IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1826 OF 2008 PETITION (L) NO. 1826 OF 2008 PETITION (L) NO. 1826 OF 2008 The Shetkari Shikshan Mandal ... Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. A.V. Anturkar alongwith Sugandh B. Deshmukh for thepetitioner. Mr.M.D.Naik AGP for the respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM : P.B. MAJUMDAR & : P.B. MAJUMDAR & : P.B. MAJUMDAR & A.A. A.A. A.A. SAYED, JJ. SAYED, JJ. SAYED, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : AUGUST 1, 2008. : AUGUST 1, 2008. : AUGUST 1, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The petitioner is an Educational Institution and is running an institute of Technology in Pune. 2. By filing this petition, it is prayed that the respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 herein include the name of the Petitioner in the list of the Eligible Institutions/ Colleges for allotment of the students for the year 2008-2009 for MBA Course through the Centralized Admission Process monitored and implemented by the Respondent No.2. It is prayed that the petitioner may be allowed to give the admission to the students from the merit list prepared by the Respondent No.2. Petitioner also prayed that the respondent No.2 may be directed to correct website and direct the respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the list of the Institution and to allot 60 students as per approved intake for the year 2008-2009 for the MBA Course in pursuance of the revised order passed by All India Council for Technical Education. 3. The Petitioners have placed on record the decision taken for AICTE approval for extension/ increase/ variation in intake/ introduction of additional courses including MBA for the year 2007-2008. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr. Anturkar submitted that in view of this permission granted to the Petitioner by the All India Council for Technical Education on 30th June, 2008, the respondent No. 2 may allow students to take admission to the additional MBA Course. Mr. Anturkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that admission process is still going on and he is ready to give advertisement in this behalf. He further submits that in view of the decision taken earlier by the Division Bench in case of YERALA MEDICAL TRUST & YERALA MEDICAL TRUST & YERALA MEDICAL TRUST & RESEARCH RESEARCH RESEARCH CENTRE & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA CENTRE & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA CENTRE & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND AND AND ORS., reported in 2006(1) Bom.C.R. 701, ORS., reported in 2006(1) Bom.C.R. 701, ORS., reported in 2006(1) Bom.C.R. 701, the reliefs prayed for may be granted. 5. The learned AGP Mr. Naik appearing for the respondents submitted that it is true that the admission process is going on and one round of admission process is still going on out of four rounds and according to him, the respondent will have to incur additional expenditure to release a fresh advertisement in this behalf. He has relied upon the decision of the Division Bench in Writ Petition No. Writ Petition No. Writ Petition No. 5538 5538 5538 of 2006, dated 18th August, 2006 of 2006, dated 18th August, 2006 of 2006, dated 18th August, 2006 wherein the Division Bench has directed the State of Maharashtra to release a common advertisement in two Marathi newspapers with regard to the institutions in question and for that purpose, the petitioner was directed to deposit Rs. 2 lac with the State of Maharashtra so as to enable the State of Maharashtra to release the common advertisement with regard to the intake capacity of the institutes involved in the petition. 6. Mr. Anturkatr submitted that the petitioner will deposit Rs. 2 lac immediately with the Director of Technical Education, Mumbai. In that view of the matter, State may take all possible steps to publish the advertisement in two Marathi news paper as early as possible. 7. The petition can be conveniently disposed of by the following directions. (i) If before the last date of the admission/ counselling process, AICTE increases the intake capacity of existing Institution or grants permission for new colleges, the State Government will take into consideration such additional seats and take steps to fill in these seats from amongst students already on their merit list and without interfering with the admission process already completed; (ii) This would, however, be subject to the condition that such Institution must have affiliation with a University as directed by AICTE and the institutional students are in a position to complete the necessary number of days for appearing for the examination in terms fixed by AICTE as followed by the University. (iii) It is made clear that those who have already been admitted before the increased intake capacity or approval by AICTE by granting approval of new institution or additional intake capacity will not be entitled to apply, nor will the State consider their applications for admission in the new college where approval has been granted or intake capacity increased. 8. It is further made clear that the Petitioners Institute shall inform each of the students who will be admitted to their MBA course that the admission will be purely provisional subject to the Institution obtaining requisite affiliation from the University. 9. With these directions, the petition stands disposed of. [A.A.SAYED, [A.A.SAYED, [A.A.SAYED, J.] J.] J.] [P.B.MAJUMDAR, [P.B.MAJUMDAR, [P.B.MAJUMDAR, J.] J.] J.]