IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 13TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 22ND BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26325 of 2010(M) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- FATHIMA MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN A.YOUNUS KUNJU, PALLIMUKKU, VADAKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM-10. BY ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA, SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN, SRI.M.R.ANISON, SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, AICTE, SOUTH WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE, BANGALORE UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, P.K.BLOCK, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.N. SANTHOSH. R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY. R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.26325 of 2010 (M) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 13th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Trust, and is running various educational institutions, including an Engineering College. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P9 order of the AICTE dated 23/08/2010, the AICTE allowed the petitioner to start M.Tech course in Civil Engineering and Applied Electronics & Instrumentation with an intake of 18 students each. It is stated that the petitioner applied to the respondent University for affiliation to start the course way back in 2009, by Ext.P3. Consequently, the infrastructure available in the college were inspected on 23/01/2010. In this writ petition what the petitioner seeks is a direction to the 2nd respondent to issue No Objection Certification to the petitioner to start the Post Graduate courses, which are sanctioned by the AICTE as per Ext.P9 order and to declare that the action of the University in not issuing NOC to start the course during the year 2010-2011 is unconstitutional. 2. Initially the stand taken by the University was that the order produced by the petitioner as the sanction of the AICTE was WP(C) No.26325/2010 -2- only a print out from the AICTE website. Thereupon the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has made available a copy of the AICTE order dated 23/08/2010 and produced the same as Ext.P9, which shows that a copy thereof has been forwarded to the University itself. 3. Now that it is obvious that the AICTE has sanctioned the course as asserted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and as the University has no case that the infrastructure available in the College is inadequate, there is no reason why the petitioner shall not be given NOC as sought for by them. This is all the more so in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Vikram Sarabhai Educational Trust & B.Ed College v. University of Calicut & another (2008(2) KHC 647). In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to produce a copy of Ext.P9 along with a copy of this judgment before the University, and the University, within four weeks thereafter, shall issue NOC as sought for by the petitioner. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg