High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 09 DEL CK 0178

Cmd Global Being Run vs All India Council For Technical Education

Delhi High Court · Decided on 10 September 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Siddharth Mridul, J
RESULT
Diposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No.8226 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 344 words

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J

1.

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays as follows:-

(i) This Hon’ble Court may direct the respondent AICTE to process the application of petitioner institute, seeking closer of PGDM programme;

and/or

(ii) This Hon’ble Court may issue an appropriate writ order or direction to Respondent AICTE to issue necessary approval for closer of PGDM

programme ;and/or

(iii) This Hon’ble Court may issue an appropriate writ order or direction to Respondent AICTE to release the amount of Rs. Fifteen Lakh, as

deposited at the time of getting approval as FDR; and/or

(iv) Pass any other order as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case.

2.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner institution states that, despite filing an application seeking closure of the PGDM programme

being conducted by them, with the AICTE in 2012, the latter have not made any determination thereon, as required by law.

3.

As consequence thereof, the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/deposited by the petitioners with the AICTE, at the time of being accorded approval to run

the subject course, has not been refunded to them.

4.

On the last date of hearing, i.e. on 07.08.2018, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had prayed for time to obtain instructions, in

relation to the abovementioned reliefs.

5.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the official respondent states that, despite all their efforts, they have been unable to obtain instructions, from

their client.

6.

In view of the foregoing and having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record, it is directed that, the official

respondent shall take necessary action to determine the petitioner’s application seeking closure of the PGDM programme, in accordance with law,

as expeditiously possible, and preferably within a period of six weeks from today, under intimation to the petitioner.

7.

Directed accordingly.

8.

No further directions are called for in the present writ petition.

9.

With the above directions the writ petition is disposed of.