Full Text
Translation output
^4-
#26-28
%03.10.2011
Present: Mr.Sanjay Sehrawat,Adv.for the petitioner.
Mr.Aniitesh Kumar,Adv. for the respondent.
+W.P.(C) Nos.5354/2011 & CM No.10898/2011
*
After some arguments, Mr. Sanjay Sehrawat, learned counsel representing the petitioner,on instructions,states that the petitioner at least would be eligible to the entitlement of grant of running of two courses out of three courses applied by it. Learned counsel submits that this statement is being made even if the Appeal
Committee takes into consideration the deficiencies already pointed outin the order impugned before this Court.
It was made clear to the parties that this Court,in the exercise of writjurisdiction would not be interfering with the finding offacts arrived at by^;the Visiting Team, based on which the Appeal
Committee has given its decision, unless the finding of facts are i perverse,illegal or irrational. Be that as it may,since the petitioner
^ .-Av T f has taken a decision that even in the teeth of the fourteen deficiencies,the petitioner,at least, would be eligible for the grant of recognition to at least two courses, therefore, to that limited extent, let the Appeal Committee decide as to whether the petitioner would be eligible to the grant of recognition to any of the three courses in
2011:DHC:16085 r the teeth of the fourteen deficiencies already pointed out by the
Appeal Committee. The Appeal Committee shall decide the matter within a period oftwo weeksfrom the date ofthis order.
DASTI. • ^
October 03,2011 tp
KAI GAMBHIR,J
2011:DHC:16085
#26-28
%03.10.2011
Present: Mr.Sanjay Sehrawat,Adv.for the petitioner.
Mr.Aniitesh Kumar,Adv. for the respondent.
+W.P.(C) Nos.5354/2011 & CM No.10898/2011
*
After some arguments, Mr. Sanjay Sehrawat, learned counsel representing the petitioner,on instructions,states that the petitioner at least would be eligible to the entitlement of grant of running of two courses out of three courses applied by it. Learned counsel submits that this statement is being made even if the Appeal
Committee takes into consideration the deficiencies already pointed outin the order impugned before this Court.
It was made clear to the parties that this Court,in the exercise of writjurisdiction would not be interfering with the finding offacts arrived at by^;the Visiting Team, based on which the Appeal
Committee has given its decision, unless the finding of facts are i perverse,illegal or irrational. Be that as it may,since the petitioner
^ .-Av T f has taken a decision that even in the teeth of the fourteen deficiencies,the petitioner,at least, would be eligible for the grant of recognition to at least two courses, therefore, to that limited extent, let the Appeal Committee decide as to whether the petitioner would be eligible to the grant of recognition to any of the three courses in
2011:DHC:16085 r the teeth of the fourteen deficiencies already pointed out by the
Appeal Committee. The Appeal Committee shall decide the matter within a period oftwo weeksfrom the date ofthis order.
DASTI. • ^
October 03,2011 tp
KAI GAMBHIR,J
2011:DHC:16085
JUDGMENT