Sree Sakthi Charitable Trust rep. by its Chairman N.Dharmalingam, established and administering Sree Sakthi Engineering College, 839/1D bettathapurampudur, Karamadai, Coimbatore-641 104. .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The Member Secretary, All India Council for Technical Education, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110 070.

¶7

The Chairman, Standing Appeal Committee, All India Council for Technical Education, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110 070. 3. The Regional Officer, Southern Regional Office, AICTE, Shastri Bhavan, 1st Floor, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006.

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Development [UDA(3)] Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶9

The Director of Town and Country Planning, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶10

The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning (In-charge), Coimbatore Region, Dr.Nanjappa Road, Corporation Shopping Complex, Coimbatore-641 018.

¶11

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

¶12

Bilichi Village Panchayat rep. by its Special Officer, Karamadai Post, Coimbatore-641 104. .. Respondents * * *

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 AICTE to grant approval to the petitioner for starting new Diploma Course in the existing petitioner College from the academic year 2019-20 without insisting on DTCP approval, by accepting the approval granted by the Panchayat to the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶14

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar For Respondents: Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Senior Central Govt. Counsel for RR1 to 3 Mr.N.Inbanathan, Additional Govt. Pleader for RR 4-7 O R D E R

¶16

The petitioner is an educational trust running Sreee Sakthi Engineering College from the year 2010 at Bilichi Village, Bettathapuram Pudur, Karamadai, after obtaining appropriate approvals from the authorities and also affiliation from the Anna University. The All India Council for Technical Education (in short, "AICTE")/the respondents 1 to 3 also granted continuous affiliation year after year from 2010 till date.

¶17

It is stated that the petitioner Trust had obtained appropriate approval from the competent authorities to run the college, including the building approval from the President, Bilichi Village Panchayat by the proceedings dated 20.11.2006.

¶18

In so far as the approval granted by the President of the Bilichi Village Panchayat is concerned, where the college is functioning, the petitioner had applied to the Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP) for exemption as per G.O.Ms.No.111, Housing and Urban Development [UD4(3)] Department, dated 22.06.2017 and also remitted a sum of Rs.2,67,450/- and the same is pending.

¶19

The petitioner college conducts five undergraduate engineering courses and one postgraduate engineering course. While so, the petitioner trust decided to offer Diploma

¶20

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

¶21

Engineering Courses also in the same premises. For the said purpose, the petitioner college had applied to the first respondent for approval and permission for the academic year 2019-20 vide application dated 21.02.2019. The Scrutiny Committee report dated 05.03.2019 had shown the deficiency only with respect to the building plan not being approved by the DTCP. Thereafter, the AICTE had sent an e-mail communication to the petitioner college on 30.03.2019 at 7.58 p.m. to appear for scrutiny on 01.04.2019, which the petitioner was able to see only on 01.04.2019 and on the same day, they sought the third respondent to fix it on some other day. But they have not received any response at all. Now, the only deficiency pointed out by the AICTE is that the building plan is not approved by the DTCP. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶22

It is stated that the petitioner Trust had applied under G.O.Ms.No.111 for exemption with the DTCP and the same is pending and the petitioner cannot be faulted with and the AICTE cannot insist on approval from the DTCP for buildings constructed earlier. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is settled position of law that buildings, which are constructed in a panchayat area after 1994 do not require to get approval from the DTCP and for approval, the application has to be filed with the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat and the Executive Authority before giving approval has to get concurrence with the DTCP.

¶23

At this juncture, it is also relevant to advert to the following directions issued by a Division Bench of this Court in the judgment in Tamil Nadu Unaided Polytechnic Management Association V. Government of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2018) 4 CTC 129.

¶24

"46. In cases, which may include the petitioners herein, where the Executive Authority of the Panchayat might not have consulted either the Joint Director or the Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning before granting permission for construction of public buildings, this Court declares:

¶25

(a)In all such cases, the Executive Authority is directed to forward the papers to the Town Planning Authority, who may now consider them, and if required visit the premises in question, and offer his advice if the constructions have complied with all necessary statutory Rules and Regulations, and the latter shall forward his views or opinions to the Executive Authority. If opinions offered are positive, in that if the constructions are found to have complied with the Rules and Regulations and such other legal requirements, then the Executive Authority shall issue an order ratifying his earlier

¶26

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

¶27

order granting his permission. This will apply only to those public buildings in the Panchayat area constructed after the coming into force of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997 till today, the date of this Order, and not to any future application for constructions.

¶28

(b) Where any permission has been granted by the Executive Authority of the Panchayat without consulting the joint or Deputy Director of Panchayat in terms of Proviso to Rule 25, but no construction has yet commenced, it shall not be commenced, till opinion of the Town Planning Authority is obtained. If the opinion is not negative, then the earlier permission granted shall, subject to other provisions of law, remain in force. If the opinion of the Town Planning Authority is negative, the Executive Authority of the Panchayat shall forthwith cancel the permission earlier granted after following the due process of law.

