Mumtaz Yaruddowla Wakf, v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (Jntu),

I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Delivered on :15-06-2017 Coram :

Betw een:

1. Mumtaz Yaruddowla Wakf, 16-2-737, Malakpet, Hyderabad, rep. by its Authorized signatory Ahmed Baig.

2. Mumtaz College of Engineering and Technology, 16-2-737, Malakpet, Hyderabad, rep. by its Authorized signatory and Board Member, Ahmed Baig.

3. Ahmed Baig S/o. Mohommed Baig, R/o. 8-1-40/A/64, Samata Colony, 7 tombs road, Towlichowki Hyderabad-500008.

Appellant/respondent Vs.

1. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU), Hyderabad, rep. by its Registrar.

2. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary Higher Education Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

3. Telangana State Council for Higher Education, rep. by its Secretary, 1st Floor, JNTU Masab Tank Campus, Mahaveer Marg, Opp: mahaveer Hospital Masab Tank, Hyderabad.

4. The Convener, Telangana State EAMCET Admissions - 2017, Sankethika Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad.

5. All India Council for Technical Education Indira Gandhi Sport Complex, I.P. Estate, New Delhi, rep. by its Secretary.

Respondent/claimants Counsel for the petitioners : Tarun G. Reddy Counsel for respondents 1 to 3: Mr. A. Abhishek Reddy, Standing Counsel Counsel for Respondent No.4 : G.P. for Higher Education Counsel for Respondent No.5 : Mr. K. Ramakanth Reddy

VRS,J & NBY,J.

W.P.No.19637 of 2017 ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice V. Ramasubramanian) The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition challenging certain regulations of the JNTUH Affiliation Procedure and Regulations 2017-18 and also challenging the refusal of the university to grant affiliation for certain courses for the academic year 2017-18.

2. Heard Mr. Tarun G. Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. A. Abhishek Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the University.

3. The order of rejection of affiliation shows that more than 50% of the faculty uploaded were absent during FFC visit. Apart from that there is a shortage of faculty to the extent of 100% in respect of several courses. No plausible explanation is given for the shortage of faculty.

4. Therefore, the case does not merit consideration. Though the writ petition challenges the validity of the regulations the same cannot be gone into at the instance of the college which does not satisfy the primary requirements. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. However, if the college appoints qualified faculty in advance and if it has necessary infrastructure, it will always be open to the petitioner to apply for affiliation for the next academic year.

5. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this appeal, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTI CE V. RAMASUBRAMANI AN __________________ JUSTI CE N. BALAYOGI 15th June, 2017 Js.

VRS,J & NBY,J.

W.P.No.19637 of 2017 (Per VRS,J) 21st June, 2017 Js.