Bombay High Court Quashes University Notification Reducing Intake Capacity to Zero in Engineering College — Violation of Natural Justice and AICTE Regulations. University's unilateral reduction of intake from 16 to 0 without prior notice or opportunity of hearing held arbitrary and unsustainable.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 87
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Mukund Education Society and Sanmati Engineering College, challenged a notification dated 19/5/2016 issued by Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University (respondent no.1) which reduced the intake capacity of the engineering college from 16 to 0 for the academic year 2016-17, while continuing affiliation. The petitioners argued that the reduction was arbitrary, without any prior notice or opportunity of hearing, and contrary to the regulations of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). The University contended that it had the power to regulate intake under the affiliation conditions. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the University's action violated principles of natural justice as no show-cause notice or hearing was given before reducing the intake to zero. The court also noted that the AICTE regulations prescribe a procedure for variation of intake, which was not followed. Consequently, the court quashed the notification and directed the University to restore the intake capacity to 16 for the academic year 2016-17, subject to compliance with other requirements. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - Reduction of Intake Capacity - University reduced intake of engineering college from 16 to 0 without any prior notice or hearing - Held that such action violates principles of natural justice and is arbitrary (Paras 2-5).

B) Education Law - AICTE Regulations - Intake Capacity - University's Power - University cannot unilaterally reduce intake to zero without following AICTE norms and without giving opportunity to the college - Held that the notification is quashed and set aside (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the University could unilaterally reduce the intake capacity of an affiliated engineering college from 16 to 0 for the academic year 2016-17 without affording any opportunity of hearing and without following the procedure prescribed under the AICTE regulations.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The impugned notification dated 19/5/2016 is quashed and set aside. The University is directed to restore the intake capacity of petitioner no.2 to 16 for the academic year 2016-17, subject to compliance with other requirements. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • opportunity of hearing
  • AICTE regulations
  • intake capacity reduction
  • affiliation conditions
  • university autonomy
  • judicial review of administrative action
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (07) 128

Writ Petition No.3593 of 2016

2016-07-14

B.P. Dharmadhikari, Kum. Indira Jain

S.V. Manohar (Senior Advocate) with U.J. Deshpande for petitioners; J.B. Kasat for respondent no.1; N.R. Patil (AGP) for respondent no.3

Mukund Education Society and Sanmati Engineering College

Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, All India Council for Technical Education, State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging University notification reducing intake capacity of engineering college from 16 to 0.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of notification dated 19/5/2016 and restoration of intake capacity.

Filing Reason

University reduced intake capacity without notice or hearing.

Previous Decisions

None mentioned.

Issues

Whether the University could reduce intake capacity to zero without affording opportunity of hearing. Whether the reduction violated AICTE regulations.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners: Reduction was arbitrary, without notice or hearing, and contrary to AICTE norms. Respondent University: Had power to regulate intake under affiliation conditions.

Ratio Decidendi

Any reduction in intake capacity, especially to zero, without prior notice and opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and is arbitrary. The University must follow the procedure prescribed by AICTE regulations before varying intake.

Judgment Excerpts

Looking to the nature of controversy and on joint request, we have heard petition finally by issuing rule and making it returnable forthwith. We find that the impugned notification has been issued without any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. In this view of the matter, the impugned notification cannot be sustained.

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed in 2016. The court heard the matter on 14 July 2016 and disposed it finally with the above decision.

Acts & Sections

  • All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Conviction for Rash Driving Causing Death — Evidence of Eye-Witnesses and Spot Panchnama Sufficient to Prove Guilt Under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304A IPC.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes University Notification Reducing Intake Capacity to Zero in Engineering College — Violation of Natural Justice and AICTE Regulations. University's unilateral reduction of intake from 16 to 0 without prior notice or opportu...