Educational Society v. Pradesh, Hyderabad
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- AICTE Act, 1987
Judgment
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of 1st & 2nd Respondents in not .....RESPONDENTS shortlisting the petitioner Society for approval of establishment of technical institution at Medak for the academic year 2001-02 to be considered by the 3rd & 4th Respondents as arbitrary, highhanded voilative of all cannons of law and justice and repugnant to the provisions laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India from time to time and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to consider the cast of the petitioner society for grant of a sanction for establishment of the Technical Institution at Medak for the academic year 2001-02 as is satisfied the guidelines, norms and other requisites of the AICTE Act, 1987 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.D.V.SITARAMAMURTHY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1to4: GP FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.5: Standing Counsel for JNTU The Court made the following : ORDER: In this writ petition, Y.B.R.Educational Educational Society seeks a direction to the third respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of sanction for establishment of technical institution in Medak for the academic year 2001-2002. While admitting the writ petition on 24.04.2001, this Court directed to list the W.P.M.P.No.33939 of 2000 after vacation. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the interim relief prayed in the W.P.M.P.No.33939 of 2000 has become infructuous and accordingly the W.P.M.P. is dismissed as infructuous. In the writ petition, the petitioner sought for permission/recognition for establishment of a technical institution for the academic year 2001-2002, at this point of time this Court is not inclined to grant any such relief. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. ___________ (V.V.S.RAO,J)
09.09.2004. To ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER
#1. The Principal Secretary, Technical Education, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad.
#2. The Commissioner of Technical Education, Government of A.P., Hyderabad.
#3. All India Council for Technical Education, I.G.Sports Complex, I.P.Estate, New Delhi.
#6. The Regional Council/Director for Technical Education, All India Council for Technical Education, Sastry Bhavan, 26-Haddows Road, Chennai. The Registrar, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. 2 CCs to the G.P.for Technical Education, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT).
#7. 2 CD copies.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; AICTE Act, 1987.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 09 Sep 2004. The bench was V V S RAO.
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.