JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J.
1. Notice on behalf of opposite party No. 1 has been accepted by Chief Standing Counsel whereas Sri Lalit Shukla has accepted notice on behalf of Technical University.
2. Issue notice to opposite party No. 2 returnable at an early date.
3. Opposite parties may file counter affidavit within a period of four weeks, to which rejoinder may be filed by the petitioner at the earliest.
4. Connect and list alongwith writ petition No. 6544 (M/S) of 2007; Karamat Husain Muslim Girls Degree College v. State of U.P. and Ors. and Writ Petition No. 256 (M/S) of 2008; Era's Educational Trust, Lucknow v. State of U.P. and Ors.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
6. Sri Mansoor Ahmad, learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Azad Institute of Engineering and Technology is an institution run, managed and administered through society, namely, Azad Educational Society, which is registered under the Societies Registration. The Institution has been declared as a Minority Education Institution on 24.5.2007 by the National Commission For Minority Educational Institutions in exercise of powers conferred under Section 2(g) of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004 and is a non-aided Institution. The Institution is imparting education in various disciplines like Master of Business Administration, Master of Computer Application and professional courses of Engineering. For various courses necessary approval has been granted by the competent authority and the Institution is also affiliated with the U.P. Technical University.
7. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that by the impugned order dated 7.11.2007, the opposite party No. 2 after declaring Muslim Community to be a non-minority, declared the Institution to be a non-minority institution and as such the Institution would be deprived of the rights and privileges which are available to a minority institution. According to him the impugned order is perse illegal and without jurisdiction because it is not within the domain of the Fairness Committee to decide the question of minority.
8. He further argued that the only authority to recognize the minority status is the State Government or an authority established by law. It has been vehemently argued that the Committee is not authorized to scrutinize the status of an Institution which has been given limited functions as enumerated in the judgment of Islamic Academy and P.A. Inamdar's case. The Apex Court while directing the State to constitute the committees for Fairness and Transparency in Admission Procedure/Fee fixation has also enumerated the powers and functions to be exercised by the said Committees. The Committee shall have powers to over see the test to be conducted by the Association. This would include the power to call for the proposed question paper(s), to know the names of paper setters and examiners and to check the method adopted to ensure papers are not leaked. It has also been provided that the said Committee will function till the appropriate legislation is enacted by the State. Lastly, it has been contended that inspite of the fact that Regulation of Admission Act 2006 having been enacted by the State Government and the Fairness and Transparency Committee having become functus officio, the Committee, on its own, is continuing and is dealing with the matters, jurisdiction of which is not vested in him.
9. Having heard the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the judgment passed in Islamic Academy and P.A. Inamdar's case as also the decision of this Court dated 11.7.2007 passed in writ petition No. 2907 (M/S) of 2007 Isabella Thoburn College v. State of U.P. and Ors. prima facie a case for interim relief is made out.
10. Accordingly, the operation and implementation of the order dated 7.11.2007 contained in Annexure No. 4 passed by the opposite party No. 2 shall remain stayed till further orders of this Court.