Madras High Court
The All India Council For Technical ... vs Sathyabama Institute Of Science And ... on 20 September, 2005
Equivalent citations: AIR2005MAD463, AIR 2005 MADRAS 463, 2006 (1) AKAR (NOC) 28 (MAD) (2005) WRITLR 737, (2005) WRITLR 737
Author: Markandey Katju
Bench: Markandey Katju, A. Kulasekaran
JUDGMENT Markandey Katju, C.J.
Page 1190
1. This writ appeal has been filed against an interlocutory order of a learned single Judge dated 22.8.2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 37016 of 2003.
2. Instead of deciding the writ appeal, we are disposing off the writ petition itself finally.
3. The writ petition has been filed challenging the communication dated 8.12.2003 from the All India Council for Technical Education to the Registrar, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology (A Deemed University), Jeppiaar Nagar, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai-600 119, and Page 1191 forbearing the appellant from inspecting the respondent (writ petitioner) institute.
4. We have carefully perused the communication dated 8.12.2003. The said communication only asks for the following details:
"Name of the courses conducted.
Intake of admissions made in each course.
Details of land, building and other infrastructural facilities available. Details of teaching staff, qualifications, pay scales paid, method of appointments and service conditions. Method of admissions of students, fees charged from the students etc. Details of geographical jurisdiction and subject areas of operation of the University and list and location of off campus centers, study centers, affiliated/collaborated centers set up by the University. Details of Rules, Regulations and By-laws framed for establishment, operation and management of the University. Any other relevant information."
5. In our opinion, the writ petition is premature and is liable to be dismissed at this stage.
6. It must be understood that writ is a discretionary remedy vide Chandra Singh v. State of Rajasthan, ; R. Nanjappan v. The District Collector, Coimbatore, 2005 Writ L.R. 47, etc. In the 9 Judge Constitution Bench decision of the Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India, the Supreme Court observed:-
"The power under Article 226 is a discretionary one, and will be exercised only in furtherance of justice".
Hence even if the law has been violated, this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not bound to interfere. To obtain a writ, not only must there be shown violation of law, but also there must be shown that by such violation of law, the petitioner has suffered some prejudice. In the present case, the petitioner has not been able to show any prejudice by the communication dated 8.12.2003. The said communication only asks for certain information and it does not affect the writ petitioner's rights in any manner.
7. A Writ petition lies when an adverse order affecting the petitioner's rights has been passed. The communication dated 8.12.2003 is innocuous and we cannot see what objection the petitioner has in giving the aforesaid information to the AICTE which appears to be empowered to call for such information under Sections 10 and 11 of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 read with Rule 4 of the Rules for inspection of Technical Institutions and Universities issued by the notification dated 10.8.1992 published in the Gazette of India : Extraordinary, and also to inspect the respondent institute.
Page 1192
8. Since in our opinion the impugned communication does not affect the petitioner's rights, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution in the matter at this stage. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed as premature.
9. However, we make it clear that it is open to the petitioner to take all such legal and constitutional pleas as it is advised if and when any adverse order affecting its rights is passed, in which case, it can approach the appropriate forum in appropriate proceedings. The writ appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment of the learned single Judge is set aside. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.