Aryanet Institution Of ... vs All India Council For Technical ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 21462 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 15959 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

               ARYANET INSTITUTION OF TECHNOLOGY
               REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VELIKKAD POST, MUNDUR,
               PALAKKAD PIN 678 592

            BY ADVS.
            RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
            K.VIJINA
            ARUL MURALIDHARAN



RESPONDENT/S:

    1          ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION -
               AICTE
               REP.BY REGIONAL OFFICER, SOUTH WESTERN REGIONAL
               OFFICE OF AICTE, AMBADI NAGAR,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 016

    2          ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION
               REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR (APPROVAL BUREAU), AICTE,
               NELSON MANDELA MARG, VASANT KUNJ, NEW DELHI, PIN
               110 070

               BY ADV SAJITH KUMAR V.




        THIS     WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   29.10.2021,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                             -2-
W.P.(C) No. 15959 of 2021 - T




                               P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                               ==============================================================


                            W.P.(C) No. 15959 of 2021 - T
                     ===================================================================================


                   Dated this the 29th day of October, 2021


                                                JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

"i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropri-

ate writ order or direction commanding the re- spondents to consider Exhibits P-3 to P-5 within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court after hearing the petitioner.

ii. Hold that the petitioner is entitled to interest on the amount, fixed by this Hon'ble Court, that is to be disbursed in terms of Exhibit P-5 made for the purpose of refund of security deposit amount by the respondents to the petitioner.

iii. To pass such other orders fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and that may be prayed hereafter."

2. The petitioner is running an accredited Engineering

College from 2012. It is the case of the petitioner that he was

not able to run the institution for want of students-intake on

W.P.(C) No. 15959 of 2021 - T

account of the mushrooming of engineering colleges on the

other side of the Kerala boarder. In such circumstances, the

petitioner submitted a representation before the respondents

for refund of the security deposit. When there is no response

from the respondents, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the 1 st respondent

to consider Ext.P3.

5. The learned Standing Counsel for respondents sub-

mitted that a detailed statement is filed by the respondents and

that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

6. I don't want to make any observation about the

merit of the case. The main prayer in the writ petition is to

consider the representation. It is a matter to be considered by

the respondents after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner. All the contentions of the petitioner in this writ pe-

W.P.(C) No. 15959 of 2021 - T

tition are left open. The petitioner is free to agitate their con-

tentions before the respondents at the time of hearing. There-

fore, without expressing any opinion on merit, this writ peti-

tion can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider

Ext.P3 representation, after giving an opportunity of hearing to

the petitioner.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following

manner:

1. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P3 representation as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. Before passing final order, an opportunity of hearing will be given to the petitioner. The hear- ing can be either virtually or physically.

3. All the contentions of the petitioner in this writ petition are left open.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE das

W.P.(C) No. 15959 of 2021 - T

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15959/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE SHOWING THE PAYMENT DETAILS OF RS.10,00,000/- SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 22.1.2018

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.L2-

62/2018/H.EDN DATED 20.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.3.2020 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.8.2020 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MANDATE FORM DATED 12.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS