WP 6985/10 with CA 5787/11 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6985/2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5787/2011 Saili Charitable Trust’s College of Bachelor of Pharmacy, Aurangabad, through its Secretary V/s All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi & others. _______________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | Shri P.V. Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Shri Amol S. Gandhi, Advocate for petitioner. Shri Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General for respondent no.1. Smt.A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent nos.2 & 3. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. Date: 02.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision taken by All India Council for Technical Education dated 27.7.2010, by which the proposal made by the petitioner for new Technical Institution for a particular academic year has been rejected. By way of impugned order, the WP 6985/10 with CA 5787/11 2 officer namely one I.D. Gonjari, AD (Approval), has informed the petitioner that the Council did not accord the approval on the following ground: “The evidence for barrier free environment was not produced.” Learned Assistant Solicitor General points out that in the impugned order, there is reference about visit of the expert committee on 19.8.2010 and the said committee found certain deficiencies. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the spot inspection was carried out after the order dated 27.7.2010. Since in the original order, which is communicated to the petitioner, there is reference of only one ground i.e. non production of the evidence for barrier free environment, and there is no other reference to any other deficiencies in detail, the petitioner is directed to make appropriate representation / application to the authorities concerned within a period of two weeks from WP 6985/10 with CA 5787/11 3 today by pointing out removal of deficiencies as per the requirement of the Department and as per the rules, regulations and in accordance with law. The authorities may, after receipt of the application / representation from the petitioner, take fresh decision on merits in accordance with law within a period of three months and communicate the order to the petitioner. The petitioner is at liberty to produce appropriate material before the authorities in order to comply with the requirements. The impugned order is set aside in view of above circumstances. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and all the points raised by the petitioner are kept open to be considered by the authorities concerned on merits. Till the application / representation of the petitioner is decided by the authorities, the FDR given by the petitioner shall continue to remain in force, however, subject to WP 6985/10 with CA 5787/11 4 decision by the authorities. In view of above, the petition is disposed of. Civil Application No.5787/2011 does not survive and disposed of. (S.S. Shinde, J.) (P.B. Majmudar, J.) Dt/- 02.05.2011 ndk/c25112