Ramchandra Sanskrutik Krida Mandal Through Its President And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 7622.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7622 OF 2019 Ramchandra Sanskrutik Krida Mandal Through its President and another .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri S. S. Thombre, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri V. M. Kagne, A.G.P. for Respondents No. 1 and 2. Shri S. V. Adwant, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 05TH JULY, 2019.

FINAL ORDER :

.

Mr. Thombre, the learned advocate for petitioners submits that, the petitioner No. 2 is running diploma level courses in Engineering in various faculties. For the academic year 20192020, the petitioner No. 2 is placed under no admission category. The petitioner No. 2 is running courses since the year 2010-2011 continuously. The learned counsel further submits that, the major deficiencies observed by the Standing Appellate Committee (for short "S.A.C.") is about faculty. The petitioners have appointed well qualified staff, however, the information uploaded by petitioners has not been considered by the S.A.C.

2 wp 7622.19 Ten assistant professors appointed by the petitioners are not considered by the Committee, though it has been observed in the report that the institution claims these ten persons to be newly recruited faculty. Even said information was uploaded on the site. Same is not considered.

2.

Mr. Adwant, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 submits that, whatever documents were placed by the petitioners were considered by the S.A.C. threadbare. Minimum number of faculty required is 30 and the petitioners had only 26 faculties. There are other deficiencies also, as such non payment of salary as per 6th Pay Commission to the faculties, so also there is deficiency for library. All these aspects are considered. 3.

The petitioners contend that the deficiencies have been removed. The faculties are also appointed as required. One certainly cannot compromise with lack of faculties. Without faculties education cannot be imparted to the students effectively. The petitioners contend that all the information was supplied to the S.A.C, but the same has not been considered. It is for the experts to consider whether faculties that the petitioners claim to have appointed are duly qualified and are really appointed, so also consider about other deficiencies being meted out.

3 wp 7622.19 4.

Considering aforesaid aspects, we grant one more opportunity to petitioners to place all the relevant documents before the Standing Appellate Committee. The petitioners may immediately present themselves before the S. A. C. with all the relevant documents of the deficiencies as pointed out in the report of AICTE. The petitioners shall present themselves before the S.A.C. on 08.07.2019. The S. A. C. shall consider the same within a period of three (03) days from the date of appearance of the petitioner. The S.A.C. within a period of three (03) days thereafter forward its recommendations to the AICTE. The AICTE thereafter shall take decision afresh on the same within a period of three (03) days.

5.

In the light of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

[MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/July 19