The central legal point established in the judgment is that once recognition is granted by N.C.T.E., the University must grant affiliation, subject to certain conditions, and the authority of the affiliating body should be complementary to the recognition of N.C.T.E.

I.A. No. 6852 of 2018

1. Present interlocutory application has been preferred by the original writ petitioner, Respondent No. 3 in Letters Patent Appeal, for an appropriate interim order permitting/allowing the students of the Respondent No. 3 institution to appear in the examination of 1st year of B.Ed.programme of 2 years, academic session 2017-18, scheduled to be held from 07.09.2018 as per the programme of B.Ed.1st year examination 2018 vide examination ID No. 185102, dated 02.08.2018 for the academic session 2017-19 or, alternatively, to extend the date of the aforesaid examination, to be conducted by the University, of the students of the petitioner college. It is also prayed to vacate the ad interim order dated 15.05.2018 passed in the main Letters Patent Appeal.

2. We have heard Sri Bindhyachal Singh, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 3, original writ petitioner, and Sri Lalit Kishore, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the appellant University and another.

3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such the Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the University and not by the Respondent No. 3. The Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the Respondent No. 3, who has filed the interlocutory application, is reported to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Apart from the fact that whether in an appeal preferred by the original Respondent University, the question is as to whether the Respondent in the appeal can pray for and/or get any substantive relief or not, we have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents before us on merits.

4. It is required to be noted that, admittedly, the institution is not affiliated with the University for the academic year 2017-18. Without even getting the affiliation and/or affiliated with the University for academic year 2017-18, once again the college admitted the students and played with the future of the students. Same thing happened in the earlier year also, i.e., for academic session 2016-17.

5. From the counter, it appears that by communication dated 16th February, 2018, the college was intimated that there is no affiliation for the academic session 2017-18 and in the communication dated 16th February, 2018, it was specifically mentioned that for academic session 2017-18 they have not received any application for affiliation. Still nothing happened and no further steps were taken by the original writ applicant-the institution which has preferred the present interlocutory application. They continued to give admission to the students for academic session 2017-18.

6. Under the circumstances, when there is no affiliation at all for the academic session 2017-18, there is no question of making any interim order allowing the students to appear in the examination. It is also required to be noted that even though the programme was published for examination as far back as on 2nd August, 2018, the present application has been preferred at the last moment on 30.08.2018 seeking equitable relief. It is also required to be noted that even process for filling up the forms for appearing in examination commenced in February, 2018 and still nothing was done by the institution. At the cost of repetition, it is required to be observed that even in the earlier year - academic session 2016-17 also, the students lost their valuable year and they were not permitted to appear in the examination and even the learned Single Judge heavily criticized the conduct on the part of the institution. Still they have continued with such conduct and played with the future of the students.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present interlocutory application deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

L.P.A. 1217 of 2017

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 11.08.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7972 of 2017, original respondents 3 and 4-Aryabhatta Knowledge