The main legal point established is that disputes over attendance figures and seat allotment based on surprise inspections are questions of fact that cannot be decided through writ jurisdiction.

Bansi Lal Bhat, J.:-

1. Following reliefs are claimed in the instant petition:-

"(i) By issuing an appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of writ of certiorari the decision taken by the Board of Inspection on 30.05.2014 to the extent it declines the allotment of 153 seats for the year 2014-15 be quashed,

(ii) By issuing an appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of writ of mandamus the respondents be commanded to allot 251 number of seats for imparting B.Ed Degree for the year 2014-15 in accordance with the decision taken in 6th Meeting of the College Development Council, University of Jammu held on 3rd July, 2014,

(iii) By issuing an appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of writ of certiorari the decision taken by the respondents to the extent it declines to determine and allot 251 seats for the Session 2014-15 to the petitioner College as reflected in the list of Colleges Participating in Centralized B.Ed Counseling 2014-15 be quashed,

(iv) By issuing an appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of writ of mandamus the respondents be commanded to adhere to the request of the students who have opted for the petitioner College for admission to the B.Ed course for the Session 2014-15 in the 3rd round of centralized admission process."

2. Facts enumerated in the petition may briefly be noticed. Petitioner College of Education has been set up by a Trust named as Cosmic Educational Trust. One Bhawani Dev Singh Jamwal-a permanent resident of the State is the Chairman of the Trust as also the College. The College is said to be recognized by the State Government and stands affiliated to University of Jammu. The Petitioner College is claimed to have been set up in the year 2004 after obtaining NOC from the State Government. Thereafter, it got temporarily affiliated to University of Jammu for a period of one year. The College was allocated 94 seats. The College was subjected to annual inspection based on Self Appraisal Report (SAR) devised by the University of Jammu. Based thereon, the University would recommend renewal of affiliation of the College. Capacity of the petitioner College was enhanced from year to year and it grew to a figure of 334 seats in 2012-2013. It is claimed that the University ranked the petitioner College as the best in the State. This state of affairs continued upto 2013-2014. However, thereafter the University took cognizance of some complaints that the Education Colleges in the State were not actually imparting education to the students as most of the students remained absent from colleges but were marked present. The College Development Council convened a meeting on 3rd July, 2014 and, besides other items of the agenda, considered the reports of surprise inspection conducted by the team as per the University Council resolution No. 3262 for determining the intake capacity of non-government Colleges of Education affiliated with the University on the basis of rational mechanism devised and approved by the University Council in its 75th meeting held on 11.10.2013. After detailed deliberations, it was resolved;

(i) Seats allotment formula based on the NAAC accreditation and affiliation status, be not applied for the academic session 2014-15. All the Non-Government Colleges of Education be given time upto 30th April, 2015, to get NAAC accreditation, as requested by FORCE, as one time exception. Maximum seat allotment for the academic year 2015-16 be strictly based on the approved table. However, the decision of the CDC be reported to appropriate bodies for confirmation.

(ii) As one time exception, average attendance of students found present during two inspections (i.e. Inspections during which higher number of students were found present) vis-a-vis the number of students admitted be reckoned and thereafter intake seats of Colleges for Session 2014-15 be fixed in accordance with the formula delineated in the following table:

1.Where average attendance of two inspection