CMP No.940/2010. 1. This is an application seeking permission to place on record a copy of the list of staff engaged by the petitioner-institute. 2. For the reasons detailed in the application, it is allowed. The document annexed with the CMP is taken on record and shall form as Annexure-D to the writ petition. CMP disposed of. OWP No.1373/2009, CMP No.1778/2009. 3. After obtaining No Objection Certificate from the State Government, the petitioner-institute applied for grant of permission/affiliation to the University of Jammu, who vide its order No.CDC/2009/6538-48 dated 07.10.2009 granted temporary affiliation to the petitioner-institute to run B.Ed. course for the Session 2009-10 with an intake capacity of only one section of 60 male students. Being aggrieved of this order, the petitioner-institute challenged the same by way of present writ petition. 4. In order to understand the controversy involved in this case, certain facts are required to be noticed. 5. The petitioner-institute applied for grant of permission/affiliation to run B.Ed. course in the year 1995 and the same was granted for the Session 2003-04 as the petitioner-institute fulfilled all the norms and conditions prescribed by the Government and the Jammu University. It seems that affiliation was also granted for the academic Session 2004-05 with an intake capacity of 150 students both male and female. 6. Certain allegations were levelled against the petitioner-institute, which resulted in de-affiliation of the petitioner-institute in the year 2005. The said order of de-affiliation was challenged by the petitioner-institute by filing writ petition (OWP No. 276/2005), which came to be stayed by this Court. However, after the stay of order of de-affiliation, students were not allotted to the petitioner-institute for the Sessions 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08. During the pendency of the writ petition (supra), the matter of B.Ed Colleges came up for consideration before the learned Division Bench of this Court in PIL No.1233/2004 titled Harinder Singh Bana Garhia v. State and others where a direction was issued for the constitution of Inspection Committee for inspection of the Colleges. In pursuance to this, the petitioner-institute was also inspected by the Committee for grant of fresh NOC, which has been done in the year 2007. However, even after grant of NOC, students were not allotted to the petitioner-institute for the Session 2008-09. It seems that temporary affiliation was granted to the petitioner-institute with an intake capacity of 60 male students. In pursuance to this, the petitioner-institute was also inspected by the Committee for grant of fresh NOC, which has been done in the year 2007. However, even after grant of NOC, students were not allotted to the petitioner-institute for the Session 2008-09. It seems that temporary affiliation was granted to the petitioner-institute with an intake capacity of 60 male students. It is contended that the petitioner-institute fulfills the norms of the Government/University required for affiliation by the University with an intake capacity of 300 students both male and female but only 60 male students have been allotted by the respondents-University without disclosing reasons for the same. 7. The respondents-University in their reply has stated that the case of petitioner-institute was considered in detail with regard to enhancement of the intake capacity from 60 to 300 students in pursuance of the directions passed by this court and the same has been rejected on the following grounds :- (a) That in take capacity cannot be increased in view of the fact the admission process is already over for the Session 2009-10; (b) That fresh inspection is required to be conducted by the committee constituted by the Vice Chancellor of the University in this behalf to inspect the petitioner-institute. 8. From the reply filed by the respondents-University, it also reveals that after grant of NOC from the State Government, Inspection Committee which conducted the inspection in the year 2009 found the following deficiencies in the petitioner-institute :- (a) There is no staff available in the college including the Principal; (b) It lacks books of good standard and required number of computers; (c) The proposed girls’ hostel lacks adequate and hygienic toilet facilities. 9. The issue involved in the present case is within a narrow compass. The moot question to be determined is that as to whether the petitioner-institute is entitled for intake capacity of 300 students both male and female instead of 60 male students. Objections raised by the respondents-University in refusing to grant intake capacity of 300 students is indicated hereinabove 10. It is important to note that after 2009, no inspection was conducted by the University to see as to whether any improvement has been made by the petitioner-institute in the infrastructure and as to whether deficiencies pointed out by the inspection Committee in 2009, have been filled up or not. 11. It is important to note that after 2009, no inspection was conducted by the University to see as to whether any improvement has been made by the petitioner-institute in the infrastructure and as to whether deficiencies pointed out by the inspection Committee in 2009, have been filled up or not. 11. In this backdrop, this Court vide order dated 28.05.2010, directed the University to specify the following : (a) The total number of staff including the Principal, which is required to be engaged by the petitioner-institute; (b) How many toilets are required to be available with petitioner-institute/proposed girls’ hostel as per the norms laid down for the purpose? (c) How many books of good standard and number of computers are required to be kept by the petitioner-institute? 12. In addition to this, District and Sessions Judge, Reasi was appointed as Commissioner to inspect the petitioner-institute and indicate about the present position existing on spot and also report regarding number of toilets with hygienic conditions available with the petitioner-institute, number of computers installed by the petitioner-institute, number of books of good standard kept by the petitioner-institute and number of staff engaged by the petitioner-institute. 13. In pursuance of the directions of this court, the District and Sessions Judge submitted its report dated 31.05.2010 after making spot inspection of the petitioner-institute. The inspection was conducted in presence of the representatives of the University comprised of Sh. Rajive Gupta, Director Colleges Development Counsel, University of Jammu and Sh. Jatinder Khajuria, Join Director (CDC) University of Jammu. The Chairman of the college Sh. Tilak Raj Kohli along with Trustee Sh. Charan Dass Puri and other Assistants were also present at the time of inspection. 14. The report of the District and Sessions Judge, Reasi suggests that the institute of the petitioner has increased the infrastructure after 2009 and added class rooms with hygienic toilet facilities. The report by and large indicates that petitioner-institute satisfied all the conditions required for grant of affiliation with an intake capacity of 300 students both male and female. The Director Colleges Development Counsel, University of Jammu, who was the part of the Inspection Team along with petitioner, has confirmed this fact that the petitioner has increased its infrastructure since last inspection conducted in the year 2009 as stated in the report. The inspection report, however, makes mention that no staff was available at the time of inspection. 15. Mr. The inspection report, however, makes mention that no staff was available at the time of inspection. 15. Mr. Lehar, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner-institute has placed on record a copy of the list of staff engaged by the petitioner-institute along with their qualification. 16. It may be noted that the directions issued by this Court to the respondents-University on 28.05.2010, have not been complied with. 17. Be that as it may, decision to grant affiliation based upon the report of Inspection Committee has to be done by the University, who will re-examine the matter and take a decision to grant affiliation to the petitioner-institute after taking into consideration the report submitted by the District and Sessions Judge, Reasi. In case, it is found that there is any deficiency, which is in consonance with the requirement of the Statute of the University, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner-institute and if no deficiency is found then the intake capacity of the petitioner-institute be increased from 60 to 300 students both male and female. Let this process be completed within one month from the date a copy of this order is received by the respondents-University. In case decision is not taken by the University within the aforesaid period, there will be deemed affiliation for the purpose of increasing intake capacity from 60 to 300 students both male and female. 18. Disposed of along with connected CMP(s) in the terms mentioned above.