✦ Bombay High Court · 12 Aug 2011

ASN v. Directorate of Tech. Education & Ors.

Writ Petition No. 1541 of 2011GIRISH S GODBOLE3 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Mr. Vishal V. Kanade with Swathy Remakrishnan i/by M/s. Ashoka Law Firm for the Petitioners. Mr.M.D.Naik, AGP. for the Respondents State and DTE. Mr. A.V. Bukhari i/by Rahul Nerlekar for Respondent No.3 Council of Architecture. Mr. Rui Rodrigues for Respondent Mumbai University. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C. J. AND GIRISH S. GODBOLE, J. 12 August 2011 PC: Rule. 2 By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard by consent. The respective counsel for respondents waive service of Rule. 3 Petitioner No.2 college has recently been granted approval by Council of Architecture for commencement of under graduate course in Bachelor of Architecture with intake capacity of 40 seats. 4 Hence, for the reasons recorded in our order dated 18th July 2011 passed in Writ Petition No.5455 of 2011, this writ petition is allowed and the following directions shall apply to the aforesaid courses ASN 2 WP-1541.sxw with the stated intake capacity for academic year 2011-2012. a) Written undertakings of the Chairman and Secretary of Petitioner No.1 not to admit any student and accept fees for the aforesaid seats till the college is granted affiliation by respondent University for the said seats and till petitioners comply with Section 21 of the Architects Act, 1972 and the conditions stipulated by the Council of Architecture in its letter of approval dated 29 July 2011 shall be filed in this Court within one week from today and the copy thereof shall be forwarded to all the respondents within one week from today. b) Respondent No.2 State of Maharashtra shall accordingly issue appropriate Government Resolution notifying the aforesaid seats in petitioner college as approved by Council of Architecture in the list of such colleges for centralized admission process for the academic year 2011-2012 and respondent No.1-Director of Technical Education shall forthwith include the aforesaid seats in petitioner college for Centralized Admission Process aforesaid Architecture course for the academic year 2011-2012 and to display the details of said seats of petitioner college on its website along with other colleges for CAP. c) It is further directed that petitioner college shall not admit any student and accept the fees in the said course before getting the affiliation from respondent University in respect of said course and before complying with Section 21 of the Architects Act, 1972 and the ASN 3 WP-1541.sxw conditions stipulated by the Council of Architecture in its Letter of Approval dated 29 July 2011.

Undertakings as aforesaid shall be filed in this Court within one week and copies thereof shall be forwarded to all the respondents within one week. d) It is further directed that Director of Technical Education shall publish the information and also specifically mention that the application of the petitioner college for affiliation in respect of aforesaid seats is pending with the concerned University and that no student shall be admitted by petitioner college in the aforesaid course without getting such affiliation. e) f) The petition is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms. Respondent University will be at liberty to move this Court for modification/clarification of this order in case the need arises. g) Parties to act on a copy of this order duly authenticated by the registry of this Court. CHIEF JUSTICE GIRISH S. GODBOLE, J.

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Architects Act, 1972 — s. 21.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 12 Aug 2011. The bench was GIRISH S GODBOLE.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 1541 of 2011). ← Search more judgments