1 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8084 OF 2009 MIT School of Management : Petitioner versus All India Council for Technical Education and others : Respondents. Mr. Surel Shah for the Petitioner Ms. Beena Menon for the Respondent No.1 Mr Vinay Masurkar, GP, a/w Mr. A B Vagyani, AGP, for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 4. CORAM : S B MHASE & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 6th October 2009 P.C. 1. Rule. With consent of the Parites made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner Management seeks directions against the Respondents for being permitted to admit students with the increased intake from existing 90 seats to 120 seats in MBA program as approved by the AICTE vide its letter dated 20/08/2009 from the current academic 2 session i.e. 2009-2010 in the school of management run by the petitioner. 3. It would be relevant to note that the Petitioner’s original intake capacity was fixed at 90 seats which came to be increased to 120 seats by communication dated 20/08/2009. The said communication inter alia discloses that the permission is valid for two years from the date of issue of the said communication for obtaining affiliation with the concerned university and fulfilling concerned State Government requirements for admission. The increase in intake capacity is with effect from the current academic session i.e. 2009-2010. 4. Our attention is drawn by the learned counsel for the Petitioner to the order passed by the Apex Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.386 of 2009 which was heard along with Writ Petition (Civil) No.387 of 2009. The relevant part of the order of the Apex Court is reproduced herein under :- “The Petitioners herein are running the colleges where the Engineering as well as the Business Management courses and being carried out. It is submitted that there are 30 additional seats for Engineering and 60 seats for MBA in each College which are to be filled up. The Petitioners colleges 3 are directed to fill up theses seats on or before 18.9.2009. The State shall sponsor sufficient number of students based on the merit secured by these candidates in the common entrance test conducted by the State. List the admitted students shall be given to the Director of Technical Education within 10 days after the admissions are over. The Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly.” It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that instant matter being one to enrol the students as per the additional intake capacity approved by the AICTE stands concluded by the said order of the Apex Court which was as regards the institutions which had been granted additional intake capacity. 5. In so far as the State Government is concerned, Shri Masurkar, the learned Government Pleader, submits that the reliefs sought for by the Petitioner for being permitted to admit students in the current academic session for the year 2009-2010 cannot be granted in view of the fact that as per the program the last date for admission was 18/09/2009. The learned Government Pleader submitted that even in 4 respect of the institutions which were covered by the various orders passed by the Apex Court additional round for CAP seats was conducted on 18/09/2009 at 10.00 am and, therefore the relief sought by the Petitioner at this point of time cannot be granted. 6. It would be pertinent to note that the instant petition was filed on 17/09/2009 i.e. on the day prior to the last day for admission. The Petition thereafter at the behest of the learned counsel for the Petitioner was adjourned so as to remove the formal defects and, also to enable the State to file its affidavit. Thereafter the Petition was adjourned at the behest of the AICTE on the ground that the AICTE was desirous of filing its affidavit in reply and this is how the Petition was posted today for hearing. Today, the learned counsel for the AICTE makes a statement that the AICTE is not desirous of filing any affidavit in reply and she would be making oral submissions. 7. On behalf of the State, the stand taken is reiterated that the last date for admission i.e. 18/09/2009 is already well gone bye. The same stand is adopted by the learned counsel for the AICTE 5 9. In our view, though the last date for admission i.e. 18/09/2009 is already over, the Petitioner cannot be made fo suffer for the delay that is occasioned in deciding the matter. The case of the Petitioner stands squarely covered by the order of the Apex Court (Supra), and therefore, the above Petition is required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) restricted to the 30 additional seats for the MBA. It is made clear that the Petitioner would be entitled to the said 30 additional seats only if the students from the additional CAP round which has been held are available. Rule is accordingly made absolute in the aforesaid terms. The learned Government Pleader makes a statement that necessary follow up action would be taken within next three days. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [S.B.MHASE, J]