IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 11TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23859 of 2011(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- THE MANAGER, VISWAJYOTHI COLLEGE OF ENGG. & TECHNOLOGY, VAZHAKKULAM, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM SRI.MATHEW K. SIMON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. M.G.UNIVERSITY, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM 686660. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, M.G.UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM 686660. 3. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPT., GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 686001. SRI.T.A.SHAJI, SC FOR UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.23859/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT FROM THE AICTE WEBSITE. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM FOR STARTING POST GRADUATE COURSES DATED 28.1.2011. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.3.11 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.8.11 FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF UNDERTAKING DATED 26TH AUGUST, 2011. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.8.11 IN WPC NO.20215/2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 23859 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the Manager of an Engineering College affiliated to the 1st respondent University. For starting a course in M.Tech, the AICTE granted approval and based on which they made Ext.P2 for affiliation. The University inspected the college and on being satisfied of the infrastructure provided, recommended the case for affiliation. Thereafter by Ext.P4 dated 3/8/11, University informed the petitioner that they are awaiting views of the Government in the matter. Views are not forthcoming, as a result of which, application remains undecided. It is complaining of delay in the matter, the writ petition is filed. 2. I heard the learned standing counsel for the University. 3. In matters of similar nature, several cases have been disposed of by this Court including the one at Ext.P6, that the obligation of the University in terms of the statutes is to seek the views and if views are not forthcoming within a reasonable period, the University is free to decide on the application. Consistent with the above, I dispose of this writ petition also WPC No. 23859/11 :2 : directing that if the views are not forthcoming, the University shall take a decision on Ext.P2 application made by the petitioner. This the University shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp