of the services rendered by the assessee RCC were colleges, universities, Government Departments and organizations etc., would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the assessee RCC was an educational institution existing solely for educational purposes. The Tribunal has recorded further findings that the main purpose of the assessee RCC was to earn profit which fact is fortified from the report of the assessee’s compilation according to which after initial stages, the assessee RCC was not only to become self-sufficient but it was also to become profitable. In these circumstances, the Tribunal has also rejected the second claim of the assessee RCC that it is entitled to exemption under Section 10(22) of the Act. The assessee RCC while challenging the order of CIT (A) before the Tribunal had also
urged various other grounds including non-taxability of its income under Section 60 of the Act, non-allowance of depreciation allowance while computing total income, treating the interest accrued on grantin- aid to be a revenue receipt, disallowance of guest house expenses of Rs. 32,672/-, deduction of E.P.F. of Rs. 20,824/-, confirmation of addition of Rs. 8,000/- under the head ‘provision made’ and of Rs. 20,853/- under the head ‘sale of assets’, wear and tear and confirmation of levy of interest under Section 217 of the Act.

However, in the instant reference we are only concerned with two substantial questions of law which have already been reproduced above.

Mr. S.K. Mukhi, learned counsel for the assessee RCC has claimed that functionally as well as structurally the assessee RCC is manned by Government officers occupying various posts ex- officio. The first Executive Council is comprised of Officer on Special Duty (Computers), Department of Electronics, New Delhi, Project Director (Semiconductor Complex), Department of Electronics, New Delhi, Joint Secretary, Department of Electronics, New Delhi, Officiating Director (Regional Computer Centre) and Joint Director (Computers), Department of Electronics, New Delhi, Additional Secretary, University Grants Commission, New Delhi, Vice-Chancellor, Panjab University, Chandigarh, Principal, Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh, Financial Commissioner and Secretary, Irrigation and Power, Government of Punjab, Chandigarh, Deputy Secretary (Finance), Chandigarh Administration, U.T. Chandigarh, Managing Director, Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh and three representatives from the State of Haryana were to be nominated. On the basis of the aforementioned constitution of the Executive Council, it has been urged that the assessee RCC is a body which enjoys public character structurally.

He has then referred to various purposes by drawing our attention to the objects in the Memorandum of Association, which provides that the assessee RCC is to encourage and promote the development and progress of Electronic Data Processing towards achieving selfreliance in the field of computer sciences and technology and to advance interdisciplinary cooperation amongst scientists, technologist, engineers, administrators and commercial entrepreneurs for the growth of teaching research etc. It further provides for dissemination of knowledge on all aspects of Electronic Data Processing Systems and allied subjects and to stimulate and offer aid for research and development for the benefit of manufacturers and users of Electronics Data Processing Systems. A number of other objects listed in various clauses (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) have also been relied upon to show that the Trust is aimed at achieving selfsufficiency in Electronic Data Processing. Learned counsel has then
submitted that all the projects undertaken by the assessee RCC are either of the Universities or of various Government institutions. Mr. Mukhi has submitted that the case of the assessee RCC is fully covered by the provisions of Section 11(4A) (b) of the Act as the work is carried on by the beneficiaries of the assessee RCC.

In the backdrop of the aforementioned facts it has also been claimed by Mr. Mukhi that the assessee RCC would be covered by the definition of expression ‘charitable purpose’ as used by Section 2(15) of the Act and it would qualify for benefits as contemplated under Section 11(4) and 11(4A) of the Act. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Hyderabad Race Club Charitable Trust, (2003) 262 ITR 194.

Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, learned counsel for the revenue has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the assessee RCC. He has submitted that the Tribunal in its order has specifically recorded a finding that ‘the assessee RCC has not substantiated how its entire business is carried on mainly by its beneficiaries. A study of its management would show the activities are not carried on mainly by its beneficiaries. Secondly by taking support of section 11(4-A) (b) the assessee has himself admitted that a business was carried on’ by the assessee RCC. Therefore, learned counsel has argued that the assessee RCC would not be entitled to benefits as contemplated by Section 10(22) of the Act, which contemplates exclusion of any income of university or any other institution existing solely for educational purposes and not for
purpose of profit. Learned counsel for the revenue has then drawn our attention to the order dated 27.2.1987, passed by the Assessing Officer (at page 16 of the paper book). It has been observed that in order to obtain benefit under Section 10(22) of the Act, the institution must be carrying on one sole activity i.e. promotion of education whereas the assessee RCC indulged in many other activities. The computer training classes is only one of its small activity. It has been recorded that out of total receipts of Rs. 65,66,76,563/-, income by way of training programme at Rs. 3,69,954/- is a negligible fraction, which goes to show that education is not a major object what to say of sole activity. The assessee RCC has itself admitted in the written submissions before the Assessing Officer that consultancy was its major activity. The Assessing Officer also referred to profit and loss account to show that the assessee RCC had earned income from various sources like income from project and CPU hours purchased, F.D.Rs. and data entry etc.

