Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10947/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10947 of 2008
=========================================
BHAGVAD
GOPAL INSTITUTE
OF
TECHNOLOGY - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
DC DAVE for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, ASSISTANT
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S.SHAH
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
Date
: 02/09/2008
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S.SHAH)
The
petitioner is a self-financed college running Diploma Course in
Engineering. As per the provisions contained under the Gujarat
Professional Technical Educational Colleges or Institutions
(Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fees) Act, 2007 (for brevity
?Sthe Act??), petitioner college was permitted to fill in 75 seats
as management seats, being 25% of the total 300 seats sanctioned to
the petitioner college for the academic year 2008-2009. As per the
provisions of the Act, the petitioner was permitted to fill in those
75 seats as management seats, however, in all 66 seats were filled in
and 9 seats remained vacant one of the seats earmarked as management
seats.
2. The
petitioner wants to be given an opportunity by the respondent
authorities to fill in all the 75 management seats.
3. The
third proviso to Section 6 of the Act provides that where any
management seat remains vacant, it shall have to be filled-in from
the Government seats. Since nine seats have remained vacant, the
above quoted proviso i.e. Section 6 comes into operation, and
therefore, respondent No.1 Admission Committee for professional
course has informed the petitioner that the vacant seats shall be
filled in by the centralized Admission Committee. The petitioner’s
representation to permit the petitioner to fill in the said nine
vacant seats on its own has been rejected by reply dated 19th
August, 2008 at Annexure ?SD?? to the petition.
4. Since
the impugned decision is in conformity with the statutory provisions,
we do not find any infirmity with the said decision of the Admission
Committee. The petition is therefore, summarily dismissed.
(M.S. Shah,
Actg. C.J.)
(D.H. Waghela,
J.)
*/Mohandas
Top