Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. - (1.) THE Petitioner institution sought affiliation/recognition for running a BTC course for which he had approached this Court and Writ Petition No. 56159 of 2010 was disposed of observing that the Division Bench judgment referred therein was binding and the State Government should pass an appropriate order within 3 weeks.
(2.) THREE deficiencies have been pointed out in relation to the Petitioner's institution entailed in the impugned order dated 27.1.2011. The first objection is that the area for running the said training course inside the premises has not been earmarked. The second objection is that the Hall which has been constructed by the institution is short of the norms fixed by the authority and the third objection is that the faculty members are not approved. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that these objections had been raised by the State Government and the said objections were replied to by the Petitioner in its reply dated 14.4.2010. After receipt of the said reply the Director, SCERT made recommendations in favour of the Petitioner and forwarded the claim to the State Government particularly the concerned Secretary Mr. Anil Sant to whom the said letter is addressed indicating that the Petitioner has already submitted his documents which should be processed and order should be passed.
(3.) AS far as the three objections are concerned learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that in his reply he had submitted the documents including the map earmarking the area for running the course and had also indicated that an additional room adjacent to the Hall has been amalgamated to bring the area of the Hall within the norms as prescribed. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that approval to the faculties appointed has to be given by the Examination Regulatory Authority and the request of the Petitioner has already been sent through registered post to the Examination Regulatory Authority about a year ago without there being any objection thereon. He therefore submits that there was no deficiency on the part of the Petitioner and it is the Examination Regulatory Authority which had to issue the said approval.;