JUDGMENT : Sanjib Banerjee, J. (Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of declaration, declaring that the Approval Process Handbook for 2021-22 issued by the second respondent, insofar as the "NOTE" to Paragraph 2.14.4 (b) of the Approval Process Handbook for 2021-22 is concerned, is arbitrary, irrational, unreasonable and illegal.) 1. The petition is by a consortium of self-financing institutions engaged in imparting technical education; in more simple language, private engineering and management colleges. 2. The grievance in the petition pertains to a note at the foot of a clause in the Approval Process Handbook for 2021-22 issued by the second respondent All India Council for Technical Education, which is a statutory body. 3. Clause 2.14.4 pertaining to increase in intake of students and additional courses in the said Handbook provides that at least two batches of students (three batches for Management Programme) should have graduated for a course to be eligible for NBA accreditation. In such context, colleges are permitted to shut down to a particular course and offer a new course upon following certain parameters indicated in the clause. The petitioner has no quarrel with most of what is required to be followed on such aspect, except the note which appears at the foot of Clause 2.14.4(b), which appears to cover only paragraph (b), to the following effect: “NOTE: New Course shall be allowed ONLY in case of more than 50% overall Enrollment in last year (at respective level & programme).” 4. According to the petitioner, it is virtually impossible to comply with the requirement that the demand for a particular course would have been to such an extent as indicated in the relevant note. 5. In meeting such challenge, the second respondent has referred to its statutory status and overall authority in the relevant field. Supreme Court judgments have also been referred to as to the extent of authority that may be wielded by the AICTE. 6. The matter falls within a very narrow ambit. The question is whether the requirement evident from the impugned note is absurd or irrational or leads to the virtual prohibition of any application for a new course. While the Council may have good reasons for incorporating the impugned note, the court may not have the wherewithal to appropriately assess such need, in view of the technical nature of the activity. 7. While the Council may have good reasons for incorporating the impugned note, the court may not have the wherewithal to appropriately assess such need, in view of the technical nature of the activity. 7. It appears that pursuant to interim orders issued earlier, several institutions affiliated to the petitioner body have already applied for new courses and such applications are pending with the AICTE. It is possible that not all such applications comply with the requirements of the relevant note. It is in such circumstances that this court was minded to inquire of learned counsel appearing for the second respondent as to whether, notwithstanding the impugned note in the Handbook, individual applications can be taken up on case to case basis. 8. It is submitted on behalf of the AICTE that the Council is ready to take up individual applications to ascertain whether the applicability of the note in every case may be relevant or justified or otherwise. 9. In view of such fair stand taken by the second respondent, the matter need not be permitted to linger any further since the decision-making has to be that of the AICTE and such statutory body is allowed to decide on applications on a case to case basis irrespective of whether the applicant college complies with the condition indicated in the impugned note. 10. It is recorded that applications for the year have already been received by June 30, 2021 and further applications cannot be received for the next academic session. The future applications that may be filed for new courses may only pertain to the next following academic session, subject to such application being filed within any cut-off date that may be indicated by the second respondent. 11. W.P.No.7969 of 2021 is disposed of. W.M.P.Nos.9962, 8522, 8523 and 8527 of 2021 are closed. There will be no order as to costs.