ST. MARY S ENGINEERING COLLEGE REP BY ITS SECRETARY AND CORRESPONDENT Vs. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in the Writ Petitions filed by Private Polytechnics Managements Association, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and M/s Sri Varlakshmi Polytechnic, Chilakalapudi, Machilipatnam represented by its Secretary and the Writ Appeals arising out of interim orders passed by a learned single Judge in W.P.M.P.No.29 of 2012 and W.V.M.P.Nos.2166 of 2012 and batch in W.P.No.29 of 2012 emanates from the action of the 1st respondent - All India Council for Technical Education (for short 'AICTE') in issuing Notification No.AICTE/Legal/11(03)/2008 dated 8.11.2008 introducing a scheme for running second shift of Polytechnic in existing Polytechnic Colleges and second shift of polytechnic in existing Engineering Colleges and inviting applications from the Polytechnic/Engineering Colleges and the consequential notifications issued by the 2nd respondent - Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Hyderabad for academic years 2010-11 and 2012- 2013. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in introducing the scheme and inviting applications for running second shift of Polytechnic in Engineering Colleges as void ab initio, arbitrary and illegal. In W.P.No.13622 of 2009 petitioner has not challenged the notifications issued by the respondents 1 and 2 but only sought for a declaration that the action of the respondents in seeking to approve the second shift of polytechnics in engineering colleges from the Academic year 2009-2010 as arbitrary and illegal.

(2.) The All India Council for Technical Education was established under the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') to ensure proper planning and co-ordinate development of the technical education system throughout the country, promotion of qualitative improvement of technical education in relation to planned quantitative growth and regulation of the system and proper maintenance of norms and standards. In order to address the issue of the regional imbalance, stream wise the imbalance between degree versus diploma level institutions, in the year 2008, the Council has introduced schemes viz., (i) running second shift of polytechnic in an existing polytechnic, (ii) running second shift of polytechnic in an engineering college and (iii) running second shift of engineering college in an existing engineering college, in those States where the number of seats available in engineering colleges per lakh of population are less than all India average. Here, we are concerned with the schemes (i) and (ii) only. Accordingly, a notification was issued on 8.11.2008 by the AICTE inviting applications from the Polytechnic/Engineering Colleges and consequential notifications were issued by the State Government in the Technical Education Department.

(3.) In W.P.No.13622 of 2009, petitioner states that new institutions are required to be established on a survey to be conducted by the AICTE and upon collection of data on all the related matters. The All India Council for Technical Education (Grant of Approvals for starting new Technical Institutions, Introduction of Courses or Programmes and Approval of intake capacity for the courses or programmes) Regulations, 1994 provide elaborate procedure, inspections and recommendations before an approval is given to establish a polytechnic or to increase the intake. According to the petitioner, the number of seats in polytechnic has increased from 20,000 in 2003 to 59,287 in the year 2009. In the year 2009, in the Common Entrance Examination for admission into Polytechnics (CEEP), out of 1,54,328 qualified candidates only 59,000 have registered their names for admission and out of them only 31,000 reported as against the approved intake of 39,658 seats, resultantly, 8,000 seats remained vacant. 16 new Government Polytechnics and second shift in 16 existing Government Polytechnics have been approved for the academic year 2009-2010 of an take of 4,380 seats. At that stage, on 26.6.2009, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings notifying that 95 engineering colleges are viable to start the second shift of polytechnics and directed that such colleges should apply for the Letter of Approval by 3.7.2009 and thereafter the inspection teams would commence the inspection of the respective colleges. According to the petitioner, starting of second shift of polytechnics in Engineering Colleges would increase the number of seats by 19,380 and the total number of seats for the academic year 2009-10 would increase to 63,760.