Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. - (1.) This Court, in a public interest litigation in CWP No. 6454/2010 issued directions from time to time. In obedience to one of the orders dated 5.9.2012, passed by this Court, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had registered two preliminary inquiries and the State Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau registered FIR No. 11 dated 18.7.2011 in connection with the allegations of certain forged certificates allegedly issued by some of the educational institutions in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The CBI concluded the first preliminary inquiry and submitted a report, upon which, this Court, vide order dated 3.5.2012, directed that the investigation of the crime registered by FIR No. 11 be transferred to the CBI, for investigation.
(2.) In the second preliminary inquiry, it was ascertained from different documents collected from different regulatory authorities, namely, All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), New Delhi, Nation Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) NRC, Jaipur, NCVI, New Delhi that a total of 274 private Technical/Educational and other institutions were granted recognition/approval by different regulatory authorities, after obtaining No Objection Certificate from the Directorate of Technical Education, Government of Himachal Pradesh, had granted affiliation to the aforesaid category of institutions. Therefore, vide order dated 9.8.2011, this Court directed as follows:- "The S.P C.B.I. who is present before us has brought to the notice of this Court, that in some cases where NOC's have been obtained from the N.C.T.E., they do not have buildings much less proper buildings. According to his information, there are several such institutions. There will be a direction to the S.P. C.B.I. to inquire into all those cases where the no objection/clearance has been obtained from the NCTE, NRC, NCVT, AICTE and other such agencies on the basis of false representations. After conducting such inquiry into the matter of all such private institutions, a report in a sealed cover be submitted before this Court in three months. We make it clear that it will be open for the C.B.I. also to take appropriate action under law on the basis of the investigation and it is not required that they should wait for orders from this Court for any direction/permission in that regard to take action in accordance with law."
(3.) The CBI assailed the aforesaid order by filing petition(s) for special leave to appeal (c) No.(s) 11462- 11463/2013 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was represented before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the CBI was in fact not challenging the aforesaid order passed by this Court, but only expressing its inability to undertake such a huge investigation, having regard to the limited infrastructure available to it. The CBI, therefore, came up with the suggestion that the investigation be referred to a Committee constituted under orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and even suggested names of four retired Police Officers of whom, three had worked with the CBI earlier. Pursuant to this representation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 20.4.2015 appointed a committee of the following members:- JUDGEMENT_4_LAWS(HPH)12_2018_1.html ;