Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Trident Academy Of Technology vs State Of Orissa And Two Others on 17 May, 2017

Author: Vineet Saran

Bench: Vineet Saran

             ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK

                 W.P.(C) No. 8079 of 2017

   In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227
   of the Constitution of India.

                           ----------

   Trident Academy of Technology             ...    Petitioner
                           -versus-

   State of Orissa and 2 others         ...    Opp. Parties


        For petitioner   : M/s. Ashok Parija, Sr.Advocate,
                           Devi Prasad Dash, B.K.Mishra and
                           K.C.Lenka

        For opp. parties : Sri R.K.Mohapatra, Govt. Advocate
                           ( For opposite party no.1)

                           M/s. S.Palit, A.K.Mahana,
                           A. Mishra and A.Parija
                           ( For opposite party no.2)

                           M/s. Aditya Kumar Mohapatra and
                           S.J.Mohanty
                           ( For opposite party no.3)


PRESENT:

   THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VINEET SARAN
                      AND
     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA


                   Decided on : 17.05.2017
                                    2




VINEET SARAN, C.J    The issue involved in this writ petition is with

      regard to grant of admission to B.Tech and MCA (Lateral

      Entry) courses in the institution of the petitioner, for the

      session 2016-2017.

      2.             The undisputed facts are that the Apex Court in

      the case of Parshvanath Charitable Trust vs. All India

      Council for Technical Education, (2013) 3 SCC 385           has

      been held in paragraph 42 that "the admission to academic

      courses should start, as proposed, by 1st August of the relevant

      year. The seats remaining vacant should again be duly notified

      and advertised. All seats should be filled positively by 15th

      August after which there shall be no admission, whatever be

      the reason or ground."

      3.             The submission of the learned counsel for the

      petitioner is that admissions to the students for the B.Tech

      and MCA (Lateral Entry) courses for the session 2016-2017

      were granted on or before 15.8.2016 and intimation of the

      same was given to the Odisha Joint Entrance Examination

      (OJEE) Committee by the petitioner institution.
                                   3




4.                 For the same issue of admission in the

institution   of    the   petitioner,   the    petitioner    had    earlier

approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 21336 of 2016,

which was disposed of on 5.4.2017 along with a batch of writ

petitions. The said order was passed with the consent of the

learned counsel for the parties. The directions given in

paragraphs 3 and 4 of the said order dated 5.4.2017 are

reproduced hereunder:

                   "3.    According     to     the   petitioners-
          institutions, they had given admissions to all
          the students prior to the cut-off date, i.e.,
          15.8.2016

and had intimated the Odisha Joint Entrance Examination Committee. The question, which is to be determined in these petitions, is as to whether the admissions had been granted by the petitioners-institutions prior to 15.8.2016 and the intimation given to the Odisha Joint Entrance Examination ( for short, 'OJEE') within the time or not. This being a question of fact would best be decided by the OJEE, as has been jointly stated by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all the writ petitions as well as learned Government 4 Advocate for the State-opp. parties, Shri S.Palit, learned counsel for OJEE and Shri A.K.Mohapatra, learned counsel for BPUT.

4. Accordingly, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of these writ petitions with the direction that the respective petitioners-institutions shall furnish the requisite details of admissions granted by them for the session 2016-17 to the OJEE Committee within ten days from today annexing therewith all the documents in respect of their claim. On receipt of the same, the OJEE Committee shall pass suitable orders in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter. A copy of such order shall be furnished to the respective petitioners- institutions as well as BPUT for necessary action."

5. Pursuant thereto, the Chairman, OJEE has passed the impugned order dated 1.5.2017, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

6. We have heard Sri Ashok Parija, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Advocate appearing for the opposite party no. 1, Sri S.Palit, 5 learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and Sri A.K.Mohapatra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 and perused the record.

7. Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that they have obtained instructions and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.

8. Sri S.Palit, learned counsel for the contesting opposite party no.2 could not justify the order dated 1.5.2017 as the same has been passed under misconception that the admissions, as well as intimation of such admissions, should be communicated to the OJEE on or before 15.8.2016. It is submitted by Sri Palit that in paragraph-3 of the judgment dated 5.4.2017, since it was mentioned that the question to be determined was whether the admissions had been granted by the petitioner institution prior to 15.8.2016 and intimation was given to OJEE within the time, the same has been construed by opposite party no.2 to mean that besides admissions to be granted on or before 15.8.2016, even the intimation was to be given by the said date. 6

9. In our view, that would not be the correct interpretation of the order dated 5.4.2017, as in para-4 of the said order it has been specified that the institutions were directed to furnish requisite details of admissions granted by them for the session 2016-17, to the OJEE Committee within ten days, meaning thereby that the proof of admission having been granted by the institutions on or before 15.8.2016 had to be furnished, which was to be considered by the OJEE as the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Parshvanath Charitable Trust (supra) was that admissions should not be given by the institutions after 15th August of the respective year. Judgment of the Apex Court is with regard to admission being given by 15th August and not with regard to the intimation of the same to be given by the said date.

10. The Government of Odisha vide its order dated 3rd December, 2016, in paragraphs-(c) and (e) has provided as under:

"(c) Those Private Professional Educational Institutions shall furnish the list and documents of the eligible candidates to the OJEE-2016 which will be verified by a committee to ensure 7 that the admission has been done on or before 15.8.2016. On being satisfied that the admission has been made on or before 15.8.2016 and the candidates have the requisite eligibility criteria then the names of the eligible candidates shall be intimated to the University for issuance of registration number in favour of them.
(e) Those institutions are required to submit the documents as desired by the OJEE Committee-2016 and shall have to produce documents such as money receipt as a token of proof that they have admitted candidates by 15.8.2016. The decision of the OJEE Committee in the matter of verification of documents is final and binding."

11. The order of this Court dated 5.4.2017 passed in the earlier writ petition of the petitioner, as well as the order dated 3.12.2016 of the Government of Odisha, clearly specifies that the admissions are to be granted by the institutions on or before 15.8.2016, which is to be verified by the OJEE. Since the order dated 1.5.2017 has been passed under misconception that intimation should also have been given by the institutions to the OJEE on or before 15.8.2016, which was not the intent of the order 8 dated 5.4.2017 as well as Government of Odisha's order dated 3.12.2016, we set aside the order dated 1.5.2017 passed by opposite party no.2 and remand the matter to the said opposite party to decide the issue afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove. Fresh order shall be passed by opposite party no.2 on the basis of the documents already furnished by the petitioner in compliance of this Court's order dated 5.4.2017 passed in the earlier writ petition. Such fresh reasoned order shall be passed by opposite party no.2-OJEE Committee as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 15 days from the date of filing of certified copy of this order before opposite party no.2-OJEE.

12. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

Urgent certified copy of this order be given on proper application.

..............................

(VINEET SARAN) CHIEF JUSTICE ...............................

(K. R. MOHAPATRA) JUDGE Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 17TH May, 2017/dm