IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.15415/2019 (EDN – RES) BETWEEN:
1 . PARAMAHAMSA FOUNDATION TRUST (REGD.) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT A.M.C.BUILDING, 30TH CROSS 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560 011 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN Dr. K.R.PARAMAHAMSA 2 . A.M.C. ENGINEERING COLLEGE 18TH K.M., BANNERUGATTA ROAD BENGALURU-560 083 REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY Dr. A.G.NATARAJ ... PETITIONERS [BY SRI V.JAVAHAR BABU, ADV.] AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION M.S.BUILDING, Dr. B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2 . THE VICE CHANCELLOR VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, JNANA SANGAMA, BELAGAVI-590 018 3 . THE VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, JNANA SANGAMA BELAGAVI-590 018 REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR 4 . UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI-110 002 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY/ MEMBER SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT.PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R-1; SRI SANTOSH S. NAGARALE, ADV. FOR R-3; SRI SHOWRI H.R., ADV. FOR R-4; R-2 SERVED.] THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION/LETTER DATED 23.02.2019 ISSUED BY R-3 VIDE ANNEXURE-E HERETO AND CONSEQUENTLY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to accept notice for respondent No.1.
The petitioners have challenged the communication/letter dated 23.02.2019 issued by respondent No.3 at Annexure – E to the writ petition.
2. The petitioner No.2 is an Institution imparting technical education in various branches of Engineering which is permanently affiliated to the respondent No.3 – University with 80% programs. Respondent No.3 has informed the petitioners that in view of the UGC Autonomous Regulations, 2003, the request made by the petitioners for conferring the recognition of autonomous status for U.G. and P.G. courses cannot be considered favourably. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the order impugned does not assign any satisfactory reasons for arriving at a decision.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent – University made an endeavour to support the order impugned.
4. The order impugned reads thus:-
“In Pursuant to the new autonomous regulations notified by the University Grants Commission (UGC) cited in ref (ii), your college application for conferment of autonomous status cannot be considered as you don’t fulfill the requirements/norms with the aforesaid regulations.”
5. Aforesaid decision is not supported by any reasons of the University. It is well settled law that the reason is the heartbeat of the order. Any order passed without assigning the adequate reasons is void ab-initio. It is ex-facie apparent that the order impugned is not a speaking order. On this ground alone, the order impugned deserves to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, Annexure – E dated 23.02.2019 is set aside restoring the proceedings to the file of respondent No.3 – University to consider the request of the petitioners and take a decision in accordance with law after passing a speaking order. Compliance shall be made in an expedite manner, in any event, not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.
The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above.
Sd/- JUDGE PMR