1 wp-5740-ors IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5740 OF 2010 Leelavati Awhad Institute of Technology ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5642 OF 2010 K. J.’s Educational Institutes ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5643 OF 2010 Pune Vidyarthi Griha’s Institute of Management ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5644 OF 2010 Shri Ramchandra College of Engineering ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents 2 wp-5740-ors WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5650 OF 2010 Modern Institute of Business Management ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5729 OF 2010 Krishna Foundation & Anr. ..Petitioners versus All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5935 OF 2010 Bhima Education Society & Anr. ..Petitioners versus All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. A. V. Anturkar i/b. Mr. S. B. Deshmukh for Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 5740, 5642, 5643, 5644 and 5650 all of 2010. Mr. C. J. Sawant – Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nitin Dhumal for Petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 5729 of 2010 and 5935 of 2010. Mr. S. R. Nargolkar – G.P. For Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in Writ Petition No. 5729 of 2010. 3 wp-5740-ors Mrs. M. P. Thakur – AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in Writ Petition Nos. 5740, 5642, 5643, 5644, 5650 and 5935 all of 2010. Mr. A. A. Kumbhakoni – Sr. Advocate with Mr. R. Rodriques for AICTE – Respondent No.3 in all the matters. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : JULY 30, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 2. During the pendency of the petitions, the respondents - AICTE issued a communication dated 27th July 2010 whereby the petitioners were informed that after due verification of the recommendations of the appellate committee, council did not accord approval on the grounds mentioned in the said communication. In the circumstances, the learned counsels for the petitioners seek permission to amend the petitions and seek to challenge the said communications. Oral requests for permission to amend the petitions granted. Appropriate amendment in the petitions be carried out, during the course of the day. 3. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the communication dated 27th July, 2010, which 4 wp-5740-ors are impugned in the present petitions read thus: “Based on recommendations of scrutiny / rescrutiny committee, an expert committee visit was arranged to verify all the facilities created for the proposed institute. The deficiencies pointed by the expert committee were communicated to you through portal. Further you were given an opportunity to comply the deficiencies before a duly constituted appellate committee. The appellate committee after studying your points of compliance rejected / recommended for revisit of the institution and in case of revisit of the expert visit reports were evaluated by the regional committee and then executive committee. Further, all the recommendations of the appellate committee were considered by the Council. After, duly verifying all the points as per the regulations the council did not accord the approval on the following grounds:- (In every case the grounds are different)” 4. The learned counsel for the respondents AICTE fairly accepted that so far as revisit of the expert is concerned, that has not been done. The learned counsel further makes a statement on the basis of instructions of Dr. P. K. Sahoo, Director and Regional Officer, Western Region, who is present in court, that the Authority proposes to undertake the entire procedure stipulated in the Regulation for verifying as to whether the deficiencies 5 wp-5740-ors mentioned in the communications in respect of each institution factually exist or not and the entire exercise shall be concluded within a period of two months from today. 5. It is in these circumstances, we dispose of the petitions as withdrawn and expect that the respondents AICTE shall conclude the exercise as stated by the learned counsel, at the earliest, and in any case not later than two months from today. It is open for the AICTE to take a decision based on the report of expert’s visit within a period of 15 days thereafter. Petitions disposed of by keeping contentions as well as issues raised therein open. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)