Allowed

Parshwanath Charitable Trusts v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Higher and Technical Education and Ors.

Bombay HC16 Jun 2016WP/6429/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by an engineering institute seeking affiliation for additional intake in Mechanical and Civil Engineering courses. Relying on a prior decision and the Supreme Court, the court directed the State and relevant authorities to issue the order, facilitate student admission, and upload the details on the centralized portal.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 to issue GR and grant affiliation; permitted student admission; directed Respondent Nos. 2, 5 to upload intake on website.

Parshwanath Charitable Trusts Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

WP-6429/16.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 6429 OF 2016

¶4

Parshwarnath Charitable Trust's A. P. Shah Institute of Technology. Versus

¶5

State of Maharashtra & Others.

¶6

..Petitioner.

¶7

..Respondents.

¶8

Mr. C. K. Thomas i/b C. K. Thomas & Associates for the Petitioner. Mr. P. P. Kakde, AGP for the State.

¶9

Mr. Abhishek Tripathi i/b Rui Rodrigues for Respondent No. 2. Ms. Meena Doshi for Respondent No. 4.

¶10

Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : June 16, 2016 .

¶11

P. C. :

¶12

Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties. By this writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking following reliefs :

¶13

“ (a) this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby directing Respondent Nos.1 2 and 3 to produce the relevant records and after considering the legality and validity and propriety thereof, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to forthwith :

¶14

(I) direct Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to accord / issue GR and grant permission / affiliation to the Petitioners' aforesaid additional intake in Mechanical and Civil Engineering in their existing B.E. Engineering course, as granted by Respondent No. 4;

1 / 3

patilsr

WP-6429/16.

(ii) permit to admit / allot students, under the centralised admission programme and also from the minority quota for the additional intake in said Mechanical and Civil Engineering courses (60 each); and

¶19

(iii) direct Respondent No. 2 and 5 to forthwith upload the Petitioner' aforesaid additional intake (Mechanical and Civil of 60 each) in the Petitioners' existing Engineering College as approved by Respondent No. 4 in their website of the centralized admission process for Engineering courses conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 5 from academic year 201617.”

¶20

Admittedly, the Petitioner – institute is running the Engineering College since 2014 with the intake capacity of 60 each in Mechanical and Civil Engineering with other branches. Also admittedly, by the order dated 30^th April 2016 the AICTE has increased the intake capacity of Civil and Mechanical Engineering of the Petitioner's institute to 120.

¶21

The grievance of the Petitioner is that despite approval by the Expert Body, Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 are not issuing the GR and granting affiliation for the additional intake of the Petitioner – Institute.

¶22

The very same issue involved in the present writ petition was the issue before this Court in Writ Petition No. 5816 of 2014. This Court relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Parshavanath Charitable Trust v. AICTE [(2013) 3 SCC 385] allowed the said writ petition and directed Respondent Nos. 1

2 / 3

patilsr

WP-6429/16.

and 2 therein to issue GR and grant affiliation to the Petitioner therein. This position is not disputed by Mr. Kakde, the learned AGP appearing for the State. In that view of the matter and for the reasons stated in the decision rendered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5816 of 2014 [dated 9^th July 2014], we allow this writ petition in terms of prayer clauses (a)(i) to (iii).

¶27

[SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.]

¶28

[RANJIT MORE, J.]

¶29

3 / 3

¶30

patilsr

Parshwanath Charitable Trusts v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Higher and Technical Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parshwanath Charitable Trusts v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Higher and 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

Mrs. Jyotsna Shailesh Mody and Anr. Vs Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation

Municipal Commissioner of Pune Vs Samayak Sankalp Vichar Santha through Chairman Mrs. Kavita v. Patekar

Shri. Shaaz Z. Fakih Vs the Municipal Corporation for Kalyan and Dombivali and Ors.

Nikhil Dilip Chauhan and 8 Ors. Vs Municipal Commissioner of Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Shri. Ratan Banvarilal Sharma and Ors. Vs the Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corp. and Ors.

Fatima Shabbir Sayyed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another