Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Shree Shree Vidya Sagar Ji Maharaj ... vs All India Council For Technical ... on 13 July, 2018
Bench: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Indu Malhotra
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 532 OF 2018
SHREE SHREE VIDYA SAGAR JI MAHARAJ EDUCATION Petitioner(s)
TRUST AND ANR.
Versus
ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND Respondent(s)
ANR.
O R D E R
We are appalled by the manner in which the
respondent has been dealing with the application for the
opening of Schools of Pharmacy in the State of
Chhattisgarh. Despite the fact that an NOC has been
granted by the State in the present case, despite the
fact that perspective plan itself states that the demand
for such colleges is good, the respondent continues to
point to condition 4 of the perspective plan, which
reads as follows:
“Approvals for Diploma Pharmacy and Bachelor of
Pharmacy may be granted in districts which do not
have Pharmacy Colleges”.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
SHASHI SAREEN
When contrasted with condition 5;
Date: 2018.07.16
17:25:41 IST
Reason:
“No approvals should be granted for new
institutes for M.C.A. and M.B.A. course as the
vacancy in admission in these courses is very
2
high. Also there is a large gap in pass-outs of
these courses and employment opportunities”
It is clear that there is no bar for recognition of
such institutes, even though other similar institutes may
have been set up in the same district of the State. By our
judgment dated 1993 (3) SCC 224 we hold:
It is difficult to hold that the government
resolution dated 13.6.1995 lays down, as a
matter of policy,that where there is a single
law college in a district of the State, no other
law college therein will be permitted. In the
first pace, the resolution was to operate only
till such time as this Court rendered its
decision in ManubhaiPragaji Vashi case (1995) 5
SCC 730) and it provided that in that
interregnum, applications and proposals for the
commencement of law colleges would be considered
if received from districts where no law college
existed. In the second place, and assuming that
that is the policy, this is clearly arbitrary
and unreasonable. Account has not to be taken
of whether or not a law college exists in a
district. What is relevant and what should be
taken into consideration is the population which
the existing law college serves and whether,
therefore, there is need for an additional
college.”
This decision is a decision of 1999. Therefore, even
if one were to construe condition 4 in the manner the
respondent construes it, the said condition would to be
3
struck down as arbitrary. We are of the view that nothing
whatsoever stood in the way of the AICTE granting
recognition for the School of Pharmacy in the present case.
In this view of the matter, we allow the writ petition
and direct the AICTE to grant recognition with all
consequential reliefs including the relief of counseling, for
the year 2018-19, which should be done within a period of two
weeks from today.
......................J.
(ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)
......................J.
(INDU MALHOTRA)
New Delhi,
Dated: 13th July, 2018.
4
ITEM NO.58 COURT NO.9 SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 532/2018
SHREE SHREE VIDYA SAGAR JI MAHARAJ EDUCATION TRUST & ANR.
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION & ANR.. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.75147/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and
IA No.75148/2018-CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 75147/2018- Exem.
From filing O.T. and IA No. 77272 of 2018-Permission to file addl.
documents)
Date : 13-07-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishabh Sancheeti, Adv.
MS. Padma Priya, Adv.
Mr. K. Paari Vendhan, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Anil Soni, Adv.
Mr. Harish Pandey, AOR
Mr. A.P.Mayee, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
Mr. A.Selvin Raja, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The writ petition is allowed in terms of the signed order.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SHASHI SAREEN) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file)