aiSiSss 1^:; r ; !1 "\. ^"^ ;u'l '^;^ :;^%^':'^^.^sf^^^%;f^fK;;^t';;'^^ y^ m^i CGURT OF rHHAtrTES^RH AT BILASPUR fC 6 ) Writ Petiti^ No. 5750 of 2005 T Jai &hame3hwari Educational Society Versus Stoteof Chhattisgarh <& Qthers Judgment for considerotjon. J O^K Hon'b!s Shri Satish K. Aanihotri J Sd/- F Justic® 26-09-2007 Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge T^>. Post for _^7September, 2J007 Sd/- ^JS^ Chief Jt.istice ^1_/<»/2007 l:m HiGH COURT OF CHI^ATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DJVJ^JONBENCH CORAIVI: Petitioner HON'BLE SHRI JAGDiSH BHALLA, Ag. CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI SATiSH K. AGNIHOTRI, J. Writ Petitioh No. 5750 of 2GQ5 Jai Dhaneshwari Educationai Society (Reg. Chhattisgarh Rajya 227) Through Suhas Kadam S/o Batlram Kadam Aged about 26 years, Occupation — Assistant Professor R/o V!P Road, Raipur, District: Raij&ur (CG) ResDondents : i^ .. •j^C Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Tiirough the Secretary, | Department of Agriculture, 1 DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG) 2. Vlce Chancelipr, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalay Krishak Nagar, Raipur(CG) j 3. Chairman Bqard j of Management, Indira Gandhii Krishi Vishwavidyalay KrishakNagar, Ra3pur(CG) 4. Registrar, Iridiral Gandhi Krishl Vishwavidyalay Krishak Nagar, Raipur (CG) Writ Petition under Articies 22S/227 of the Constitution of India Prssent: Smt. Hamida Siddique, couhsel for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Mishra. Additiona! Advocate General for the State / respOndent No.1. Shri Prashant Mishra, Senior Advocate with Shri Shashank Thakur. Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2to4. !' ,. : ' • .!- ; ;: :^ 1'' . / .-> JUDGMENT (DelJveredon?!s2.September, 2067) The foilowing judgment of the Court was delivered by Hon'ble Jagdish Bhalla, Ag. C.J. This writ petition is directed againstthe part of the notificafion dated 04-08-2005 whereby the Board pf Management of indiraGandhi '/ ^' k % ^ K •^'^ ! i -2.- Krishi Vishwavidyaiay has rejiiised to grant permission for fresh admission of sfudents durin^ Academic Session 2005-06 in the Coliege of Agricultural Biotechnoiogy. The Board of IVianagement has further suggested that the Coil^ge can change the degree from B.Sc (Agricuiturai Biotechnology) toj B.Sc (BiotechnolQgy) and^^^^^^^^^^ afflliation from any other Tr^ditional Univei|sity. In the Nationaj Agricultural Research and EduGatlon system as regulated/managed by 1CAR, no undergraduate Prog§|amme / Degree can be offered in the name of B.Sc(AgriculturaI Biotechnolog^ or B.Sc' (Biotechnoiogy) as such affiisation for the sald degree cannot be jcontinued. !t has been further prayed that a writ in the nature ofj mahdamus be issued dlrectlng the respondents to allow the petitioner - college to continue with B.Sc (Agncuitural Biotechnology) degre|e cpurse in the larger interest of Justice as also to grant permissio^ fori fresh admission of thestudents dyring the academic session 2005-20C^ with the intake capacity as was approved at the time ofl grsnting recognition / afflliation. !t has been submitted on behalf ofjthe ipetitioner that the petitioner-Society is imparting education up to thje degree level and was accorded affiiiation / recognition fbr the B.Sc (Biotechnology Programme) by notification dated 19-12-2002 and were allotted 96 seats wth certain terms and conditions and requisite facilities and faculty. AccorcJingiy, 96 students were admitt^d in the aforesaid course for the academic session 2002-2Q03J artd for the academfo session 2003-2004 & 2004-2CX}5,78 and 96;students were admitted respectiveiy. The petEtioner "-Society was refysed to admit the students in the aforesaid course for the academ!cyear 2005-2006 and j was thus disaffiliated on the ground that Nationai Agricultural Research SSK- ISIf BK il:i!:il ! .^1 nri.il ^v L!f -z-:^ . ! !1 /•; •1 • and Education System as regul^ted / managed by 1-C.A.R;, no under graduate Programm^ / degree has been offered in the name of B.Sc i' • ; .. ;';' .' i ^. :-' .' ' .- ;• :.:'': •:•' 1^.; ••1' • (Agricultura! Biotechnoiogy) or B.Sc (Biotechnplogy). Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner Soci^ty filed a Writ Petition No.4240/2005 whlch was decided with a direcl|ion that in case the petitioner makes a representation beforethe Vice-ehancQilor/Chalrmanoflndira Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, the same be considered and decided in accordance with law/ Accordirig tothe petitiQner^^ft^ was considered and rejected by a cryptic onder dated 10-10-2005. Aggrieved bythe said order, thepetitioner preferred thiswrit petition. The representation of the petitioner was rejected in iight of the decislon taken by the Board otiVianagement jof indira Gandhi Krishl Vishwavidyalaya in its 56th meeting held on 30-b7-20Q5. The grounds taken bythe petitioner in ^his writ p^^^ similar grounds which were raised by the petitioner in the earlier writ petition wherein the petitloner could not get any relief exce^ petitioner was allowed to make representation to the authority concern. it was pointed out that the respondent 4 University has decided to fotlow the Nationa! Agriculturai Research ahd Education system as approved by I.C.A.R. and i.C.A.R. which is the apex body in the country with respect to National Agricuiturai Res^rch andE^^ System, does not provide a degree course inj Biotechnology and therefore, the petitionerwas not ailowed to admit|the students for the academic session 2005-2006. From the perusal ofthe impugnedbrder It is crystal clear that the fate of the studentsj who have already been enrolled has been secured, hence, for the said pu^ provided thatthe University wjll take appropriate rneasures for granting degree to the students who are already enrpjled and pursuing their 11 ? |:1 l^ ^. -^- ' . / '- ^ -, •' degree course in B.Sc (Agricuttura! Biotechnoiogy) or B,Sc (Biotechnoiogy). j The inspectlon report cohtained in Annexure R/1 dated 05-04- 2004 aiso Indicates that the facijities and faculty avaiiable for impartlng education was not found to be up to the mark as it does not satisfy the minimum requirements as per the norms which is crystal ciear from the perusa! of Annexure R/2 fiied along with theiresponse. It has also been brought to our knowledge| that the State ^ricuiturai Universities have been estabiished by the respective State Governments by an enactment, and I.C.A.R. piays a pivotal roiej by extending financiai assistance to such Universities for Agricultural Education and Research in the background of quaiity of education. Accordingiy, the norms indicated in Annexure R/2 were provided and the petitioner faiied to fulfill the norms. We find that when the writ petition was flled no interim order was granted and since academic session 2005-2006 has aiready over, accordingly, no effective relief can be granted. Hpwever, it does not mean that the other plea of the petitioner has been accepted by this Court. In iight of aforesaid facts, since the course in question is not available with the National Agricultura! Research and Education System, it was made open for the petitioner to approach any tradltionai University for recognition of the course and due care was taken for the students who were earlier admitted by providjng them the degree in question. !n the iight of the above circumstances, no interference is warranted under Article 22S of the Constitution. The writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- Ag. Chief Justice Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge li-e^