ASN 1 WP-5455-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5455 OF 2011 D.Y. Patil Education Society and anr. .. Petitioners. Vs. Directorate of Tech., Education and ors. ..Respondents. Mr. S.C Naidu. Y.C. Naidu and Saurabh Kulkarni i/by C.R.Naidu & Co. for the Petitioners. Mr.Rui Rodrigues for Respondent-No.2 AICTE. Mr. R.P.Behere, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.S.V.Kolla. O.S.D. Of the DTE is present. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C. J. AND GIRISH S. GODBOLE, J. 18 July 2011 PC: Rule, returnable forthwith and petition taken up for hearing with consent of the petitioners and respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Service of Rule on respondent No.4 is waived in view of the order we propose to pass. 2 Mr. Rui Rodrigues, learned counsel waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.3. Mr. R.P .Behere, learned Addl. Govt. Pleader waives service of notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. ASN 2 WP-5455-11.sxw 3 The petitioner No.1 society applied to the AICTE for approval for commencing Engineering Courses in Petitioner No.2 Institution at Talasande, District Kolhapur. The AICTE has granted such approval to the petitioners as per the decision taken at the meeting held on 12 July 2011 and the decision was published on the website of AICTE on 14 July 2011. However, the Director of Technical Education did not include the name of the Petitioner No.2 Institution in the list of such colleges approved by AICTE which list was published by DTE on 14 July 2011 for centralized admission process. The petitioners approached the DTE to include the Petitioner No.2 institution in the list of Engineering Colleges of AICTE. But it was unable to include the petitioner No.2 college to participate in the common admission process being undertaken by DTE by single window admission process as required by a decision of the Apex Court in P.A. Inamdar’ case. The Director of Technical Education did not accept the request on the ground that the Director of Technical Education would consider the names of only those institutions which were granted affiliation by AICTE on or before 30 June 2011. 4 At the hearing of this petition Mr. Behere, learned Additional Government Pleader has relied on the decision of the full bench of this Court in Mahatma Gandhi Missions Institute, Aurangabad Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. 2008(5) Mh.L.J. 913 particularly on the following directions in Paragraph 58 (d) of the Judgment. ASN 3 WP-5455-11.sxw (d) The AICTE and all other concerned authorities are hereby directed to communicate to every applicant institution, university or trust about refusal and/or grant if approval of their proposal by 15th June of every academic year where the applications have been received in terms of its brochure upto 31 December of the previous year, regarding admissions for the academic year. The learned Additional Govt. Pleader, however, has not disputed the fact that the AICTE has granted approval to the petitioner No.2 college for its Engineering college for the academic year 2011-2012 but it was received by the DTE- Maharashtra State on 16 July 2011 i. e. after 30 June 2011. 5 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that so far as the decision of the full bench of this Court was concerned; it was dealing with the admission process for the academic year 2008-2009 and that as per the procedure prescribed for that year 31 December of the previous year i. e. 31 December 2007 was the cut off date for making the application to the AICTE for approval. It is submitted that, however, for the current academic year 2011-12 AICTE published its Regulations called as AICTE (Grant of Approvals for Technical Institutions) Regulation, 2010 by Notification dated 10 December 2010. Regulation 4.3 further provides that the Council shall publish, from time to time, Approval process Hand Book, detailing the procedure to process the applications of Institutions and/or promoters. The AICTE Process Hand Book 2011-2012 is placed before us and Para 19.1 of the said ASN 4 WP-5455-11.sxw Hand Book provides that:- “AICTE shall notify through a Public Notice published in the leading news papers and through uploading on the AICTE Web Portal regarding cut off dates for various purposes including receipt of applications and processing thereof from time to time. The time schedule mentioned in the Public Notice shall be final and binding. The last date of submission of application form shall mean submission of application on Portal and generation of paying slip not later than the last date as mentioned in the time schedule for this purpose. AICTE shall not however wait for more than 7 days from the last date of the time schedule for realization of the Pay order”. It is stated that as per the Information Brochure notified by AICTE on AICTE website cut off date for making applications to the AICTE for approval to start Engineering College was 27 April, 2011 and the petitioners had submitted application on 25 Feb. 2011 to the AICTE. It is therefore, submitted that AICTE itself could not take final decision in the matter till 14 July 2011 and therefore the full bench decision of this Court will not apply to the facts of the present case i.e. for the admission process for the present academic year. The full bench proceeded on the premise that the applications to AICTE was required to be made by 31 December of the previous year. ASN 5 WP-5455-11.sxw 6 These facts about making of 2010 Regulations and the cut off date for making application are not disputed by the learned counsel Mr. Rodrigues for the AICTE. 7 As regards the affiliation of respondent No.4 University, the learned counsel for the petitioners states that the application for affiliation was made on 29 October 2010 and that the inspection committee of the University inspected the premises of the petitioner No. 2 college on 24 January 2011. it is further stated that however, in view of the new regulation framed by the AICTE, the petitioners were again required to submit application for necessary affiliation in continuation of the earlier application and therefore petitioners submitted such application on 28 Feb. 2011. Subsequently on 17 March 2011 the respondent University informed the petitioners that the petitioners’ proposals have been duly scrutinized and considered by the Board of College and University Development constituted under Section 35 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 and the Management Council of the University and it has been decided as a policy decision not to recommend the said applications to the AICTE. It is decided by the University Authorities that the Institutes should first obtain approval of the AICTE and Govt. of Maharashtra and after getting these approvals, University will start the procedure of affiliation. It is therefore, submitted that the petitioners have done everything which was within their powers to start the Engineering college but approval has been given by AICTE recently on 14 July 2011. Strong reliance is also placed on the decision ASN 6 WP-5455-11.sxw of the Apex Court in State of Tamil Nadu and another Vs. The Adhiyaman Educational and Research Institute, (1995) 4 SCC 104 and State of Maharashtra Vs.Sant Dyaneshwar Shikshan Shashtra Mahavidyalaya and ors. (2006) 9 SCC Page 1 in support of the contention that once AICTE has granted approval, the University cannot decline to grant affiliation on any other ground which is inconsistent with the provisions governing grant of approval by AICTE and the Regulation framed there under. 8 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that since the petitioners have been granted approval by AICTE on 14 July 2011 pursuant to the AICTE Regulation which came into force on 10 December 2010 and the AICTE had fixed 27 April 2011 as the last date for making application for approval; it is obvious that the time limit of 30 June stipulated in the full bench decision cited supra will not apply to the present academic year. 9 As regards the affiliation by respondent No.4 University, the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Tamilnadu and another Vs. Adhiyaman Educational & Research Institute and others and State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and others support the petitioners’ case that atleast petitioners’ name should be inserted in the list of institutions approved by AICTE so that the petitioners can participate in the common admission process. But at the same time we are of the view that in order to ensure that students being admitted to petitioner-No.2 college do not ASN 7 WP-5455-11.sxw suffer any prejudice on account of non compliance of the statutory requirement of affiliation with respondent No.4 University, it is necessary to record the statement of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners also undertakes that the petitioners will not admit any student or accept fees from the students before getting the affiliation from respondent No.4 -University. 10 Our attention is also invited to Regulation No.4.22 of the aforesaid AICTE Regulation, 2010 which provides that :- “It is provided that the Institutions other than minority Institutions shall appoint teaching staff/Principal/Director and other technical supporting staff and administrative staff strictly in accordance with the methods and procedures of the concerned affiliating university particularly in case of selection procedures and selection committees. The information about these appointments of staff in the prescribed format shall also be uploaded on the web portal of AICTE as per the schedule prescribed in the approval process hand book. In no circumstances unless the appointment of all teaching and other staff is in place, the Institutes shall start the approved Technical Course.” ASN 8 WP-5455-11.sxw The petitioners shall also comply with the aforesaid regulations of the AICTE. 11 In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed:- ORDER i) Written undertakings of the Chairman and Secretary of Petitioner No.1 not to admit any student and accept fees till the college is granted affiliation/permission by respondent-University/Board and till petitioners comply with Regulation 4.22 of AICTE shall be filed in this Court within one week from today and copy thereof shall be forwarded to all the respondents within one week from today. ii) Respondent No.2 State of Maharashtra shall accordingly issue appropriate Government Resolution notifying the petitioner No.2 College as approved by AICTE in the list of such colleges for centralized admission process to be published today for the academic year 2011-2012 and respondent No.3 Director of Technical Education shall forthwith include the petitioner-college for Centralized Admission Process for the first year Engineering Course for the academic year 2011-2012 and to display the name of Petitioner- College on its website along with other colleges. The information of said publication will be published by DTE by this evening by 5.00p.m. ASN 9 WP-5455-11.sxw iii) It is further directed that Petitioner-College shall not admit any student and accept the fees before getting the affiliation from respondent No.4 University and before complying with Regulation No. 4.22 of AICTE (Grant of Approvals for Technical Institutions) Regulation 2010. Undertakings as aforesaid shall be filed in this Court within one week and copies thereof shall be forwarded to all the respondents within one week. iv) It is further directed that Director of Technical Education shall publish the information and also specifically mention that the application of the petitioner college for affiliation is pending with the concerned university and that no student shall be admitted by petitioner college without getting such affiliation. . v) The petition is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms. vi) Respondent-University/Board will be at liberty to move this Court for modification/clarification of this order, in case the need arises. This order is dictated in presence of the learned Additional Government Pleader Mr. Behere who is instructed by Mr. S.V. Kolla, Officer on Special Duty of Director of Technical Education who is present in Court. ASN 10 WP-5455-11.sxw Parties to act on a copy of this order duly authenticated by the registry of this Court. CHIEF JUSTICE GIRISH S. GODBOLE, J.