- (1.) Heard Sri Pankaj Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents, Sri Neeraj Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Sri Niket Dutta holding brief of Sri Rajiv Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 2.6.2015 communicated by the Registrar Bundelkhand University, informing the petitioners that the matter of recognition cannot be considered in view of the fact that the Regional Higher Education Officer had sent comment on 27.5.2015, which was received in the University on 28.5.2015 and in view of the order of the Apex Court in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 1 ESC 157, the affiliation could only be granted upto 10th May, 2015. It is stated that the temporary affiliation was granted to the College by the State Government vide order dated 7.5.2014 with the condition to fulfil pointed shortcomings within a year. The petitioners, after completing the deficiencies, has filed an application and also deposited fees for inspection on 18th/19th March, 2015. Pursuant thereto, the Committee was constituted on 20.3.2015, which has inspected the premises on 10.5.2015 and the Regional Higher Education Officer has sent his comment on 27.5.2015. It is submitted that neither in the inspection by the Committee nor in sending the comments by the Regional Higher Education Officer, there was any role of the petitioners and it was lapse of the State authorities and for that, the petitioners cannot be penalized.
(2.) Sri Neeraj Tiwari, who appears for the University, taking shelter of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya wherein schedule has been prescribed for granting affiliation and the consequences of disobedience of the Apex Court judgment directing that in case, schedule is violated by any authority, the proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 may be initiated and departmental disciplinary action may also be taken in accordance with law, submits that there was no escape for the University to take any other view except the view taken by it, therefore no infirmity can be attached to the impugned order.
(3.) In view of the admitted facts that the comment of the Regional Higher Education Officer was sent much after cut off date i.e. 10.5.2015 fixed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya i.e. 10.5.2015 and amended order dated 28.2.2013 passed on I.A. No. 8, for affiliation of the Institution, no relief can be granted to the petitioners by this Court. The writ petition is dismissed.;