Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. When the matter is taken up for hearing, neither there is appearance of behalf of the petitioner nor there is any representation. Learned Government Pleader submits that due to lapse of time, the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous. Recording the same…
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an Order, Direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the letter/proceedings bearing No.3257/H/2002-03/MCA/Acad/IV-I, dated 28-9-2002, issued by the 3rd Respondent-University insisting upon the Petitioner College to produce permission from the Government of Andhra Pradesh for revised intake of 40 candidates into M.B.A programme for the academic year 2002-03, failing which the name of the Petitioner College cannot be included in the next phase of the counseling though the revised orders of approval from the AICTE exist for intake of 40 candidates into M.B.A programme, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable, contrary to the spirit and object of the provisions of All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 and violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, and consequently, declare that no permission is required and/or direct the 1st Respondent to accord permission forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.ANANDAM Counsel for the Respondents 1 and 2: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for Respondents 3 & 4: Mr. Deepak Bhattacharjee The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus declaring the letter bearing No.3257/H/2002- 03/MCA/Acad/IV-I dated 28-09-2002 issued by the 3rd respondent-University insisting upon the petitioner college to produce permission from the Govt. of A.P., for revised intake of 40 candidates into MBA Programme for the academic year 2002-03, failing which the name of the petitioner college cannot be included in the next phase of the counseling though the revised orders of approval from the AICTE exist for intake of 40 candidates into MBA programme, as arbitrary and illegal.
Operative part
When the matter is taken up for hearing, neither there is appearance of behalf of the petitioner nor there is any representation. Learned Government Pleader submits that due to lapse of time, the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous. Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. June 22, 2005 MRR _______________ N.V. RAMANA, J Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Copy to. – Section Officer 1 The Principal Secretary to Government (Higher Education) Education (EC.2), Department, Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Technical Education, Govt. of A.P., 5th Floor, BRKR, Govt. Complex, Hyderabad. 3 The Registrar, Osmania University, Hyderabad. 4 Director, Directorate of Admissions, (Convenor : MBA/MCA Admissions), Osmania University, Hyderabad. Two C.C. s to the G.P. for Higher Education, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT) Two C.D. Copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.