*1* 944wp6297o19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.6297 OF 2019

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11806 OF 2019

IN

WRIT PETITION NO.6297 OF 2019

DR.BIYABANI SYED NAJEEBUDDIN

VERSUS

MILLENNIUM INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT THR

DIRECTOR AND OTHERS

AND

WRIT PETITION NO.8202 OF 2018

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9358 OF 2019

IN WP/8202/2018

SAYED ZEESHAN SAYED NAEEM

VERSUS

MILLENNIUM INSTITUTION OF MANAGEMENT THR

DIRECTOR AND OTHERS

AND

WRIT PETITION NO.8378 OF 2018

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7108 OF 2020

IN WP/8378/2018

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.14225 OF 2019

IN WP/8378/2018

MAULANA AZAD EDUCATIONAL TRUST

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

AND

WRIT PETITION NO.8809 OF 2018

*2* 944wp6297o19

DR.AKHTER ANWAR

VERSUS

MAULANA AZAD EDUCATIONAL TRUST AND OTHERS

...

Shri V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate h/f Shri Dixit Sushant V.,

Advocate for the Petitioners in WP/6297/2019, 8202/2018, .

Shri R.N.Dhorde, Senior Advocate h/f Shri A.C.Darandale,

Advocate for the Management i.e. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in

WP/6297/2019, WP/8809/2018 and 8202/2018.

Shri Amol N. Kakade, Advocate for the petitioner in

WP/8378/2018.

Shri Sayyed Tauseef Yaseen, Advocate for the petitioner in

WP/8809/2018.

Shri S.S. Thombre, Advocate for the University i.e. Respondent

No.3 in WP/6297/2019, No.4 in 8202/2018, No.5 in

WP/8378/2018, No.6 in WP/8809/2018.

Shri C.V. Dharurkar, Advocate for the AICTE i.e. Respondent

No.4 in WP/6297/2019, No.6 in 8202/2018 and WP/8378/2018

and No.7 in WP/8809/2018.

Shri S.B. Yawalkar, AGP for the State Authorities i.e.

Respondent Nos.5 and 7 in WP/6297/2019, Nos.3 and 7 in

8202/2018, Nos.1 to 3 in WP/8378/2018, Nos.3 to 5 in

WP/8809/2018.

Shri S.G. Karlekar, Advocate for the Entrance Test Cell i.e.

Respondent No.6 in WP/6297/2019, No.5 in 8202/2018, No.4 in

WP/8378/2018.

...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE

&

S.G. MEHARE, JJ.

DATE :- 20^th August, 2021

*3* 944wp6297o19

P er Court

: -

1.

We have heard the learned Senior Advocates for the

respective sides, the learned AGP on behalf of the State and the

learned advocates on behalf of the AICTE and the University, for

quite some time. We have perused the order dated 06.03.2020

passed by this Court wherein, we have directed the University to

cause an inspection on two counts viz. (i) continuation of

affiliation and (ii) closure of the institution.

2.

We are informed by the learned advocate for the

University that there were two Committees that were constituted.

One Committee, which was to inspect the Institution with

reference to the continuation of affiliation, has submitted the

report indicating that since the Institution has infrastructural

facilities and no deficiencies, it deserves continuation of

affiliation. The other Committee inspecting the Institution having

regard to the desire of the Management to close down the

Institution, has submitted the report observing that as there are no

students admitted and there is no educational activity, closure of

the Institution can be approved.

3.

The debate as to whether, Section 121 of the

*4* 944wp6297o19

Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016 would be applicable

to the process for approving closure of the Institution, still

continues. The learned advocate for the University submits that

as the AICTE is the nodal body, the University has a very little

role to play, except to the extent of issuing a “No Objection

Certificate” for closure of the Institution. Such NOC has already

been submitted to the Government by the University.

4.

The learned AGP submits on behalf of the Joint

Director of Higher and Technical Education, Aurangabad, that

they have received necessary papers from the Institution along

with requisite documents, seeking NOC for closure. As the

requisite fees were deposited on 03.08.2021, the Joint Director of

Technical Education has forwarded the proposal to the State of

Maharashtra on 0