Madras High Court
All India Council For Technical ... vs Sun College Of Engineering And ... on 8 June, 2023
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 08.06.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012
1.All India Council for Technical Education,
Rep. by its Member Secretary,
7th Floor, Chanderlok Building, Janpath,
New Delhi-110 001.
2.All India Council for Technical Education,
Rep. by its Regional Officer,
Southern Regional Office,
69, Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. ... Appellants / Respondents 1&2
Vs.
Sun College of Engineering and Technology,
Rep. by its Chairman C.Thayaparan,
Sun Nagar, Erachakulam, Erachakulam Post,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondent / Petitioner
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying this
Court to set aside the order dated 02.08.2012 made in W.P.(MD)No.6790 of
2012 on the file of this Court.
For Appellants : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar
For Respondent : No Appearance
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order passed by the Writ
Court dated 02.08.2012 made in W.P.(MD)No.6790 of 2012.
2.Before the Writ Court, Clause 3(1)(d) of Chapter II of the
Approval Process Hand Book (2012-2013), as reiterated by the paragraph
Nos.4 and 5 of the notifications dated 31.03.2012 and 12.04.2012 issued by
the 1st respondent / 1st appellant herein (AICTE) was sought to be declared
as invalid and unenforceable in law.
3.The learned Single Judge, who heard the said Writ Petition by
the impugned order dated 02.08.2012 allowed the Writ Petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
4.Aggrieved over the same, the appellants preferred this
intra-court appeal.
5.We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, who
would submit that, in fact two Writ Petitions were filed, one is for the
present relief and another one is for consequential relief, where Mandamus
sought for to process the approval application submitted by the College
concerned unmindful of the aforestated clause, which was in fact allowed by
the Writ Court. As against which, W.A.(MD)No.448 of 2012 was filed by
the AICTE, which was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court on
29.06.2012.
6.He would further submit that, insofar as the approval process
handbook is concerned, every year such kind of handbooks are being issued.
The notification in question was related to the academic year 2012-2013,
wherein certain clause was under challenge and the same was declared to be
unenforceable through the impugned order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
7.However, subsequently, further approval process handbooks
were issued from time to time by AICTE, which have been in vogue insofar
as the academic year covering under the said approval process handbooks.
8.When that being the position, whether academically the question
raised in this Writ Appeal has to be decided or the Writ Petition can be
disposed of by giving liberty to AICTE to agitate the issue in future, in case
the declaration that has been made through the impugned order dated
02.08.2012 is shown as precedent by any stack holders against AICTE to
have a similar provisions in the future notification also.
9.We have considered the said submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants and since there has been no representation for the
respondent College, we feel that since this Writ Appeal is pending for more
than a decade, we can give a quietus to this issue by disposing this Writ
Appeal.
10.As has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the
appellants, it is an academic question to be decided. Since subsequent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
years, years-wise approval process handbooks had been issued from time to
time by AICTE, those notification in the particular year for which it was
issued, only covers the processing of application for approval or extension
of approval by technical institutions for that year/s governed under AICTE
Act. The declaration even though has been made by the impugned order of
the Writ Court dated 02.08.2012, the same shall not be treated as a
precedent in any future cases of similar challenge, if in case in future it is
made at the instance of any aggrieved party with regard to approval process
handbook of that year concerned. Therefore, we feel that this Writ Appeal
can be closed, as no further adjudication is required to academically decide
whether the order passed by the Writ Court is justified or not at this
juncture. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(R.S.K., J.) & (K.K.R.K, J.)
08.06.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
MYR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
MYR
W.A.(MD)No.610 of 2012
08.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
