A POLYTECHNIC BY NAME LARSON AND TOUBRO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND ANR. versus ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] 2 S.C.R. 741 · Decided: 10-03-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-' 
' 
\/ 
I 
l' 
A POLYTECHNIC BY NAME LARSON AND TOUBRO 
A 
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND ANR. 
v. 
ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION 
AND ORS. 
MARCH 10, 1995 
[B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND SUHAS c. SEN, JJ.] 
Education: 
B 
c 
Polytechnic institute run by a Public Limited Company exclusively for 
children of its employees-No fees charged-Admission on merit 
basis-Reservation policy followed-Not covered by scheme prepared in pur-
suance of Unnikrishnan-Allowed to function subject to conditions as it 
fulfilled the underlying purpose and object of Unnikrishn~onstitution of D 
India-Article 32. 
Larson and Toubro Ltd., a Public Limited Company, established a 
polytechnic institute to be run by a trust constituted by them. As the 
amount paid by the company into the said trust was not being allowed as E 
a deduction in the assessment of the company under the Income Tax Act, 
the trust was dispensed with. The admission to the institute was open only 
to the children of those employees of Larson and Toubro group who had 
been confirmed in service for atleast five years. Admissions were made 
purely on merit and no fees was charged. The Government rules regarding 
reservations were followed. Certain conditions laid down by the Govern· F 
ment while granting permission for starting the Institute were followed by 
the Institute. 
After the judgment of this court in Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of 
Andhra Pradesh, (1993) 1 SCC 645. Regulations were framed by the All 
India Council for Technical Education (A.I.C.T.E.) which were consistent G 
with and in furtherance of the scheme and directions contained in Unnik-
rishnan. The idea behind the scheme framed in Unnikrishnan was to put an 
end to financial and other irregularities in admission to professional 
colleges including colleges imparting technical education and to regulate 
admissions to such colleges. 
H 
741 
r 
742 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
The petitioner-institute could not fit itself in the scheme framed by 
All India council for Technical Education and therefore, applied for 
)--1 
B 
exemption to the Government which was not granted. Hence, this writ 
petition. 
Disposing of the writ petition, this Court 
HELD : 1. The idea of the appellant is to train the students keeping 
the requirements of the company in mind and to absorb them ultimately 
in company service to the extent feasible. It is thus obvious that the 
purpose for which this institute has been started and run are in no way 
C inconsistent with the underlying purpose and object sought to be achieved 
by the scheme enunciated in Unnikrishnan and the regulations framed by 
the A.l.C.T.E. (745-F] 
2. In the instant case, therefore, the institute may be allowed to 
D function as at present, i.e. subject to several conditions imposed by the 
Government of Maharashtra, viz., (1) no fee shall be charged from any 
student; (2) the parents of the students must be in service of the company 
for atleast five years; (4) the government rules regarding reservation are 
followed and (5) only where no candidates are available in the backward 
class category, those seats will be filled up by open category candidates. In 
E all other respects, the regulations framed by All-India Council for Techni· 
cal Education shall apply as also the relevant rules and regulations, if any, 
• made by the Education and Employment Department (including the omce 
of Director of Technical Education, Bombay), Government of 
Maharashtra. It shall be open to the Government of Maharashtra and All 
F India Council for Technical Education to inspect, call for records .. and 
information and take all other steps to ensure that the institution· is 
adhering to the above conditions. (744-B-C, 745-G-H, 746-A-B] 
3. The condition that the institute is run by a Public/charitable trust 
as required by one of the cla.uses of the scheme· in Unnikrishnan was 
G dispensed with in the case of this institute alone subject to the following 
further conditions, viz. (1) the company shall open, if not already opened, 
a separate account concerning the petitioner institute, (2) all the expendi-
ture incurred on the institute and any other receipts by the said institute 
shall be entered therein as also the particulars of the application of the 
H said amounts. (746-D, ff, 747-A] 
' 
I 
L. AND T. INSTT. OF TECH. v. Al.C.T.E. [B.P. JEEV AN REE[)Y, J.] 743 
Unnikrishnan J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1993] 1 SCC 645, relied A 
on. 
CIVIL ORI
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.