Remanded

Jeevan Polytechnic College v. the Appeal Committee

Madras HC16 Sept 2011WP(MD)/10402/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court set aside an impugned order refusing approval to the petitioner for starting a polytechnic college. The Court held that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice due to the lack of an opportunity for a personal hearing. The matter was remitted to the Assistant Director, AICTE.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned order of the Second Respondent and remitted the matter to pass a detailed order on merits after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Jeevan Polytechnic College Vs the Appeal Committee — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16 . 09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD) No.10402 of 2011

¶3

Jeevan Ploytechnic College, Rep. by its Correspondent, Vinmathi Nagar, NH-45 Trichy - Dindigul Road, Muthapudaiyanpatti Post, Manaparrai, Trichy District. ...Petitioner

¶4

-Vs-

¶5

1.The Appeal Committee, All India Council for Technical Education, 7th Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001. 2.All India Council for Technical Education, Represented by its Assistant Director, 7th Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001. 3.The Southern Regional Officer, Southern Regional Office, AICTE, Shastri Bhavan, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai. ...Respondents

¶6

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, praying to call for the records of the Respondents, relating to the impugned order of the 2nd Respondent in his proceeding F.No.SRO/2011-12/1-474053841 dated 12.08.2011 and to quash the same and to direct the respondents herein to grant approval to the petitioner for starting Jeevan Polytechnic, Vinmathi Nagar, NH-45, Trichy - Dindigul Road, Muthupudaiyanpatti Post, Manapparai, Trichy - 621 306 for the academic year 2011-2012 by considering the compliance report dated 27.06.2011 submitted by the petitioner.

¶7

For Petitioner : Dr.R.Manoharan For Respondents : Mr.C.Mahadevan for M/s.AL.Gandhimathi

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the proceedings in F.No.SRO/2011-12/1-474053841 dated 12.08.2001 of the Assistant Director, All India Council for Technical Education, 7th Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001. The petitioner has prayed to quash the same with a consequential direction to grant approval for starting Jeevan Polytechnic, Vinmathi Nagar, NH-45, Trichy - Dindigul Road, Muthupadaiyanpatti Post, Manapparai, Trichy - 621 306 for the academic year https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2011-2012, by considering the compliance report dated 27.06.2011.

¶10

¶11

The petitioner has assailed the impugned order on various grounds inter-alia that the institution was not given an opportunity of hearing, which according to the petitioner is mandatory.

¶12

When the matter came up for hearing on 13.09.2011, considering the grievance and urgency expressed in the matter of grant of approval, for starting a polytechnic college and the admissions to be made, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to serve notice on Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi, learned counsel for the All India Council for Technical Education. After notice, the matter has been listed for hearing today.

¶13

On this day, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.C.Mahadevan, learned counsel representing the respondents fairly submitted that the petitioner ought to have provided with an opportunity of personal hearing, before passing the impugned order. His submission is placed on record.

¶14

In view of the submissions of the learned counsel representing All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi it is not necessary to advert to other points raised by the writ petitioner and it is suffice to set aside the impugned order on the sole ground of violation of principles of natural justice.

¶15

Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the second respondent is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Assistant Director, All India Council for Technical Education, 7th Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001, second respondent herein, who shall pass a detailed order on merits and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner. The second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits duly following the procedures contemplated under law, as expeditiously as possible and not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Notice of inspection/enquiry, if any given to the petitioner, shall be given well in advance so as to enable the petitioner to attend the inspection/ enquiry.

¶16

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶17

No costs.

¶18

SD/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar (RTI)

¶20

/True copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S)

¶22

¶23

1.The Appeal Committee, All India Council for Technical Education, 7th Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001.

¶24

2.All India Council for Technical Education,

¶25

Represented by its Assistant Director, 7th Floor, Chandralok Building, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001.

¶26

3.The Southern Regional Officer, Southern Regional Office, AICTE, Shastri Bhavan, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶28

W.P.(MD) No.10402 of 2011 16.09.2011

¶29

sj/TR : 19.09.2011 : 2p/4c : IT

Jeevan Polytechnic College v. the Appeal Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeevan Polytechnic College v. the Appeal Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Ramadevi Vs the State Government

S. Arokiya Antony Majeela, Vs the Joint Director of School

R. Surulimuthu, S/O.Rasu, Vs the District Collector

Mrs.M. Indira Vs the Director of Public

Deesan Amose Vs the District Collector

M. Balakumar, Vs the District Collector