Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 404 OF 2015
Government Mohindra Instt. of
Information Technology & Anr. ... Petitioner(s)
| ... Respon | |
|---|---|
| All India Council For Technical<br>Education & Ors.<br>J U D G M E N T<br>ANIL R. DAVE, J.<br>1. The Petitioner is a Government co<br>Education Institute of Society which<br>the year 1875 and for the last 140 ye<br>education to the students of the State |
2. The Petitioner-College wanted to set up a new
JUDGMENT
technical institute for running MCA Course from the
academic year 2015-16 and therefore, had submitted an
application to Respondent No.1. The said application had
been considered by Respondent No.1 and after certain
instructions and doing necessary formalities, the said
th
application had been rejected on 7 April, 2015.
th
3. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection dated 7
1
Page 1
April, 2015, the Petitioner-College had filed an appeal
against the said order before the Standing Appellate
Committee of Respondent No.1. The Standing Appellate
Committee had heard a representative of the Petitioner-
th
College on 14 April, 2015 and at that time, the
Petitioner-College had also been informed about some
deficiencies which have been found at the time of
physical inspection of the Petitioner-College. After
affording a hearing to the Petitioner-College, a letter
th
dated 24 April, 2015 had been addressed to the Standing
Appellate Committee pointing out the deficiencies to be
removed by the Petitioner-College. It is an admitted
th
fact that letter dated 24 April, 2015, whereby the
Standing Appellate Committee had been informed about the
removal of deficiencies, had not been brought to the
notice of the Standing Appellate Committee when it had
th
convened its meeting on 27 April, 2015 and ultimately,
th
on 30 April, 2015 a final order rejecting application
JUDGMENT
for initiation of a new course had been passed by the
Standing Appellate Committee.
4. The above referred facts have not been disputed by
the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, whose
function is to grant necessary permission for starting a
new MCA course.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner-
2
Page 2
College has mainly submitted that had the Standing
Appellate Court considered the contents of the letter
th
dated 24 April, 2015, possibly the application
submitted for starting a new course would not have been
rejected.
6. We have considered the facts of the case in the light
of the fact that the Petitioner-College is a Government
College which had been established in the State of
Punjab and has been imparting education for the last 140
years. The said institute is the oldest institute in
the State of of Punjab having a very good reputation and
it is not disputed that all deficiencies, which had been
pointed out to the Petitioner-College, had been
substantially removed and in our opinion, for a
negligible defect, which the learned counsel appearing
for Respondent No.1 has pointed out to us, there was no
reason for rejecting the application submitted by the
Petitioner-College.
JUDGMENT
7. In our opinion, by not placing the letter of the
th
Petitioner-College dated 24 April, 2015 before the
Standing Appellate Committee which had convened its
th
meeting on 27 April, 2015, the principles of natural
justice had been violated and therefore, the final order
th
dated 30 April, 2015 passed by the Standing Appellate
Committee of Respondent No.1 deserves to be quashed and
3
Page 3
set aside.
8. In view of the fact that the deficiencies have been
removed, we direct Respondent No.1 to reconsider the
case of the Petitioner-College as soon as possible,
th
especially, in view of the fact that 15 August, 2015 is
the last date for admitting the students to the course
which the Petitioner-College is going to initiate.
9. The final decision which might be taken by
Respondent No.1 shall be communicated to the
Petitioner-College immediately and if the final decision
is taken in favour of the Petitioner-College, the
Petitioner shall be permitted to give admission to 60
students to MCA course which it proposes to commence and
Respondent No.3-University is also directed to do the
needful to grant the necessary permission to the
Petitioner-College with regard to initiation of new
course.
JUDGMENT
10. For the afore-stated reasons, looking at the
peculiar facts of the case, we allow this petition and
grant the relief, as prayed for, in the writ petition to
th
the effect that the letters of rejection dated 7 April,
th
2015 and 30 April, 2015 issued by Respondent No.1, are
quashed and set aside so that needful can be done for
grant of approval to the Petitioner-College for setting
up a new technical institute to run MCA course with an
4
Page 4
intake of 60 students for academic session 2015-16.
Upon necessary permission being granted, Respondent
No.3-University is directed to consider grant of
affiliation to the Petitioner-College in respect of MCA
course, which it proposes to initiate from academic year
2015-16.
..............J.
[ANIL R. DAVE]
..............J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]
New Delhi;
th
10 August, 2015.
JUDGMENT
5
Page 5