HYDERABAD (SIND) NATIONAL COLLEGIATE BOARD, MUMBAI AND ANR. Vs. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION (AICTE) AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for respective parties. Taken up for hearing and final disposal in view of the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court requesting to dispose of the petition.

(2.) The Petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and seek to challenge the letter dated 30 April 2016 and the order dated 30 April 2016 issued by Respondent no.1 whereby the Petitioner no.2 institution is placed in "No Admission Category" for the academic session 2016-17. The Petitioners have also challenged the communication dated 8 April 2016 issued by Respondent no.1 rejecting the proposal of the Petitioners for change of site of the Petitioner no.2 institute.

(3.) The petition was initially heard by this Court and by order dated 13 June 2016, Rule was issued. By way interim relief, it was directed that till next date of hearing, the operation of order dated 30 April 2016 by which Petitioners' application for extension of approval has been rejected, shall remain stayed and the Respondents shall allow the college to participate in the Centralised Admission Process (`CAP' for short) for the academic session 2016-17 in respect of engineering courses conducted by the Petitioners, except BioMedical Engineering. It was further directed that the Petitioners shall execute an undertaking to the effect that they will apply, if not already applied, for occupation certificate before the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (`MCGM' for short), which application was to be decided by the MCGM as expeditiously as possible and shall pass appropriate order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of application. The Petitioners were further directed to give an undertaking to the effect that the Petitioners will inform the students that Petitioners' application for grant of extension has been rejected by Respondent no.1 and on the basis of an interim order of this Court the admissions are being allowed, and that neither the students nor the Petitioners' college shall be entitled to claim any equity on the basis of admission of students, on the basis of said interim order. The Petitioners were further directed to make it clear on the portal that present petition is pending with regards to the grant of extension of approval before this Court. Further, with reference to the prayer for shifting of college from present place to Ulhas Nagar, this Court observed, prima facie, that no case for grant of interim relief is made out since as per the norms, relaxation can be granted only up to 20 kilometers from the present place, whereas the Petitioners were seeking extension up to 46 kilometers. However, it was made clear that rejection of prayer for interim relief qua shifting of place, will not preclude the Petitioners from applying afresh in the next academic session and the Respondents shall be free to consider and decide the same afresh. Respondent no.5 University and the State Government were directed to process the admissions and to take consequential steps so as to include the Petitioners' institution in the CAP.