Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 278 (PNJ)

O. P. Katyal v. State Of Punjab

2000-03-07

A.S.GARG, V.K.BALI

body2000
Judgment V.K.BALI, J. 1. O.P.Katyal, President of Governing Body as well as Managing Director, Longowal College of Pharmacy, Dera Bassi, District Patiala, through present petition filed by him under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari so as to quash the minutes of 11th meeting of Affiliation and Accredition Committee held on February 3, 1999 under the chairmanship of Ms. Ravneet Kaur, IAS, Punjab State Board of Technical Education, Annexure P-15, being mala fide, illegal, contrary to law. He further prays for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No. 3 Punjab State Board of Technical Education to recommend students for admission in two years diploma course in Pharmacy with an intake capacity of 60 students for the Session 1999-2000. Reliefs, as asked for in the present petition, are sought to rest on the fact that need a necessary mention. 2. Petitioner Pharmacy is stated to have started in the year 1986 and it continued to function till 1996 when all of a sudden recognition to run the college was withdrawn by Punjab Technical Education Board, Chandigarh-respondent No. 3. A copy of letter for dis-affiliation of Pharmacy has been annexed with the petition as Annexure P-1. On the orders aforesaid, petitioner was constrained to file Civil Writ Petition in this Court which was, however, withdrawn inasmuch as there was provision for filing appeal before respondent No. 3. Consequently, an appeal was filed, on which, respondent No. 3, after hearing the petitioner and making inspection, granted re-affiliation on August 5, 1997 vide order, Annexure P-4 with certain conditions which are as follows :- "1. Pledge the endowment fund to the tune of Rs. 10 lacs up to 12-8-1997.2.The Institute will run in total block and whole of the old block will be used for Diploma Course in Pharmacy and no room, Lab., Shop etc. will be shared for any other course or purpose.3.The Institute will provide basic amenties like good toilets, drinking water, study room etc. before start of classes.4.The Institute will make available teaching as well as supporting staff before starting classes.5.The Institute will settle accounts with ex-students before the start of admission who were transferred to other Institutions.6.The Institute will submit approval letter of PCI before the start of admission". 3. before start of classes.4.The Institute will make available teaching as well as supporting staff before starting classes.5.The Institute will settle accounts with ex-students before the start of admission who were transferred to other Institutions.6.The Institute will submit approval letter of PCI before the start of admission". 3. The said affiliation was for one year, i.e., for the year 1997-98, but no student was recommended for admission during the academic Session 1997-98 on the plea that approval of Pharmacy Council of India had not been received and as such students could not be recommended for the said academic year. Respondent No. 3 is said to have addressed a letter to the Pharmacy Council of India that the said College may be affiliated again for the academic session 1998-99, subject to removal of deficiencies and recruitment of staff. The institute shall be allowed to admit students only after approval of Pharmacy Council of India and A.I.C.T.E.is obtained and Board is satisfied that the Institute meets norms laid down. In order to fulfil the conditions imposed by respondent No. 3, the Pharmacy deposited a sum of Rs. 9.8 lacs as endowment fund with respondent No. 3 and also removed the other defects. It is the case of petitioner that staff was interviewed and selected, appointments were not made as the students were not recommended by respondent No. 3 for the Academic Session 1997-98 and it was very difficult to pay salaries and allowances to the staff without students. However, inasmuch as the affiliation had been granted by respondent No. 3 for the Session 1998-99, petitioner selected and issued appointment letters to the required staff. Respondent No. 3 is then stated to have addressed a letter to respondent No. 4 to grant approval for running Diploma Course in Pharmacy as also to respondent No. 6 for giving their approval for running the said College. Respondent No. 6 is then stated to have conveyed vide letter dated December 23, 1997 that it had extended its earlier approval accorded to the Pharmacy up to 1997-98 for running the Diploma Course in Pharmacy. Petitioner again approached respondent No. 6 for extension in approval vide letter dated July 15, 1998 for the academic session 1998-99. When the students were not recommended for admission during academic session 1998-99, petitioner filed CWP No. 15408 of 1998 in this Court. Petitioner again approached respondent No. 6 for extension in approval vide letter dated July 15, 1998 for the academic session 1998-99. When the students were not recommended for admission during academic session 1998-99, petitioner filed CWP No. 15408 of 1998 in this Court. When the writ was still pending, respondent No. 5 accorded recognition and affiliation to petitioner institute for admission of 60 students and also conducting their examination for the Session 1998-99 to 1999-2000 vide letter dated November 18, 1998. Respondent No. 6 also informed the petitioner that there was no objection in giving recognition and affiliation for the Session 1998-99 in case respondent No. 3 clarifies the position. Respondents 2 and 3 also informed that they were hardly concerned with the recognition and affiliation matter of the Pharmacy inasmuch as this was a private institute and entire control vested with respondent No. 3. When the matter was still pending, respondent No. 3, all of a sudden presented the minutes of 11th meeting of Affiliation and Accredition Committee held on February 3, 1999, Annexure P-15, wherein it was recommended as follows :- "The Institution lacks basic infrastructures, staff and other related facilities, therefore, the Affiliation and Accredition Committee decided not to grant affiliation to this Institution as the opportunity granted to the Institution in its 9th meeting was conditional and it was mentioned therein that this Institution should be treated at par with any fresh institution applying for affiliation" 4. Petitioner filed reply to the minutes of the aforesaid 11th meeting dated February 3, 1999, but this Court passed following order :- "Mr. Dua, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that this petition may be dismissed as withdrawn with permission to file afresh on the same cause of action enabling the petitioner to challenge the order dated 3-2-1999 that has been passed during the pendency of this petition. Allowed as prayed for". 5. It is this order, Annexure P-15, as mentioned above, that has been challenged by way of present writ. It has, inter-alia, been pleaded and so argued by Mr. Allowed as prayed for". 5. It is this order, Annexure P-15, as mentioned above, that has been challenged by way of present writ. It has, inter-alia, been pleaded and so argued by Mr. Dua, learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No. 3 committed contempt of Court when it decided to withdraw the recognition and affiliation of the Pharmacy for the year 1998-99 as the matter was subjudice before this Court and that before withdrawing recognition and affiliation, provisions made under the Punjab State Board of Technical Education and Industrial Training Act, 1993 were to be complied with. The provisions entailed giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is then stated that petitioner Pharmacy was granted affiliation in the year 1986 and it had been functioning upto October, 1996 when respondent No. 3 arbitrarily and without any justification withdrew the affiliation in the mid of the year/session. It is further the case of petitioner that there was no shortcoming whatsoever and if at all there was any, same had been made good. Some details with regard to deficiencies pointed out by respondents and explanation thereof or controverting the finding of deficiencies pointed out by the Committee, have also been given in the petition. 6. Pursuant to notice issued by this Court, respondents have filed replies and seriously opposed the claim of petition. Insofar as respondents 1 and 2 are concerned, a short reply has been filed by way of affidavit of S.K.Aggarwal, Joint Director, Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab, Chandigarh. It has been pleaded that inasmuch as relief has been claimed from respondent No. 3 only, petition against respondents 1 and 2 deserves to be dismissed. Insofar as respondents 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 are concerned, they plead by way of preliminary objections that petitioner had earlier filed Civil Writ Petition No. 15408 of 1998 wherein he had prayed that he should be allowed to admit the students for the Pharmacy course for the year 1998-99. During the pendency of said writ, answering respondents had informed the Court that college lacks basic infrastructure for running the Pharmacy course. In order to verify the facts, an inspection team was sent to inspect the college as to whether it fulfilled the conditions which were necessary for grant of affiliation. The Inspection Committee, after inspecting the college, gave its report. In order to verify the facts, an inspection team was sent to inspect the college as to whether it fulfilled the conditions which were necessary for grant of affiliation. The Inspection Committee, after inspecting the college, gave its report. The said report was placed before the Affiliation and Accredition Committee which comprised of Chairperson of the Board. Following members decided the case of petitioner and ultimately came to the conclusion that the college could not be granted affiliation :- "1. Dr. Inderpal Singh, Pro-Vice Chancellor, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.2.Mr. D.K.Sharma, Head Pharmacy Wingh, Government Medical College, Patiala.3.Dr. A.S.Sawhney, Director, Representative of Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala.4.Dr. R.K.Sareen, Head of Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Regional Engineer College, Jalandhar.5.Shri S.S.Bajaj (Retd.) Head of Pharmacy, Government Polytechnic for Women, Chandigarh.6.ShriA.P.S.Virk, Secretary of the Board.7.Dr. A.S.Arunachalla, Registrar of the Board". 7. The expert body, keeping in view the report of the Inspection Committee, came to the conclusion that the affiliation could not be granted to the said Pharmacy. It is the expert body which is to see as whether the college is entitled for the affiliation or as to whether the college has infrastructure and to see that the college could impart education to the students. Therefore, once the expert body had taken a decision that the Pharmacy lacked the infrastructure of staff etc., petitioner could not make any grievance. It is then pleaded that the petitioner Pharmacy was disaffiliated in the year 1996 and the Trust filed CWP No. 16600 of 1996. The writ was dismissed on November 6, 1996. The reasons for disaffiliation were that the institution was established in the year 1986 by one Lala Wazir Chand, who set up a charitable trust. At that time, the institute was running only one course, i.e., Diploma in Pharmacy. Unfortunately, Lala Wazir Chand died in the year 1994, leaving behind two sons, O.P.Katyal and B.B.Katyal. After his death, number of complaints were received by the answering respondents that both his sons could not see eye to eye and they were both trying to take over the affairs of the Institution. Unfortunately, Lala Wazir Chand died in the year 1994, leaving behind two sons, O.P.Katyal and B.B.Katyal. After his death, number of complaints were received by the answering respondents that both his sons could not see eye to eye and they were both trying to take over the affairs of the Institution. In the year 1996 further complaints were received and actually one institution has been split into two in the same building where earlier diploma in Pharmacy was running and other course of Electronics and Communication Engineering had been started by Shri B.B.Katyal, whereas Shri O.P.Katyal was still claiming to run the Pharmacy course. Both were styling themselves as Chairman/Managing Director of their respective institutions. Besides this, there were numerous other complaints as well. Accordingly, a detailed enquiry was marked into the affairs of the college. The Secretary of the Board marked the enquiry and recorded statements of both the Katyal brothers, students and lecturers. He submitted a report to the Chairperson and after following the due process of law and acting on those reports, the Board decided to disaffiliate the institute. After passing the order of disaffiliation, the Trust approached this Court by way of CWP No. 16600 of 1996 challenging that order. Reply was filed by the Board in that case. Keeping in view the averments made in the reply, Division Bench of this Court was pleased to dismiss that writ petition on November 6, 1996. It is then pleaded that once the writ petition was dismissed and the order of disaffiliation was upheld and in view of the fact that there was no substantial improvement which could entitle the Pharmacy to affiliation, this writ is also liable to be dismissed. It is further pleaded that after dismissal of that case, Pharmacy course and the course of Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering were stopped in this Institute and taking advantage of this fact, the other brother Shri B.B.Katyal has started a ful- fledged industrial training Institute in the name of W.C.I.T.I.in the same building wherein diploma classes were running earlier. The said Industrial Training Institute is affiliated with the Directorate of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab, for the following courses:(i) Preparation and Computer Software;(ii) Instrument Mechanic;(iii) Electronics Mechanic. 8. It is further pleaded that as per latest norms of All India Council of Technical Education, atleast three acres of land is required for diploma in Pharmacy. The said Industrial Training Institute is affiliated with the Directorate of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab, for the following courses:(i) Preparation and Computer Software;(ii) Instrument Mechanic;(iii) Electronics Mechanic. 8. It is further pleaded that as per latest norms of All India Council of Technical Education, atleast three acres of land is required for diploma in Pharmacy. However, it has been mentioned in the project proposal that the petitioner Pharmacy has two acres of land. More so, in the prospectus published for ITI courses, again availability of land has been shown to be two acres under the head "Location". Allegation of petitioner that order of dissaffiliation was passed without hearing him, has been denied. It has been pleaded that detailed enquiry was conducted after giving due opportunity to everybody and thereafter only disaffiliation order was passed. With regard to the deficiencies, it is pleaded that but for depositng the amount, no other action has been taken by the College. It has been reiterated that there is no staff, which is necessary for imparting education to the students. Insofar as approval, Annexure P-12, is concerned, it is the case of respondents that same was subject to fulfilment of guidelines as stipulated by the AICTE which the College lacks. One of the guidelines given by the AICTE is that Constitution of Management should be as under (i) Chairman to be nominated by the Registered Society/Trust.