Learned counsel has then argued that the assessee RCC has been enjoying exemption till the assessment year 1983-84 but by virtue of amendment carried in Sections 2(15) and 11(4A) w.e.f. 1.4.1984, the amended provisions of the Act have been rightly applied by the Tribunal in respect of the assessment year 1984-85 and the assessee RCC has lost its earlier charitable character which was qualified for exemption.

Learned counsel has pointed out that the definition of expression ‘charitable purpose’ was amended by excluding the words ‘not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit’. Therefore, it has been submitted that the order of the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity and the questions framed must be answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee RCC.

We have thoughtfully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that the view taken by the Tribunal deserves to be upheld. In order to put the controversy in its proper perspective, it would be apposite to read the provisions of Section 2(15), 10(22), 11(4) and 11(4A) of the Act, which are extracted as under:-

Section 2(15) of the Act [as amended with effect from 1.4.1984]:

(15) “charitable purpose” includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility;

Section 10(22) of the Act:

(22) any income of a university or other educational institution, existing solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit;

Section 11(4) of the Act:
11(4) For the purposes of this section “property held under trust” includes a business undertaking so held, and where a claim is made that the income of any such undertaking shall not be included in the total
income of the persons in receipt thereof, the Income-tax Officer shall have power to determine the income of such undertaking in accordance with the provisions of this Act relating to assessment; and where any income so determined is in excess of the income as shown in the
accounts of the undertaking, such excess shall be deemed to be applied to purposes other than charitable or religious purposes.

Section 11(4A) of the Act [as inserted with effect from 1.4.1984] (4A) Sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) or sub-section (3A) shall not apply in relation to any income, being profits and gains of business, unless-

(a) the business is carried on by a trust wholly for public religious purposes and the business consists of printing and publication of books or publication of books or is of a kind notified by the Central Government in this behalf in the Official Gazette; or

(b) the business is carried on by an institution wholly for charitable purposes and the work in connection with the business is mainly carried on by the beneficiaries of the institution, and separate books of account are maintained by the trust or institution in respect of such business.

The provisions of Sections 11(4) and 11(4A) of the Act fell for consideration of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras v. Thanthi Trust, (2001) 2 SCC 707. Dealing with the controversy relating to the assessment years 1984-85 to 1991-92 and applying the provisions as it existed at that time, which is relevant to the case in hand, their Lordships’ observed as under:-

22. Sub-section (4) of Section 11 remains on the statute-book, and it defines property held under trust for the purposes of that section to include a business so held.

It then states how such income is to be determined. In other words, if such income is not to be included in the income of the trust, its quantum is to be determined in the manner set out in sub-section (4).

It is true in respect to assessment year 1992-93, the benefits of Section 11 was extended because sub-section (4A) of Section 11 had further undergone change w.e.f. 1.4.1992. However, in respect of the assessment year of 1984-85, which is relevant to the case in hand, the benefit could not be extended.

In the present case, there are categorical findings recorded by the Tribunal that although one of the objects of the assessee RCC was to impart computer training but that was not its sole purpose. It has further been found that the major source of income as reflected in the statement of profit and loss account was from consultancy work. The assessee RCC was not considered to be existing solely for educational purposes simply because it s services were used by colleges, universities, Government departments or other public sector organizations. That alone would not bring its case within the parameters of Section 11(4A)(b) of the Act. The Tribunal has placed reliance on a report submitted by the assessee RCC itself, which provided that the assessee RCC was not only to become selfsufficient but it was also to become profitable. When the aforementioned findings are viewed in the light of bare perusal of Sections 2(15), 10(22), 11(4) and 11(4A) of the Act as well as in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Thanthi Trust (supra) then it becomes clear that the benefit of Section 11 of the Act could not be availed in respect of any income being profit and gains of business unless it is proved that the business was being carried on by a trust wholly for public religious purposes and the business consisted of printing and publication of books or publication of books or is of a kind notified by the Central Government in this behalf in the Official Gazette. It further required that separate books of account were maintained by the trust or institution in respect of such business and that the business was
carried on by an institution wholly for charitable purposes and the work in connection with the business was mainly carried on by the beneficiaries of the institution.

The argument of Mr. Mukhi that the business was being carried on by the beneficiaries of the assessee RCC is liable to be rejected because the requirement of sub-section (4A)(b) of Section 11 is not that the business is carried on for the benefits of the institution but it is required to be carried on by the beneficiaries of the institution. The beneficiaries like the Panjab University, Punjab Engineering College, various Government departments are not carrying on the business merely because the officers from those departments are ex officio members of the Executive Council.

Even otherwise the argument over looks the requirement of Section 11(4A) (b) of the Act that the business is carried on wholly for charitable
purposes. The findings of fact are also against the assessee RCC that it is not a charitable institution. Therefore, the argument does not deserve acceptance.

In view of the discussion above, the questions raised are decided against the assessee RCC and in favour of the revenue.

(M.M. KUMAR)
JUDGE

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE

Summary: DOEACC, Mohali (SAS Nagar) Punjab website, mobile, contact address and approval / recognition details.