Decision of Committee is subject to judicial review.

The above two writ petitions had come knocking at the doors of this Court invariably involving yet another controversy of annual phenomenon in respect of the procedure for admission in private unaided professional educational institutions, both minority and non-minority.

2. As a prelude, an exposition in brevity of the law as it stands at present needs to be mentioned. The entire gamut of the issue comprised of divergent and intricate factual and legal facets respecting the establishment and administration of private educational institutions in general has been more or less set at rest in all its larger constitutional perspective by the Supreme Court in the judgment handed over by a coram of 11 judges in the case of T.M.A.Pai Foundation and others Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2002) 8 SCC 481 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as "Pai Foundation case"). This judgment of the Supreme Court was referred to a Constitution Bench in the case of ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697, (hereinafter called as "Islamic Academy case") for the specific purpose of clarification of doubts/anomalies, if any in the judgment of T.M.A.Pai Foundation case, as Pai Foundation case was interpreted in different ways by different institutions to suit their convenience.

3. The Constitution Bench in Islamic Academy case, after completing the task of interpretation, has issued directions in terms of Article 142 of the Constitution of India for appointment of permanent committee by each State to ensure that the test conducted by the Association of Colleges is fair and transparent. By virtue of the said direction, a permanent committee came to be appointed by the State of Tamil Nadu as an adhoc measure until appropriate legislation or law is enacted with power to oversee the tests to be conducted by the association/Consortium of Colleges.

4. With this brief legal and factual backdrop, let me turn to the facts in controversy before this Court. The Consortium of Self Financing Professional Arts and Science Colleges in Tamil Nadu, the petitioner in W.P.No.15701 of 2006 filed writ petition for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in proceedings No.SFPC/Engg/001/2006, dated 5. 2006 and quash the direction in so far as it relates to the direction to follow single window system and to follow Rule of reservation and the consequential terms and conditions 3, 13, 15, 19, 20 and 21 and consequently direct the Committee/first respondent to grant approval to the petitioner to conduct common entrance test as per the norms stipulated during the academic year 2005-2006 for the present academic year 2006-200 7.

5. Theother writ petition in w.P.No.16027 of 2006 is filed by the Association of Minority Unaided Christian Institution (AMUCI), which is also a constituent member of the Consortium of Self Financing Professional Arts and Science Colleges in Tamil Nadu, the petitioner in w.P.No.15701 of 2006 praying for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent/Committee dated 5. 2006 and quash the same to the extent in so far as insisting upon the counselling process through single window system as compulsory for filling up the seats in self financing minority colleges and conditions 3, 5, 9, 12, 19, 20 and 21 and consequently direct the Committee/first respondent to grant approval to the petitioner to conduct common entrance test as per the norms stipulated during the academic year 2005-2006 for the present academic year 2006¬2007.

6. Both the writ petitioners have approached this Court with almost identical grievances arising out of the proceedings of the first respondent/permanent committee dated 5. 2006. The directions contained in the impugned proceedings and those amongst which are assailed specifically in both the writ petitions are substantially identical and the petitioners rest their case on the ratio