(ii) to (v) Members to be nominated by the Registered Society/Trust.(vi) Nominee of the All India Council for Technical Education Regional Officer (Ex. Officio).(vii) All Industrialist/Technologist/Educationist from the Region to be nominated by the concerned Regional Committee as nominee of the council, out of the panel approved by the Chairman of the council.(viii) Nominee of the Affiliating Body/University/State Board of Technical Education.(ix) Nominee of the State (Government-Director of Technical Education Ex. Officio).(x) An industrialist/technologist/educationist from the Region nominated by the State Government.(xi) Principal/Director of the concerned Technical institution (as nominated by the Society/trust)-Member Secretary. 9. Insofar as constitution of the Pharmacy is concerned, the same as as under :- 1.Mr. W.R.DuaChairman 2.Sh. O.P.KatyalMember 3.Shri Hardesh KatyalMember 4.Smt. Kanta RaniMember 10. O.P.Katyal is petitioner, Smt. Kanta Rani is stated to be wife of Shri B.B.Katyal, younger brother of petitioner and Shri Hardesh Katyal may be son or nephew of the petitioner. It is then pleaded that it is clear from the above constitution that all the members, except Mr. W.R.DuaChairman 2.Sh. O.P.KatyalMember 3.Shri Hardesh KatyalMember 4.Smt. Kanta RaniMember 10. O.P.Katyal is petitioner, Smt. Kanta Rani is stated to be wife of Shri B.B.Katyal, younger brother of petitioner and Shri Hardesh Katyal may be son or nephew of the petitioner. It is then pleaded that it is clear from the above constitution that all the members, except Mr. Dua, are from one family, i.e., Katyal family and as such constitution of the Management is not as per guidelines of the Government of India. 11. Petitioner has filed replication reiterating the facts detailed in the writ petition and controverting the one pleaded in the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents. Vide CM No. 19479 of 1999 petitioner was permitted to file reply to the inspection report wherein it has been pleaded that inspection report submitted by the Inspection Committee is misleading and based on extraneous considerations as also mala fide. In fact, the petitioner Pharmacy was started in the year 1986 and it was functioning uninterruptedly upto 1996 when the Board withdrew affiliation of the Institute. After pleading some facts which are only reiteration of one given in the writ petition, it has further been pleaded that the plea of inspection committee that outlook of the building is like a residential house, rather than a technical institute is totally incorrect and misreading. Some photographs have also been attached. It is also pleaded that the Inspection team at the time of inspection took photographs of the entire building as well as of the labs but they have not produced the same and they have concealed the facts from this Court. The covered area of building is stated to be 22968 sq. feet which consists of three storeyed building. There are 28 rooms in the entire building, out of which there are ten halls of the size of 20 x 40 each. These ten halls can be used, two for classrooms, four for labs, one for museum and one for library-cum-reading room. The plea of the Committee that this building has been divided into two portions, i.e., one being used to run R.K.Public School and the other portion to run ITI is stated to be incorrect. These ten halls can be used, two for classrooms, four for labs, one for museum and one for library-cum-reading room. The plea of the Committee that this building has been divided into two portions, i.e., one being used to run R.K.Public School and the other portion to run ITI is stated to be incorrect. It is then stated that five inspections were carried out, i.e., three by the State Board, one by All India Council of India and they never pointed out the defects which are now being pointed out. Some other objections with regard to report submitted by the Inspection team have also been detailed in the application aforesaid. Vide yet another CM No. 17249 of of 1999, petitioner prayed to place on record the enclosed undertaking. Resolution that was passed on July 25, 1999 to give undertaking reads thus :- "Resolved that the Trust will give an undertaking to the Hon ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana on 30-7-1999 when the case for re-affiliation and recognition of the college comes for hearing to remove all the shortcomings and deficiencies if any pointed out by the Inspection Committee of the Board within a period of three months provided the students for Pharmacy courses are recommended by the Board for the Session 1999-2000 and also it is mentioned in the advertisement that Longowal College of Pharmacy, Dera Bassi, has been recognised and affiliation for running the course of Pharmacy for the Session 1999-2000 has been granted" 12. It shall be now worthwhile to give some details of interim orders that came to be passed from time to time during the pendency of this writ petition. When the matter came up for hearing on July 23, 1999, following order was passed :- "After hearing learned counsel for the parties at considerable length, we pass the following interim order. This interim order is without prejudice to the rights of the parties to make their submissions on merits of the case.Mr. Patwalia, learned counsel for the State Board of Technical Education would give a list of deficiencies found in the petitioner-Institute within a week from today. Mr. Dua states that all the deficiencies pointed out by the State Board of Technical Education would be made up as early as possible. Let the list of deficiencies be handed-over to Mr. Dua within a week from today. Mr. Dua states that all the deficiencies pointed out by the State Board of Technical Education would be made up as early as possible. Let the list of deficiencies be handed-over to Mr. Dua within a week from today. The orders with regard to completing the deficiencies and further inspection by the respondents shall be passed later on. Adjourned to 30-7-1999." 