IN THE HIGH COURT OF UT ARAKHAND AT NAINITAL T Writ Petition (M/S) No. 297 of 2010. Inspiration College of Teachers Education, Polysheet, Post Office- Kathgodam, District Nainital through its Director Shri Deepak Balutia, S/O Shri N.C.Balutia. … Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of Uttarakhand through Principal Sdcretary, Higher Education, Secretariat, Dehradun. 2. Chancellor, Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital. 3. Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital through its Registrar. 4. National Council for Teacher Education, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. …Respondents. (2) Writ Petition (M/S) No. 298 of 2010. Jai Arihant Academic Institute, Arihant Puram, Academic City, Bareilly Road, Haldwani, District Nainital, through its Joint Secretary Shri Sanjay Jain, S/O Shri Suresh Chandra Jain. … Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of Uttarakhand through Principal Sdcretary, Higher Education, Secretariat, Dehradun. 2. Chancellor, Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital. 3. Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital through its Registrar. 4. National Council for Teacher Education, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. …Respondents. (3) Writ Petition (M/S) No. 299 of 2010. Devbhumi College of Education, Choona Bhatta, Road, Banbasa, District Champawat through its Secretary, Nischal Pandey, S/O Late Shri Mohan Chandra Pandey. … Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of Uttarakhand through Principal Sdcretary, Higher Education, Secretariat, Dehradun. 2. Chancellor, Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital. 2 3. Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital through its Registrar. 4. National Council for Teacher Education, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. …Respondents. (4) Writ Petition (M/S) No. 300 of 2010. Shriram Institute of Management & Technology, 7 Km. Stone Kashipur-Ramnagar Road, Corbett Sun City, Kashipur, Distt. Udham Singh Nagar, through its Vice Chairman Shri Brijesh Kumar S/O Late Shri Ram Chandra. … Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of Uttarakhand through Principal Sdcretary, Higher Education, Secretariat, Dehradun. 2. Chancellor, Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital. 3. Kumaon University Nainital, District Nainital through its Registrar. 4. National Council for Teacher Education, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. …Respondents. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. K.P.Upadhyay, Additional C.S.C. for the respondent No.1. Mr. B.D.Upadhyay, Advocate, for the respondent no.3. Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate, for the respondent no. 4. Date March 11, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Since the prayer made in all the four writ petitions is the same and the controversy involved therein identical, therefore, for the sake of convenience, all the four petitions are being decided by this common order. By means of these writ petitions, the petitioner in each petition has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent university to accord extension of affiliation to 3 the petitioner institute for the B.Ed. session 2009-2010 of 100 seats forthwith. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Executive Council wholly arbitrarily, illegally and without application of mind against the U.P.State Universities Act, 1973 (for short the Act) and the N.C.T.E. Act recommending the affiliation to the petitioner institute forwarded the same to the State Government whereas the said recommendation should have been forwarded to the Chancellor of the respondent university who happens to be the head of the Executive Council and the sanctioning authority of granting affiliation to a particular institute under Section 37(2) of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the State Government has no role to play in the matter of affiliation and the respondent no.1 is lingering on the matter without any authority of law. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the Apex Court judgment in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Danyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and others [2006 (9) Supreme Court Cases, 11] wherein it has been held inter alia in para 80 that as per the scheme of the Act once recognition has been granted by N.C.T.C. under Section 14(6) of the Act, every University (examining body) is obliged to grant affiliation to such institution. The petitioners without making a representation to the University have filed these writ petitions. Mandamus can only be issued in case of inaction on the part of the University after the representation having been made before it. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, liberty is given to the petitioners to make a representation before the 4 respondent nos. 2 and 3 for redressal of their grievance. If the representation is made the authorities concerned namely respondent nos. 2 and 3, shall decide the representation of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. With the above direction, all the four writ petitions are disposed of finally. All pending applications stand disposed of. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP 5