Telangana High Court
WP/27120/2005 of Azad Educational Society, Vs All India Council for Technical Education, on 28 December 2005
MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.27120 of 2005 28.12.2005 BETWEEN Azad Educational Society and another. …….PETITIONERS AND All India Council for Technical Education, Indira Gandhi Sport Complex, I.P.Estate, New Delhi rep. By its Secretary.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Writ Petition No.27120 of 2005
28.12.2005
BETWEEN
Azad Educational Society and another.
…….PETITIONERS
AND
All India Council for Technical Education, Indira Gandhi SportComplex, I.P.Estate, New Delhi rep. By its Secretary.
…….RESPONDENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYWrit Petition No.27120 of 2005
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The first petitioner is an Educational Society and the secondpetitioner is an Engineering College established by the first petitioner.They submitted an application to the respondent with a request toaccord approval for establishing Bio Technology Course in theircollege. They complain of discrimination in the matter of adherence tothe policy laid down by the respondent for according approval. Thepetitioners contend that though the respondent has taken a policydecision not to accord approval for starting Bio Technology Course inthe new institutions, they have accorded such approval in favour oftwo institutions, by name, Bharat Institute of Engineering &Technology, Ibrahimpatnam and Gandhi Institute of Technology &Management, Visakhapatnam.
This Court was in fact impressed by the averments made by thepetitioner in the affidavit and directed the learned Standing Counselappearing for the respondent to obtain instructions as to the accuracyor correctness of the statements made by the petitioner. The learnedStanding Counsel submits that the Bharat Institute of Engineering &Technology, Ibrahimpatnam was established in the year 2001,whereas the Gandhi Institute of Technology & Management,Visakhapatnam was established in the year 1997.
It is true that the proceedings, dated 23.11.2005, issued by therespondent in respect of two institutions referred to above leave an impression as though the colleges were started in the year 2004-05and during the current academic year. However, the reference to thetwo years referred to above, is in the context of existing strength. Theentries in last column of statement disclose that the said collegeswere established in the year 2001 and 1997 respectively.
In its policy statement relating to grant of approval for variouscourses, the respondent has categorically stated that no newinstitution shall be eligible to start under-graduate programme in BioTechnology. It is not in dispute that the second petitioner is a newinstitution. In that view of the matter, no relief can be granted to thepetitioners at this stage.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
VGB
_________________
28.12.2005