¶29

(c) In cases of partially constructed buildings, no completion certificate or other amenities be provided unless a favourable opinion is given by the Town Planning Authority.

¶30

(d) In all cases falling under (a) and (c), if the opinion of the Town Planning Authority is negative, then such authorities as are empowered to initiate action for illegal constructions shall initiate appropriate actions as per law. The power to grant sanction for construction by the Panchayat is no answer to a builder or a developer violating Rules and Regulations pertaining to construction activities."

¶31

The Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment gave certain directions emphasizing that a procedure has to be adopted while obtaining DTCP approval, hence, the petitioner has to follow the same. The Division Bench also made it clear that there should be single window system through which, either past or future approvals could be done.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that since the cut-off date for obtaining the approval of the AICTE is on or before 30th April of each year, the anxiety of the petitioner is that the approval should not be rejected for want of certification from the DTCP authorities. It is also pointed out that the "Approval Process Handbook 2019-20" of the AICTE is a legal document as per the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 and other various acts, including the University Grants Commission Act. Annexure XVI provides for answers to frequent queries. 14.4. says "if an Institution intends to utilise a Building constructed earlier, the Building

¶33

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

¶34

approvals obtained from the then authorities shall be produced, else the approval for the same shall be obtained from the current approving authorities."

¶35

Going by the above clarification, as issued by the first and second respondents/ AICTE, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the original approval granted by the Bilichi Village Panchayat on 20.11.2006 itself is sufficient for the AICTE to consider the application of the petitioner for approval. However, in view of the subsequent development, namely, issuance of G.O.Ms.No.111 and the directions issued by the Division Bench, as stated supra, the petitioner is bound to follow the same.

¶36

Learned counsel for the AICTE also pointed out that the Handbook is applicable for each of the States all over India and when there is a specific direction given by this Court, particularly, for the State of Tamil Nadu, even the AICTE is bound to follow the said procedure and consequently, without any doubt, the petitioner is also bound to satisfy the authorities by producing the DTCP approval.

¶37

Though the Division Bench has given certain directions, since time-frame for each of the authorities is not prescribed and the approval of the AICTE is to be granted by 30th April of each year, the petitioner as well as similarly placed institutions find it difficult to get the order of approval within time.

¶38

In such circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to submit the duly self-attested copies of the plan documents to the seventh respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the seventh respondent is directed to forward the copies of the papers, either available with them or as submitted by the petitioner, with due endorsement to the concerned DTCP authorities/sixth respondent within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶39

The respondents 5 and 6 thereafter, have to follow the procedure mandated in paragraph 46 of the judgment of the Division Bench in Tamil Nadu Unaided Polytechnic Management Association case (cited supra) and complete the said exercise within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the papers pertaining to the petitioner institution.

¶40

In the meanwhile, the respondents 1 to 3/AICTE are directed to give approval to the petitioner institution as sought in their application for offering Diploma Course on or before 27.04.2019, without reference to DTCP approval, if

¶41

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

¶42

otherwise all the other norms and conditions are complied with, indicating that the same would be subject to the production of the approval of the DTCP, immediately upon receipt of the same from the DTCP authorities, as directed above.

¶43

This writ petition is ordered accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶44

s/d-

¶45

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶46

True Copy

¶47

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶48

gg To

¶49

The Member Secretary,

¶50

All India Council for Technical Education,

¶51

Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj,

¶52

New Delhi-110 070.

¶53

The Chairman,

¶54

Standing Appeal Committee,

¶55

All India Council for Technical Education, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj,

¶56

New Delhi-110 070.

¶57

The Regional Officer,

¶58

Southern Regional Office, AICTE, Shastri Bhavan, 1st Floor, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006.

¶59

The Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Development [UDA(3)] Department, Fort St. George,

¶60

Chennai-600 009.

¶61

The Director of Town and Country Planning, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶62

The Deputy Director of Town and Country

¶63

Planning (In-charge),

¶64

Coimbatore Region, Dr.Nanjappa Road,

¶65

Corporation Shopping Complex,

¶66

Coimbatore-641 018. +1 CC to Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Advocate sr 38881. +1 CC to Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, Advocate sr 39241.

¶67

W.P.No.10670 of 2019

¶68

SP(27/04/2019)

¶69

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

Sree Sakthi Charitable Trust, v. The Member Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Sree Sakthi Charitable Trust, v. The Member Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tamil Nadu Private School Teachers Sangam, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

K.Ramani Vs The District Revenue Officer

V.S.B.Educational Trust Vs The secretary to govt

Rukmani Vs The Chairman

Angammal Educational Trust, Vs The Member Secretary

Selvam Educational and Vs The Member Secretary