Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : BILAL NAZKI, G.CHANDRAIAH
Self-Financing Rural Engineering College managements Association - Appellant
Versus
All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi - Respondent
Decided On : 06-28-05
Held : Provisions of the Central Act are clear that the final decision with regard to establishment of a new technical institution has to be taken by the AICTE and there cannot be any veto with the State Government, prescribing a total ban on establishment of new colleges.
Section 20 of A.P.Education Act shows that the competent authority will have to, from time to time, conduct surveys to identify the educational needs of the locality under its jurisdiction and notify in the prescribed manner through local newspapers, calling for applications from the educational agencies desiring for establishing educational institutions and once such a notification was issued, the educational agencies could apply for establishment of such an institution.
There was no conflict between the two provisions i.e., Section 10 of the Central Act and Section 20 of the State Act.
there was no statutory requirement for obtaining the approval of the State government and even if there was one, it would have been repugnant to the aicte Act. The law on the subject is that the last word for establishing atechnical institution lies with the AICTE.
The educational needs of a locality are to be ascertained and determined by the State having regard to the regulations framed under the Central Act. The representatives of the state have to be included in the decision making process and the final decision rests with the AICTE. It is the prerogative of AICTE to approve or not to approve establishment of a new college, but it is bound to consider the view of the State Government. There is no dispute between the parties with regard to the applicability of the regulations framed on 06-01-2005. Although a feeble attempt was made by the Special G. P. appearing for the government that they were not sure as to which of the regulations would apply for the present case, but it is a fact that letters of intent were issued after the regulations of 06-01-2005 came into force. Regulation 6 lays down the procedure for processing of the applications for grant of approval for establishment of new technical institutions. Regulation 6 (1) (b) lays down that AICTE shall seek recommendations from the concerned State Government on the viability of the applications received for starting new technical institutions. Regulation 6 (1 ) (c) says that the State Government, while forwarding the recommendations on the viability of the applications, shall provide reasons and justification to substantiate their stand and do so by the date stipulated by the Council from time to time. Regulation 6 (1 ) (d) lays down that the recommendations of the concerned State Government shall be taken into consideration, among various other relevant factors, including the demand and requirement of the technical educational facilities in respective States, before issuing a letter of intent for establishment of new technical institutions.
( 1 ) THERE are six writ petitions and four writ appeals. The writ appeals arise out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge in one of the writ petitions being Writ Petition no. 3179 of 2005.
( 2 ) THE bone of contention in all these cases is a Memo issued by the State government being Memo No. 10680/ec. 2/2004, dated 14-12-2004. Some of the writ petitioners support the Memo, whereas in some other writ petitions, this Memo has been challenged. Controversy revolves around this Memo. Since all the writ petitions and writ appeals raise same questions of law and fact, they were heard together and are being disposed of together by this common judgment.
( 3 ) THE impugned Memo communicated a decision of the government to its functionaries i. e. Director of Technical Education, secretary, A. P. State Council of Higher education and the Registrars of the universities that it had decided not to consider establishment of new Engineering colleges in the State during the Academic year 2005-06. This Memo has been challenged as unconstitutional, arbitrary and illegal in writ Petition Nos. 7151 and 5662 of 2005. Writ Petition No. 3179 of 2005 challenges the letter of intent for establishment of engineering colleges to respondent Nos. 4 to 20 in that writ petition. Writ Petition No. 4871 of 2005 has been filed in public interest and it also seeks a direction that the authorities concerned should not permit new Technical institutions to come up and it has challenged the action of respondents permitting respondent Nos. 4 to 9 in that writ petition to open the new colleges. Writ Petition No. 5756 of 2005 also challenges the letter of intent issued by All India Council for Technical education (hereinafter referred to as aicte ) in favour of respondent Nos. 4 to 20 in that writ petition with regard to establishment of new colleges. In Writ Petition No. 5486 of 2005 also, the letter of intent issued in favour of respondent Nos. 4 to 20 for establishment of new colleges has been challenged. When the Writ Petition No. 3179 of 2005 came up for admission before the learned Single judge, he passed an order directing that letters of approval to the respondent Nos. 4 to 20 consequent to grant of letters of intent be not issued. This order is challenged in Writ appeal Nos. 425, 426, 427 and 630 of 2005.
( 4 ) THE nature of the cases which are before us and the particulars of which have been mentioned hereinabove, demands resolution of two issues- firstly, whether Memo No. 10680/ec. 2/2004 is unconstitutional and arbitrary, and Secondly, whether the letters of intent issued by AICTE in favour of certain colleges are bad and can a direction be given to AICTE not to approve the establishment of those colleges. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties in detail.
( 5 ) THERE are two sets of writ petitions now before us. We will take one each from two sets for the purposes of facts and pleadings and will deal with the set of writ petitions first, by which the letters of intent have been challenged. Writ Petition No. 3179 of 2005 is one of such writ petitions. This writ petition has been filed by an association which comprises of the colleges which are already in existence. It states in its affidavit that the objects of the association are to ensure establishment and growth of technical education in the State and rural Engineering colleges in particular. It also states that all the members of the association are Engineering colleges which have been established by them in pursuance to the policy of the State government framed in G. O. Ms. No. 501, dated 4-8-2000. Under the said policy, educational agencies were encouraged by the State to set up Engineering institutions in rural areas in furtherance of its Constitutional obligations under Article 41 of the Constitution. Earlier, the colleges were established only in urban areas, resulting in migration from villages to urban areas. The petitioners also referred to section 3 of the All In
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
