IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7047 OF 2011 "Aditya Education Trust, Beed Vs. The All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. Atul M. Karad, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for respondent State. Mr. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General for the respondent Union of India. Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate, for respondent No.5. CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 16th SEPTEMBER, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2] By way of present petition, the petitioner has approached this court praying for a direction to the respondent No.3 – State of Maharashtra to issue necessary notification in respect of increase in intake granted by AICTE to the petitioner institute by communication dated 1/9/2011 and for a further direction to the respondent No.4, Director of Technical Education, Mumai to upload the increased intake in Mechanical Engineering Diploma level courses on its official website from 60 seats to 120 seats in the Centralized Admission Process for the academic year IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7047 OF 2011 "Aditya Education Trust, Beed Vs. The All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 2011-2012. 2] The petitioner is a society registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public trusts Act. A letter of approval was granted in favour of the petitioner institute from the academic year 2010-11 by the respondent No.1 – AICTE, with a intake capacity of 60 each, in various subjects for running the Diploma Courses including one in Mechanical Engineering. Accordingly, the Director of Technical Education issued the necessary Govt Resolution. For the academic year 2011-2012, the petitioner applied for extension of approval/increase in intake and for other additional courses. 3] The respondent No.1 – AICTE vide communication dated 1/9/2011, which was received by the petitioner on 8th September, 2011, granted request of the petitioner to increase the intake in Mechanical Engineer, Diploma level courses from 60 seats to 120 seats. However, the respondent No.4, informed the petitioner orally that as the cut off date is over, it will not be possible to update the intake capacity. Though the petitioner approached the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, since necessary steps were not taken by them, the petitioner has approached this court. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7047 OF 2011 "Aditya Education Trust, Beed Vs. The All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 3 4] By now, it is a settled position of law, that any decision taken by the respondent NO.1 in the matter of technical education would be binding on the respondent Nos. 3 and 4. A reference in this respect could be made to the judgment in the matter of “ State of Tamil Nadu and another Vs. Adhiyaman Educational & Research Institute and others” reported in (1995) 4 SCC 104. 5] In that view of the matter the writ petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (A). In the circumstances, there shall be no orders as to costs. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-