w.P.(c) No‘.952/2oo9 1. Aditya Jain, S/o Shri Kishore Jain, Aged about 20 years, Plot No.361, Transport Nagar, Near Vijay Talkies. Korba (CG) 2. R. Anand Krishan, Clo Shri MK Ramani, Aged about 19 years. Near GM Annar Building, Q.No.1179. Officer Colony. Bila5pur (CG) Pin 495004. 3. Bimal Ghosh Clo Shri Babiu Gosh, aged about 19 years, Clo Ashok Dadsena, Near Jagannath Para, New Shanti Nagar Raipur (CG) 4. Abhishek Dewangan. S/o Shri Uma Shankar Dewangan, aged about 19 years, B—10, Jindal staff Colony, Mandir Hasaud, Dist. Raipur (CG) Motilal Patel, S/o Shri Batdau Patel, aged about 19 years, Darbary Toli, RES Colony, Jashpur Nagar. Dist Jashpur Pin 496331. 6. Ajit Burman, S/o Shri RS Burman. aged about 19 years, House No.100/4/A, Balco Nagar, Korba (CG) Ku. Reetu Agrawai, D/o Shri Anii Agrawai, Aged about 19 years, Near Raman Mandir, Raman Mandir Ward, Fafadih, Raipur (CG) Ku. Shamiksha Bansal, Dlo Shri Jagdish Bansal, aged about 19 years, C-25, Sector-Ill, Devendra Nagar, Raipur (CG) Devashish Tripathi, Slo Shri AK Tripathi, Aged about 19 years, MIG- 25, lndrawati Coiony, Raipur (CG) 10. Sahaj Dubey. Slo Shri JP Dubey, Aged about 19 years, CI6, Pension Bada, Raipur (CG) 11. Dhirendra Tiwari, Slo Shri Narayan ' Prasad Tiwari, Aged about 20 years, HoUse No.1011, Sector-5, Type-A, Balco Nagar, Korba (CG) 12. Vikrant Singh Deo, Slo Shri Vikram Chandra Deo, Aged about 20 years, Near Sudhir Transport, Amanaka. Raipur. Petitioners; «r 13. Ku. Pooja Tiwari D/o Shri Prakash Tiwari, Aged about 19 years, 0-326 B, Gas Godown Rohnipuram, Raipur (CG) Ku. Shilpi Choubey, D/o Shri RN Choubey, Aged about 19 years, L- 749, Sec-ll, Pt. DDU Nggar, Raipur (CG) 15. Ku. Priyanka Soni. D/o Shri Ashok Kumar Soni. aged about 19 years, Geetanjali Nagar, Bottle House Sec- I, Raipur (CG) 16. Ku. Pooja Thadwani D/o Shri Sevak Ram Thadwani, aged about 19 years, House No.33, Byron Ba7ar, Hanuman Nagar, Raipur (CG) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh. Department of Respondents Technica! Education. Through its Secretary, DKS Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur, 492001. 2. Chhattisgarh Swami Vivekanand Technical University, Through its Registrar, North Park Avenue, Sector-8, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. 3. Vice Chancellor, Chhattisgarh Swami Vivekanand Technical University, North Park Avenue, Sector.8, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. 4. Raipur institute of Technology, Through its Principai, Chhatauna, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Ail india bouncii for Technical Education, Through its Secretary, 7‘“ Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath. New Delhi 110 001 S.B : Hon’ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, J. 12.1 1 .2009: Mr. Manindra Shrivastava, learned Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Dadariya and Mr, Harsh Vardhan, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Y.S. Thakur, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 & 3/University. Mr. Sanjay K. Agrawal with Mr. Ankit Sinhal, learned counsel for the Mrs. Fouzia Mirza, learned Assistant Solicitor General of lndia for AICTE/respondent No.5. College/respondent No 4 Heard. nwmuJwJ/qv‘ By the instant petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the order dated 24.12.2008 (Annexure P/5) passed by respondent No.2/University and have also prayed for direction to respondents No. 2 & 3 to declare their result for 3r“ Semester examination of Bachelor of Engineering courses of changed Branches. Briefly stated, the dispute involved in thi ‘petition is that the petitioners were admitted in respondent No. 4/College on the basis of Common Entrance Examination. While the petitioners were pursuing their studies in the 3'“ Semester in their allotted Branches, counseling was held by respondent No.4/College for change of Branch and accordingly, the petitioners were permitted to change their respective Branches, as detailed in the document of Annexure P/3. Respondent No.2/University initially issued admission cards to the petitioners for appearing in the examination of 3'“ Semester of chaned Branch. However, considering the fact that the change of Branch was permitted by the College without permission of the University. the impugned order of Annexure P/5 was passed and their change of Branch effected by the College was temporarily rejected. ln these circumstances, the instant petition was med. Due to interim orders passed by this Court from time to time, the petitioners were permitted to appear in the examination of 3'“ semester, 4‘" Semester and have been further permitted to till up the examination form of 5‘“ Semester. The sum and substance of the dispute in this petition is that the College could not have admitted students over and above its intake capacity in any particular Branch. However, by allowing change of Branch, the College has admitted the students in excess to its intake capacity in various Branches. As per directions of this Court, an amdavit has been filed by respondent No.5lAlCTE stating therein that seats available under lateral entry in 3'“ Semester are to be tilled/up by-the classes of students, for which it is meant as per’notitication and the same cannot be tilled in by change of Branch from General Category. Mrs. Fouzia Mirza, leamed counsel appearing for respondent No.5/AICTE, on instructions, submits that in case, the Cotlege concerned submits its proposal with respect to the petitioners herein for permission to pursue their studies in the changed Branches, the same may be considered as per AICTE regulations. keeping in view the overall interest of the students, who have been permitted to appear in the examination of their changed Brach for almost three Semesters. However, she submits that liberty may be reserved to AICTE to proceed against the erring College in accordance with AICTE regulations. r £ § Mr.‘ Y.S. Thakur, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 & 3/University, submits that the University would abide by any decision that is ultimately taken by the AICTE with respect to change of Branch of the petitioners. However, he prays for liberty to proceed against the erring College in accordance with rules and regulations of the University. Mr. Sanjay K. Agrawal with Mr. Ankit Singhal. learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4/College, submits that the College shall forward its proposal with regard to its permission for change of Branch of the petitioners to AICTE for its approval. He further submits that liberty be reserved to respondent No.4/College to take appropriate legal remedy, in case any adverse action is initiated by the University or AICTE. Mr. Manindra Shrivastava. learned Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Dadariya and Mr. Harsh Vardhan. learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the instant petition may be disposed of in View of submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents. HOWever, liberty be reserved to the petitioners to approach this Court, in case any fresh cause of action accrues to the petitioners. for ming appropriate proceeding available under the law. In View of above submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the nstant petition is disposed of in the following terms: (i) Respondent No 4/College shall submits its proposal alongwith copy of this order wrth regard to its permission for change of Branch of the petitioners to respondent No 5/AICTE latest by Monday 16 November 2009 for its approval (ii) On receipt of such proposal from respondent No.4/College, the same shall be considered by respondent No.5/AICTE as per AICTE regulations keeping in view the overall interests of the students, who have been permitted to pursue their studies in their changed Branches for almost three Semesters now and have also been permitted to appear in the examination of 3 & 4 Semester The deciswn shall be taken on or before 19‘ November 2009 as examination of 59KSemester is to commence in the fourth week of November, 2009. lt is made clear that concessions given by the respondent No.5/AICTE, respondent No.2/University and respondent No.4/College is without prejudice to their right to take appropriate action under the law, rules and regulations against the erring institutions, and also without any prejudice to the right of the respondent No.4/College to pursue its legal remedies available under the law. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to tile fresh petition, if cause of action still survives 9 / . /’? a . Certifed copy bytomorrow i e 13 11 2009 / / we“ 9““ “? 6%e i ,