Cmd Global Being Run vs.all India Council for Technical Education

Cmd Global Being Run vs All India Council for Technical Education

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Sep 10, 2018

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1217777

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1217777
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Sep 10, 2018
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cmd Global Being Run

Respondent

All India Council for Technical Education

Excerpt

.....approval for closer of pgdm programme ;and/or (iii) this hon’ble court may issue an appropriate writ order w.p.(c) 8226/2018 page 1 of 3 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. as consequence thereof, 3. 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 w.p.(c) 8226/2018 page 2 of 3 within a period of six weeks from today, under intimation to the petitioner.7. 8. directed accordingly. no further directions are called for in the present writ petition.9. with the above directions the writ petition is disposed of. september10 2018 p’ma siddharth mridul (judge) w.p.(c) 8226/2018 page 3 of 3

Full Judgment

#11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:

10. 09.2018 W.P.(C) 8226/2018 CMD GLOBAL BEING RUN versus ........ Petitioner

ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION ........ RESPONDENTS

Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

: Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocate with Mr. Chandra Shekhar Singh and Mr. Mayank Manish, Advocates. For the... RESPONDENTS

: Mr. Anil Soni, Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhinav Tyagi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution 1. of India prays as follows:-

"(i) (ii) This Hon’ble Court may direct the respondent AICTE to process the application of petitioner institute, seeking closer of PGDM programme; and/or 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 W.P.(C) 8226/2018 Page 1 of 3 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. As consequence thereof, 3. 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 W.P.(C) 8226/2018 Page 2 of 3 within a period of six weeks from today, under intimation to the petitioner.

7. 8. Directed accordingly. No further directions are called for in the present writ petition.

9. With the above directions the writ petition is disposed of. SEPTEMBER10 2018 p’ma SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE) W.P.(C) 8226/2018 Page 3 of 3

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Cmd Global Being Run vs All India Council for Technical Educa... Same Subject Education