t ^J^- w S t^. O ^ ^,.? S ' IN THE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION f C1 N0. ^3 J) OF 2010 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS / 1//' - <? M'/ ^s^ o^y/^y - ^'§ ^•' :.<» Sff y ITM Society, through its authorized signatory, Mesonite 2 Sector-1, Near Vidyamandir, Shankar Nagar, Raipur-492 001, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through Department of Higher Education, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Principal Secretary, Oepartment of Higher Education, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh Private University Regulatory Commission through its Competent Officer, near Madhu Pillay Chowk, near Ram Mandir, Shanti Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Commissioner, Higher Education, Directorate, Raipur,Chhattisgarh ? WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA —l]_PARTICULARSOF THE PETITIONER: - ^ &^^ "^y^•: '• HIGH COURT OF CHHA:mSGARH AI: BILASPUR PETI'nONER WRIT PETmON SC) No. 8S9 of2010 I'l'M Societv. VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Othsrs. WRIT PEITTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSnTLmON OF INDIA Present: B. „Ae: Shri B.P.Shamia. Advocate forthe pentioner. Shn -Ajay Dwivedi, Dsputy Govenmient Advocate forthe Stale/respondent No. 1, 2 and 4. Shri A.S.KaclAwaha, Advocate forthe respondent No. 3. (Passsd on Q6m day ofMay, 2011) * Leamed counsei appearing for tlie petitioner submits that in view Qf'the amendinent made m March. 2011 in tlie Cliliattissarh Pnvate Universities i''Establislu-nent and Ooeration) Act. 2.005, (for short "the Act, 2005") the impugiied order does not sun'ive aiid the respoiident authorities mav be directed to consider the case of the •^ petitioner in the lisbt ofameiided provisions ofthe Act, 2005. Slm KacKliwalia, ieamed counsel appearing tbr the respoiident No. 3 submits that the oi-der dated 04.01.2010 (Armexiire P/l) r.squires reconsideration in vievv of the subsequent ameadmait. Tlius, tlie same may be quashed with libei-tv' to the authorities to consider the same a fresh in accordance witli the ameaded provisions of law. In view ofthe above, the writ petition is disposed of However, the resDondent No. 3 mav consider and decide the case of the petitioner in view ofthe ainended provisions ofthe Act, 2005, as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks ITOITI tlie date ofreceipt ot 4 copv ofthis order. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge