.

1. The petitioner institutions in both the petitions applied to the respondent All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), within the prescribed time, for approval for imparting education in the course of Diploma in Pharmacy, with effect from the academic year 2015-16 but the application of both the petitioners was rejected by the Scrutiny Committee of the respondent AICTE on 7th April, 2015. In accordance with the Handbook of Procedure of the respondent AICTE, both petitioners appeared before the Standing Appellate Committee (SAC) of the AICTE on 13th April, 2015 which ordered the institutions of the petitioners to be visited by the Expert Visiting Committee. The Expert Visiting Committee, pursuant to visit, pointed out deficiencies in the institution of each of the petitioners and on the basis thereof the SAC of the respondent AICTE also, vide orders dated 30th April, 2015 rejected the application of each of the petitioners.

2. Both petitioners preferred writ petitions (W.P.(C) No.4884/2015 and W.P.(C) No.4707/2015 respectively) and vide orders dated 18th May, 2015 in each of the said petitions, the matter was remanded to the SAC of the respondent AICTE and it was further observed that in the event of the SAC being satisfied with the explanations offered by the petitioners, the applications of the petitioners for commencing imparting education in the said course would be accepted. Opportunity was also given to each of the petitioners to appear before the SAC and the SAC of the respondent AICTE was directed to pass speaking order, if again rejecting the application of the petitioners.

3. The SAC of the respondent AICTE vide order dated 29th May, 2015 in W.P.(C) No.6138/2015 and vide order dated 28th May, 2015 in W.P.(C) No.5943/2015 has now held that though all the deficiencies pointed out have been cured, but since the last date stipulated of 30th April, 2015 for granting approval was over, permission cannot be granted for the academic year 2015-16. Accordingly, the applications have again been rejected with liberty to each of the petitioners to apply for the next academic year if so desire.

4. Notice of W.P.(C) No.5943/2015 was issued on 9th June, 2015 and the respondent AICTE has filed a counter affidavit pleading, i) that the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust Vs. All India Council for Technical Education (2013) 3 SCC 385 has laid down the time schedule and in accordance therewith, AICTE could not have granted approval to the petitioner for the year 2015-16; ii) that if approval is given at this late stage, there may be cascading effect thereof in taking university approval / application which was to be done by 15th May and further schedule of conduct of entrance examination and counseling / admission for allotment of seats etc.; iii) that admittedly deficiencies existed in the petitioner institutions and some of the said deficiencies existed even till 18th May, 2015 as is evident from the order of the said date in W.P.(C) No.4707/2015; iv) that though the Supreme Court vide judgment dated 16th February, 2015 in W.P.(C) No.1034/2014 titled Mahatma Education Society’s Pillai’s Institute of Information Technology, Engineering, Media Studies & Research Vs. All India Council for Technical Education had directed AICTE to grant approval for the academic year 2014-15 beyond the stipulated date but the same was done in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India; v) that the fact that the Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 is indicative of Supreme Court acknowledging that the time schedule is solemn and strict adherence thereto required.

5. W.P.(C) No.6138/2015 came up first before this Court on 30th June, 2015 when the counsel for the petitioner therein, faced with the query as to what could be said to be wrong with the order of the SAC – though finding the petit