Allowed

Shikshan and Krushi Vikas Pratishthan, Medshingi, through President, Dilipkumar Ingawale v. All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Jul 2014CAW/1534/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench granted interim relief permitting applicants to admit students for the second shift in Diploma Pharmacy courses for the academic year 2014-15, based on AICTE permission and a similar order passed concurrently.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to permit provisional admission of students for first-year D-Pharmacy course in second shifts based on last year intake capacity.

Shikshan and Krushi Vikas Pratishthan, Medshingi… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

928-caw1532.14etc.

¶2

krs

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

APPELLATE SIDE

¶5

CIVIL APPLICTION NO.1532 OF 2014 In WRIT PETITION NO.6214 OF 2013 With WRIT PETITION NO.6214 OF 2013

¶6

K.B.H.S.S. Trust

¶7

: Applicant /Petitioner

¶8

V/s.

¶9

All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. : Respondents

¶10

With

¶11

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1533 OF 2014

¶12

In WRIT PETITION NO.6215 OF 2013 With

¶13

WRIT PETITION NO.6215 OF 2013

¶14

Aldel Education Trust : Applicant/Petitioner V/s.

¶15

All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. : Respondents

¶16

With

¶17

CIVIL APPLCIATION NO.1534 OF 2014

¶18

In WRIT PETITION NO.6276 OF 2013 With WRIT PETITION NO.6276 OF 2013

¶19

Shikshan & Krushi Vikas Pratishthan Medshingi : Applicant/Petitioner V/s.

¶20

All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. : Respondents

¶21

Mr.G.S.Godbole with Mr.S.D.Patil for the Applicants/Petitioners.

¶22

928-caw1532.14etc.

¶23

krs

¶24

Mr.A.I.Patel, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State.

¶25

Ms Nandini Chittal i/b. Mr.M. Janardhanan for Respondent no.5.

¶26

Mr.Mihir Desai with Sariputta S. and Mr.Swaraj Jadhav for AICTE.

¶27

DATE : JULY 11, 2014.

¶28

P.C.:

¶29

Considering the averments made and as case is made out as the Applicants/Petitioners want to place on record subsequent developments, the Civil Applications for amendment are allowed. The Petitioners to carry out amendment forthwith.

¶30

The learned counsel for the Applicants/Petitioners has pointed out that the earlier order dated 16.07.2013 was passed by this Court after considering the material placed on record and also recording the fact that the AICTE has permitted the Applicants/Petitioners to run Diploma Courses for the Second Shift. The submission is made that for this academic year 2014-15, the AICTE has granted the same permission to the Applicants/Petitioners to run the Diploma Courses for the Second Shift. Considering the fact that the order dated 16.07.2013 is still intact and has not been challenged and/or the order so passed is not stayed, we are inclined to grant ad-interim relief on the same terms for the academic year 2014-15. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-Pharmacy Council opposed the ad-interim relief by relying on the

2 of 4

928-caw1532.14etc.

krs

judgment of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.274 of 2012 (@ SLP (C ) No.27239 of 2011) (Medical Council of India v. JSS Medical College & Anr.), we are inclined to observe that in spite of knowledge of the order dated 16.07.2013, the Pharmacy Council has not taken any steps to challenge the said order. The fact and circumstances, including the basic permission of AICTE also support the case of the Petitioners. We see no reason to deny the relief in the interest of justice and the students at large. The issue with regard to supremacy of the AICTE and/or Pharmacy Council is also pending for consideration.

¶35

A Division Bench of this Court (Aurangabad Bench) has passed order dated 27.06.2014 in Writ Petition no.4751 of 2014 (Kai. Yashodabai Dagadu Saraf Charitable Trusts College of Pharmacy v. The State of Mah. & Ors.) has granted similar relief which we propose to grant. Therefore, the following order is passed:

¶36

O R D E R

¶37

In view of the above, by way of interim relief, we direct the Respondents to permit the Petitioners to admit students as per the last year intake capacity for First Year D-Pharmacy Course in Second Shift. We make it clear that the admission granted to the students shall be provisional and such students shall not claim any equity by virtue of grant of provisional admission which is liable to be cancelled depending on the result of the Writ Petitions. The Petitioners-

¶38

3 of 4

¶39

krs 928-caw1532.14etc.

¶40

Institutions shall inform each of the students who are desirous to take admission that his/her admission is provisional and depend upon the result of the Petitions and that he/she shall not be entitled to claim equity.

¶41

The Civil Applications are disposed of.

¶42

Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶43

( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

¶44

(A.A. SAYED, J.)

¶45

4 of 4

Shikshan and Krushi Vikas Pratishthan, Medshingi, through President, Dilipkumar Ingawale v. All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shikshan and Krushi Vikas Pratishthan, Medshingi, through President, Dilipkumar Ingawale v. All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Ravindra Shrirang Bargal Vs the Member Secretary, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran and Ors.

Dr. D. Y. Patil Pratishthans Padmashree Dr. D. Y. Patil Polytechnic, through Secretary and Trustee Vs Directorate of Technical Education, Maharashtra State and Ors.

Ashokrao Mane Polytechnic, Save, by Shri. Balasaheb Mane Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, through Secretar Vs Directorate of Technical Education, Maharashtra State and Ors.

Shikshan and Krushi Vikas Pratishthan, Medshingi, through President, Dilipkumar Ingawale Vs All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

K. B. H. S. S. Trust, through Mr. Bairagi Vinod Ashokdas Vs All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Aldel Education Trust, through Mr. Albert W. Dsouza Vs All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.