THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.35475 of 2014 Between:
Dated 21st November, 2014 NRI Institute of Technology And …Petitioner State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.Sriram for Sri Shreyas Reddy P.
Counsel for the respondents: Advocate General (TG) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed feeling aggrieved by notice in Letter bearing No.JNTUH/AAC/Affiliation Application A-114/2014, dated 07.11.2014, of respondent No.2-University, whereby it has issued a general notice to all the colleges which are conducting UG/PG/Dual Degree/Pharma-D/Pharna-D(PB) for the academic year 2014-15 in an existing Engineering/Pharmacy/Integrated Campus/Technical Campus/Standalone MBA/MCA Institutions including Autonomous College Institutions, which are seeking affiliation of the University, to submit on-line application in Form A-114 on or before 15.11.2014.
The petitioner pleaded that it has already made an application for affiliation for the academic year 2014-15 and that in pursuance thereof, several events have taken place which included passing of several orders by this Court and the Apex Court. It has therefore pleaded that the impugned notice once again asking it to apply for affiliation is wholly unsustainable.
T h e learned Advocate General (TS) submitted that the impugned notice was issued in view of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in SLP(C).No.26648 of 2014 and batch, dated 29.10.2014. He has, however, fairly conceded that this notice will not be insisted upon and the same is deemed to have been withdrawn in respect of the institutions, such as the petitioner, which have already applied for affiliation for the present academic year. He has further submitted that based on AICTE norms and University Regulations, the inspecting teams will conduct inspections and submit their report.
In the light of the above clarification given by the learned Advocate General, respondent No.2 is directed not to enforce the impugned notice on the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.44381 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 21st November, 2014 Note: Issue CC by tomorrow.
(b/o) VGB