$~18 (2021 Cause List)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 13946/2018

APARNENDU RAM TRIPATHI & ORS ..... Petitioners

Through: Mr. Vivek Naraya Sharma,
Advocate.

versus

DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL
UNIVERSITY & ORS
Through:
..... Respondents
Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate
with Mrs. Tania Ahlawat,
Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh and
Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advocates
for R-1/DTU.
Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha,
Advocate for R-2/UGC.
Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, ASC with
Mr. Premsagar Pal for R-
3/GNCTD.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

ORDER
% 08.11.2021

The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video

conferencing.
1. Pursuant to the order dated 28.07.2019, an additional affidavit has
been filed by the respondent no. 1- Delhi Technical University [“DTU”].
Although a copy of the said affidavit is not on record, Ms. Avnish
Ahlawat, learned counsel for the DTU has shared a copy of the same on

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed By:SHITU
NAGPAL
Signing Date:09.11.2021
11:48:42 W.P.(C) 13946/2018 Page 1 of 3
 the screen, during the video conference hearing. Ms. Ahalawat is also
requested to ensure that the affidavit is placed on record within one week.
2. In the said affidavit, it is inter alia stated as follows: -
“6. That pursuance to conferring the status of University of
Delhi College of Engineering, The B.Tech (Evening)
Programmes are conducted after getting approval from
Academic Council and Board of Management of Delhi
Technological University. DTU is running the B.Tech
(Evening) Programme as a four years regular course during
the evening hours (6:00 PM to 9:00 PM) for candidate,
passed 03 years diploma programme in engineering. The
degree of Bachelor of Technology (Evening) issued by the
University, nowhere, describe the course as a part time
degree course. Annexure R-3 annexed with the counter
affidavit gives the manner in which the degree is given to the
students it nowhere mentions that it is a degree for a part
time course.
7. That as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India in 2001(8) SCC 676 Bharati Dasan University &
Ors. Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Ors.,
the Universities like the DTU which are established under
the State Act and are not receiving any grant from the UGC
does not require AICTE approval for conducting the courses
in the University. As has been submitted the B.Tech. (Part
Time/ Evening) Course was initially started in 1982 with the
approval of the Ministry of Human Resources and continued.
After the DTU University came into existence the B.Tech
(Evening) Programme was introduced with the approval
from the Academic Council which is a full time course. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment has categorically
held that, as per provisions of Section-2(h) of the AICTE Act,
Technical Institutions for the purposes of the Act means an
Institution, not being a University, which offers courses or
Programme of Technical Education.
xxxx xxxx xxxx
11. That in their affidavit AICTE is only referring to the

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed By:SHITU
NAGPAL
Signing Date:09.11.2021
11:48:42 W.P.(C) 13946/2018 Page 2 of 3
 various contentions of the Petitioners and simply in Para-20
mentioned that, AICTE has not given approval to the DTU to
run any part time course either in the Assessment Year 2017-
18 or 2018-19. As has been submitted above previously since
1982 B.Tech. (Part Time/ Evening) Course was being
conducted with the approval of Ministry of Human Resource
and Development by Delhi College of Engineering which
was affiliated to Delhi University. After the college was
upgraded as Delhi Technological University. It is offering
full time four year B.Tech (Evening) Course in four
disciplines. There is no part time course being run by the
University. Therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be
dismissed. The petitioners have applied for part-time degree
course knowing fully well that it is a full-time course where,
admission is direct or through sponsor. The brochure of
admission to evening course is self explanatory. The DTU
being State University is not required to have AICTE
approval for any courses to be conducted.”

3. Ms. Ahalwat confirms that the stand of DTU is that the B.Tech
(Evening) Programme, in which the petitioners were enrolled, is a full
time programme.
4. In view of the stand of DTU, Mr. Vivek Narayan Sharma, learned
counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners do not seek any
further orders in the writ petition and are satisfied with the position taken
by DTU.
5. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of.
6. It is made clear that this is without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the other respondents.

PRATEEK JALAN, J
NOVEMBER 8, 2021
‘bp’/

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed By:SHITU
NAGPAL
Signing Date:09.11.2021
11:48:42 W.P.(C) 13946/2018 Page 3 of 3