13. It may be recalled at this stage that petitioner had filed undertaking, referred to above, in view of the interim order that was passed by this Court, as noted above. 14. When the matter came up for hearing on August 6, 1999, list of deficiencies was handed over by Mr. Patwalia to Mr. Dua. Mr. Dua, after going through the said list, informed the Court that all the deficiencies had since already been removed. Then Mr. Patwalia stated that an inspection team shall be sent to the petitioner-Institute to verify the statement made by Mr. Dua and if it is found that deficiencies have been removed, matter shall be looked into. The matter was adjourned to August 13, 1999. When the matter came up for hearing on August 13, 1999, following order was passed :- "Inspecting Team visited the institution of the petitioner and has pointed out short- comings in writing, copy whereof has been given to the counsel for the petitioner today in the Court, thus, the necessitating an adjournment.Adjourned to 19-8-1999.Meanwhile, counsel for the petitioner may file any objections that may be had by the petitioner against the report of the Inspecting Team." 15. It is pursuant to this order, that objections were filed by the petitioner vide CM No. 19479 of 1999. 16. Besides the inspection reports that have been mentioned earlier, inspection report dated August 10, 1999, which was carried out during the pendency of this writ, has also been placed on records. Shri Ranjit Singh, Coordinator Curriculum, PSBTE and IT, Punjab, Shri J.K.Sharma, Deputy Director, Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab, Chandigarh, Shri SPS Khurana, Head Pharmacy, Mehar Chand Polytechnic, Jalandhar, Shri D.K.Sharma, Head Pharmacy Medical College, Patiala and Shri Sarbmohan Singh, Senior Lecturer, GPW, Patiala, were the members of the inspection team. With regard to building of the Pharmacy, it has been mentioned that it looks like a residential house rather than a Technical institute. With regard to building of the Pharmacy, it has been mentioned that it looks like a residential house rather than a Technical institute. It is divided into two portions, one portion is being used to run R.K.Public School and the other portion to run ITI, thus, the total block where earlier diploma in Pharmacy was running, was divided into two portions by putting collapsible gate at ground floor and bricks wall on the first floor. First floor could be reached through separate staircase of separate block. The details of building have then been given and deficiencies pointed out. Insofar as Pharmaceutics is concerned, it is mentioned in the said report that there were three pucca working tables on which facilities were available for performing experiments only for 12 students. No fuming cupboard and proper electric working points on the working table were available. Pharma Chemistry Lab is stated to be having facilities for performing experiments only for 16 students. No fuming cupboard and proper electric working points were available on the working tables. No balance room was attached with the lab. Anatomy and Psychology Pharmacognosy is stated to have only four portable working tables. There was no water, gas, electric supply, exhaust fans, fuming cupboard and, therefore, it could not be used to perform experiments of the subject. No stools were available in the lab. Bio-chemistry and Clinical Pathology, Hospital and Clinical Pharmacy is stated to have two pucca working tables within an area on which 20 students could work but no facilities of water, gas, electric supply, re-agents for the conduct of the experiments were available. Museum was in-adequately equipped with only three cupboard and only few drugs/samples were there. Area of machine room is stated to be in-adequate and the machines in the room were not properly installed. Water supply was not available. The roof was made of corrugated sheets. Animal house was being housed by the family of a peon. There was no Botanical garden. The benches and desks available for class rooms were substandard. The roof was made of corrugated sheets which is not suitable to engage classes during summer. There was inadequate space, furniture and books in the library. Staff position has also been detailed and deficiency in the same pointed out very clearly. There was no Botanical garden. The benches and desks available for class rooms were substandard. The roof was made of corrugated sheets which is not suitable to engage classes during summer. There was inadequate space, furniture and books in the library. Staff position has also been detailed and deficiency in the same pointed out very clearly. In the column of "Recommendations" it is stated that due to deficiency in building, equipment and staff, institution was not fit for running first year classes of Diploma Pharmacy. Deficiencies of equipments for Pharmaceutical Lab has then been pointed out. Deficiency in equipments for Biochemistry and Clinical Pathology Lab has then been pointed out separately. Various other short coming have also been pointed out in detail in the said report. 17. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the case. Interim order dated July 23, 1999, reproduced above, which came to be passed after hearing learned counsel for the parties at considerable length, would manifest that deficiencies were indeed found in the petitioner institute. It is for that precise reason that Mr. Patwalia, learned counsel for the respondent-Board stated that he would give a list of deficiencies found in the petitioner-Institute. Mr. Dua, learned counsel for the petitioner had then stated that the deficiencies pointed out would be made good as early as possible. List of deficiencies was, in due course of time, handed-over to learned counsel for the petitioner. Resolution of the petitioner by way of undertaking that was passed by it on July 25, 1999, was also brought on records which has since been reproduced above. A reading of the resolution in itself would suggest that there were deficiencies and the same were sought to be removed, subject to the conditions that students for Pharmacy course were recommended by the Board for the Session 1999-2000 and also it is mentioned in the advertisement that Longowall College of Pharmacy, Dera Bassi was recognised and affiliation for running the course of Pharmacy for the Session 1999-2000 had been granted. 18. As would be clear from the facts given above, after the list of deficiencies were handed-over to learned counsel for the petitioner and a statement came to be made by him that deficiencies have been removed, yet another inspection was carried out. The deficiencies pointed out by this inspection team have been given in some details above. 18. As would be clear from the facts given above, after the list of deficiencies were handed-over to learned counsel for the petitioner and a statement came to be made by him that deficiencies have been removed, yet another inspection was carried out. The deficiencies pointed out by this inspection team have been given in some details above. All that has been done by the petitioner is to file objections against the said report of the Inspection Committee. 19. From the narration of facts, as have been fully detailed above, this Court is left with an undeniable impression that the petitioner-institute does lack facilities that are required to impart proper education to the students as also that the view of such deficiencies, as have been pointed out by the inspection team from time to time, the institute can not be granted recognition. The plea of petitioner that these deficiencies shall be removed only when the students for pharmacy course are recommended and it is also mentioned in the advertisement that Longowal College of Pharmacy, Dera Bassi was recognised and affiliation for running the course of Pharmacy for the Session 1999-2000 had been granted, does not impress us at all. Recognition is dependent upon availability of proper infra-structure to impart education to the students and not vice-versa. No educational institute, in our view, can ever say that it must be granted recognition prior in point of time and insofar as basic facilities are concerned, same shall be completed later on. Insofar as objections filed by the petitioner institute against the report of Inspection Committee are concerned, suffice it to say that this Court can not go into this question, being a disputed question of fact, prima facie, it appears to us that these objections have been filed only with a view to further complicate the issue, despite the fact that deficiencies, as pointed out by the Inspection Committee, stand admitted. Further, no allegations of mala fide have been made against any one and it does not appear to us that the Inspection Committee would make a wrong report. 20. In view of the detailed facts, as have been given above, as also in view of the findings that recognition is dependent upon pre-requisite of fulfiling the necessary criteria and not the other way round, this petition is dismissed, leaving, however, the parties to bear their own costs. 21. 20. In view of the detailed facts, as have been given above, as also in view of the findings that recognition is dependent upon pre-requisite of fulfiling the necessary criteria and not the other way round, this petition is dismissed, leaving, however, the parties to bear their own costs. 21. Before we may part with this order, we would only like to mention that if the petitioner institute even now fulfils the requirements of grant of recognition and satisfies the concerned authorities on that count, the respondent-Board would reconsider the matter in accordance with law.Petition dismissed.