IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1588 OF 2008 Mahatma Education Society ..... Petitioner V/s. All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. .....Respondents Mr.Vijay Thorat, Sr. Advocate a/w Chetan Kapadia i/b C.J.Abhayankar, for the petitioner. Ms.Beena Menon, for respondent No.1. Mr.M.D.Naik, A.G.P., for respondent No.2. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2008. P.C. 1. By filing this petition, the petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer that the respondent No.1 may be directed to grant approval to the petitioner's institution for conducting the professional courses i.e. Management & Engineering, for the academic year 2008-09. Mr.Thorat, Senior Advocate, during the course of hearing, has submitted that in view of the fact that the said academic term has already commenced and in case the approval is granted, the procedure for enrolling the students shall be undertaken only for academic year 2009-10. It is pointed out that the petitioner's institution is running a school for the employees of the lessor 2 i.e. Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd., which is a Government India Undertaking and number of students are taking education in the school and therefore, the management was desirous to have professional courses in the field of Management and Engineering. According to the petitioner, they have got the premises which has been taken on lease by way of lease agreement for 30 years and they have all other infrastructure ready. The premises which was taken on lease belongs to Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. However, the approval has not been granted by respondent No.1 on the ground that the petitioner could not produce any material to show that the lease in favour of the petitioner is irrevocable. 2. In our view, such type of insistence is not justified on the part of respondent No.1 when it is an admitted fact that the petitioner is running a school in the very premises. However, in order to satisfy the so-called requirement of respondent No.1, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has placed on record a letter addressed by respondent No.4 to the Secretary of the petitioner's institution, informing the petitioner that they have no objection if the aforesaid professional courses are being run by petitioner's institution, provided all the terms & conditions are fulfilled as per lease agreement dated 16-10-2006 and if there is no breach of any terms & conditions. Accordingly, the lessor has given no objection certificate in this 3 behalf to the petitioner. 3. The lease agreement is confirmed by the respondent No.4 vide their letter dated 18-09-2008, which is kept on record and copy of the same is already given to the learned counsel for respondent No.1. In our view, the matter is required to be reconsidered again by the respondent No.1 in the light of the said letter of respondent No.1. The petitioner-institution has already shown its financial stability and the insistence on the part of respondent No.1 that there should be irrevocable lease agreement is not at all justified. 4. Be that as it may, in view of the letter of respondent No.4 dated 18-09-2008, the respondent No.1 is directed to reconsider the said aspect and to take fresh decision in connection with granting approval for aforesaid courses to the petitioner. While taking such decision, the letter addressed by respondent No.4 dated 18-09-2008 may also be taken into consideration and such decision may be taken within a period of two months from the receipt of order of this Court. In case any approval is granted, the petitioner-institution shall start the procedure for enrolling the students only for the next year 2009-10. Subject to what is stated hereinabove, the petition is disposed of. ( A.A.SAYED, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )