Kambli 1 wp6349.10 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6349 OF 2010 ... Jagadamba Education Society Yeola ...Petitioner v/s. All India Council for Technical Education & ors. ...Respondents ... Mr.P.M.Haridas i/b Mr.P.N.Joshi for the Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, Addl.G.P. for Respondents Nos.2 to 9. Mr.Rui Rodrigues for Respondent No.1. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATED: 20TH OCTOBER,2010 P.C.: 1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. Kambli 2 wp6349.10 2. The Petitioner-Institution challenges the order dated 27th July, 2010 passed by the Respondent No.1 rejecting the application filed by the Petitioner for establishment of new technical institution in the name of SND College of Hotel Management and RC Center at Babhlgaon, Yeola, Nasik. It is an admitted position that initially the application filed by the Petitioner was not approved by the Technical Committee and deficiencies were pointed out. Therefore, appeal was filed before the Appellate Committee and the Appellate Committee by order dated 19-6-2010 found that the Petitioner had removed all the deficiencies and therefore, their case was recommended. Now, if the General Council wanted to disagree with the recommendation of the Appellate Committee the minimum that was required is that the Petitioner should have Kambli 3 wp6349.10 been told about it and also the reason why the Committee wants to disagree with the Appellate Committee. But the General Council without observing these elementary principles of natural justice by order dated 27th July, 2010 rejected the application of the Petitioner. The order shows that there is no application of mind of the Respondent No.1 to the recommendation made by the Appellate Committee. In our opinion, the recommendation of the Appellate Committee could not have been disregarded without even referring to them and deal with them. The recommendations of the Appellate committee were in favour of the Petitioner and therefore, before disregarding those recommendations a notice of the intention of the General Council to disregard the recommendations to the Petitioner was necessary. We find that the order impugned in the petition is completely Kambli 4 wp6349.10 in breach of the principles of natural justice and therefore, it will have to be set aside. In our opinion, therefore, following order would meet the ends of justice. O R D E R 1. The Order dated 27th July, 2010 passed by the Respondent No.1 is set aside. 2. The Respondent No.1 is directed to reconsider the application of the Petitioner in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, in any case within a period of three months from today. 3. If the Application is granted, the course will commence from the next academic year. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE, J.)