IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2178 OF 2009 (MS) Shakuntala Devi Educational Institute. ….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and another. …Respondents. Mr. Rajendra Tamta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1. Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for the respondent no. 2. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Rajendra Tamta, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for the respondent no. 2. The short contention of the petitioner is that although it has applied for approval to the Bar Council of India, no decision has been taken on it by the Bar Council of India. Sri Vipul Sharma, learned counsel for the Bar Council of India has stated that the stand of the Bar Council of India is that before an approval can be granted by the Bar Council of India, the applicant must get an affiliation order from the University and only after such an affiliation, can they apply before the Bar Council of India. Relevant portion of Rule 16 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 reads as follows: “16. Conditions for a University to affiliate a Centre of Legal Education (1) When a University receives an application for affiliation of a Centre of Legal Education to provide legal education by running professional degree program in law under either or both the 2 streams, the University may before deciding whether it is fit case for seeking inspection from the Bar Council of India, shall ensure that (i) ……. (ii) ……. (iii) …… (iv) …….. (v) ……. (vi) if the prior permission of the State Government is necessary, a no objection certificate is obtained to apply for affiliation, (vii) ……. (viii) …….. (2) After affiliation order is received fro the University the Centres of Legal Education may only then apply for inspection by the Bar Council of India.” In view of the above settled position of law, there is no ground for interference in the present writ petition by this Court. However, at this stage, Mr. Rajendra Tamta, learned counsel for the petitioner states that his application which is pending before the State Government for granting “No Objection Certificate” may be expedited. Therefore, if such an application of the petitioner is pending before any of the authorities of the State Government, the said authority is hereby directed to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 24.12.2009 Rathour 3