AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Learned Party-in-person filed a memo vide U.S.R. No.93260 of 2022, dated 20.10.2022 not pressing the present writ petition against respondent Nos.4 to 7. In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed as not pressed against respondent Nos.4 to 7.
Heard Dr. Rev. K.V.K. Rao, learned Party-in-Person, Chairman and Correspondent of petitioner No.1 Society and petitioner No.2, Mr. T. Surya Karan Reddy, learned Additional Solicitor General of India representing Mr. B. Jithender, learned counsel for Central Government appearing for respondent No.1 and Mrs. Megha Rani Agarwal, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2.
This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in not completing the process of considering the application dated 16.12.2021 submitted by petitioner No.1 for establishment of First-of-its-kind in India and world a Private Self-Financing Rehabilitation Deemed to be University (Under De Novo Category) under the name and style ‘Dr. Bharathi Rao’s St. Mary’s Advanced Comprehensive Rehabilitation Deemed to be University (Under De Novo Category) within the timelines prescribed under 6.04.3, 6.04.4, 6.04.5 and 6.04.6 of the UGC (Institutions Deemed to be Universities) Regulations, 2019 dated 20.04.2019 while granting permissions and letter of intents and/or fast track processing to other applicants as illegal and also to declare that the failure on the part of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in processing the application of petitioner No.1 beyond the prescribed period and in any event beyond 90 days amounts to deemed grant of letter of intent/No Objection Certification NOC under Section - 10.3 of NCMEI Act, 2004 and for a consequential direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to forthwith process the application dated 16.12.2021 of petitioner No.1 along with the copy of the presentation dated 24.08.2022 and issue the conditions/additional conditions along with reasons for imposing or not imposing such conditions of Letter of Intent as per Clause - 6.04.4, to commence and proceed with the establishment of a minority deemed to be university as per Section - 10 (4) of NCMEI Act, 2004 and reporting compliance to respondent No.1 as per Clause - 6.04.6, for forwarding to respondent No.2 for verification and advising respondent No.1 to take further steps to issue notification under Section - 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, for declaring the institution as an institution Deemed to be University (Under De Novo Category).
Petitioner No.1 herein had submitted an application dated 16.12.2021 for establishment of First-of-its kind in India and World a Private Self-Financing Rehabilitation Deemed to be University (Under De Novo Category) under the name and style ‘Dr. Bharathi Rao’s St. Mary’s Advanced Comprehensive Rehabilitation Deemed to be University (Under De Novo Category)’. Thereafter, respondent No.2 has constituted an Expert Committee for the purpose of conducting inspection and submission of a report, on 16.06.2022. Thereafter, the said committee has conducted inspection on 24.08.2022 and submitted report to respondent No.2. The said fact is confirmed by learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Thereafter, respondent Nos.1 to 3 have not completed the entire process within the time fixed by the Statute i.e., ninety (90) days from the date of application.
However, Mrs. Megha Rani Agarwal, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.2 had already received the report of Expert Committee constituted by it and they are going to place the same in the meeting to be held on 28.10.2022. On consideration of the said report, the Committee will refer the matter to respondent No.1.
Mr. T. Surya Karan Reddy, learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.1, would submit that while considering the said proposal sent by respondent No.2, respondent No.1 will take a decision within the time frame fixed under Section - 10 (3) of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004.
In view of the above said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the report submitted by the Expert Committee appointed by it and take a decision in its meeting dated 28.10.2022, submit its proposal to respondent No.1. On receipt of the said proposal, respondent No.1 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within thirty (30) days thereafter as stipulated under Section - 10 (3) of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004. However, the writ petition is dismissed against respondent Nos.4 to 7 as not pressed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.