2006 CORAM THE HONBLE MR. SHAH, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONBLE MRS. Registrar, Jeppiaar Nagar, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai 600 119. Secretary to Government, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi 110 001. The All India Council for Technical Education, Rep. Estate, New Delhi 110 002.

The University Grants Commission, Rep. Secretary, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110 002. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the reliefs as stated within. APPEARANCE For Petitioner : For Respondent : Mr.

Rajeev Dhawan, Senior Counsel for Mr. Krishnamoorthy, Senior Counsel for V.

Chandran, Senior Counsel for Mr. Rajeev Dhawan, Senior Counsel for Mr. Thiyagarajan, Senior Counsel for Mr. Chandru, Senior Counsel for Mr.

Udayakumar, SCGSC for Ministry of Human Resource Development :ORDER Prabha Sridevan, J. Institution deemed to be university under Section 3 of the UGC Act as against public interest and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to implement the public notice in Advt.

2006 and inspect the deemed to be universities conducting technical courses and award recognition to the technical courses conducted by such deemed to be universities after evaluating their merit. 2006, which was issued by the Central Government pending the writ petitions, as illegal and ultra vires the AICTE Act and the UGC Act.

Universities and to establish a University Grants Commission.

The relevant sections dealing with the power of the UGC will be dealt with later. The Commission has, inter alia, the power and jurisdiction to inspect any University or any Department thereof and also to impose penalties for violation of provisions of the Act. Section 3 of the Act. AICTE Act is in accordance with the UGC Act. Act, which will be dealt with in detail later, refers to the functions of the Council and Section 11 deals with the manner in which the inspection should be undertaken. Court for quashing the said notice. AICTE Act cannot be exercised by the AICTE for issuing the notice of inspection referred to above. The Division Bench, however, protected the right of the petitioners to take such legal and constitutional pleas if any adverse order affecting their rights is passed. 2005, another notice was issued by the AICTE, which was almost identical to the earlier notice, subject matter of the above judgment. 11 of the AICTE Act, and the notices were stayed. Universities, including deemed to be universities and regulation of deemed to be universities.

These Regulations are also challenged by way of amendment. In order to fulfill the mandate given by the AICTE Act, the Council has notified regulations for grant of approval for establishment of new Technical Institutions, courses, intake etc. Technical Education shall be effected at all levels without obtaining prior approval of the Council. Associated Individuals, as the case may be. The student community, on seeing this notification, became agitated and concerned about their future prospects. Secretary of the Students Federation of India, the students asked for clarification regarding the notice, for which no assurance was given by the deemed to be universities. It was alleged that this was the direct outcome of the public notice issued pursuant to the 2005 Regulations. Thereupon, writ petitions were filed challenging the said public notice.

In view of the urgency involved, all the writ petitions were taken up for hearing.