Page 1

               NON-REPORTABLE                 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                  CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

         WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 404 OF 2015

    Government Mohindra Instt. of       Information Technology & Anr.     ... Petitioner(s)

               VS.

    All India Council For Technical       Education & Ors.                       ... Respondent(s)

     J U D G M E N T

ANIL R. DAVE, J.

1. The Petitioner is a Government college run by Higher Education Institute of Society which was established in the year 1875 and for the last 140 years it is imparting education to the students of the State of Punjab.

2. The  Petitioner-College  wanted  to  set  up  a  new technical  institute  for  running  MCA  Course  from  the academic  year  2015-16  and  therefore,  had  submitted  an application to Respondent No.1.  The said application had been  considered  by  Respondent  No.1  and  after  certain instructions  and  doing  necessary  formalities,  the  said application had been rejected on 7th April, 2015.

3. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection dated 7th

1

Page 2

April, 2015, the Petitioner-College had filed an appeal against  the  said  order  before  the  Standing  Appellate Committee  of  Respondent  No.1.   The  Standing  Appellate Committee had heard a representative of the Petitioner- College  on  14th April,  2015  and  at  that  time,  the Petitioner-College  had  also  been  informed  about  some deficiencies  which  have  been  found  at  the  time  of physical inspection of the  Petitioner-College.  After affording a hearing to the  Petitioner-College, a letter dated 24th April, 2015 had been addressed to the Standing Appellate Committee pointing out the deficiencies to be removed by the  Petitioner-College.  It is an admitted fact  that  letter  dated  24th April,  2015,  whereby  the Standing Appellate Committee had been informed about the removal  of  deficiencies,  had  not  been  brought  to  the notice of the Standing Appellate Committee when it had convened its meeting on 27th April, 2015 and ultimately, on 30th April, 2015 a final order rejecting application for initiation of a new course had been passed by the Standing Appellate Committee.

4. The above referred facts have not been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, whose function is to grant necessary permission for starting a new MCA course.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the  Petitioner-

2

Page 3

College  has  mainly  submitted  that  had  the  Standing Appellate  Court  considered  the  contents  of  the  letter dated  24th April,  2015,  possibly  the  application submitted for starting a new course would not have been rejected.

6. We have considered the facts of the case in the light of the fact that the Petitioner-College is a Government College  which  had  been  established  in  the  State  of Punjab and has been imparting education for the last 140 years.  The said institute is the oldest institute in the State of of Punjab having a very good reputation and it is not disputed that all deficiencies, which had been pointed  out  to  the   Petitioner-College,  had  been substantially  removed  and  in  our  opinion,  for  a negligible  defect,  which  the  learned  counsel  appearing for Respondent No.1 has pointed out to us, there was no reason  for  rejecting  the  application  submitted  by  the Petitioner-College.

7. In our opinion, by not placing the letter of the Petitioner-College  dated  24th April,  2015  before  the Standing  Appellate  Committee  which  had  convened  its meeting  on  27th April,  2015,  the  principles  of  natural justice had been violated and therefore, the final order dated 30th April, 2015 passed by the Standing Appellate Committee of Respondent No.1 deserves to be quashed and

3

Page 4

set aside.

8. In view of the fact that the deficiencies have been removed,  we  direct  Respondent  No.1  to  reconsider  the case  of  the  Petitioner-College  as  soon  as  possible, especially, in view of the fact that 15th August, 2015 is the last date for admitting the students to the course which the Petitioner-College is going to initiate.   

9. The  final  decision  which  might  be  taken  by Respondent  No.1  shall  be  communicated  to  the Petitioner-College immediately and if the final decision is  taken  in  favour  of  the   Petitioner-College,  the Petitioner  shall  be  permitted  to  give  admission  to  60 students to MCA course which it proposes to commence and Respondent  No.3-University  is  also  directed  to  do  the needful  to  grant  the  necessary  permission  to  the Petitioner-College  with  regard  to  initiation  of  new course.

10. For  the  afore-stated  reasons,  looking  at  the peculiar facts of the case, we allow this petition and grant the relief, as prayed for, in the writ petition to the effect that the letters of rejection dated 7th April, 2015 and 30th April, 2015 issued by Respondent No.1, are quashed and set aside so that needful can be done for grant of approval to the Petitioner-College for setting up a new technical institute to run MCA course with an

4

Page 5

intake  of  60  students  for  academic  session  2015-16. Upon  necessary  permission  being  granted,  Respondent No.3-University  is  directed  to  consider  grant  of affiliation to the Petitioner-College in respect of MCA course, which it proposes to initiate from academic year 2015-16.  

..............J. [ANIL R. DAVE]

..............J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]

New Delhi; 10th August, 2015.

5