The 18-member committee of the All India Council for Technical Education, Western Region (AICTE), had recommended that 19 institutes with 1,740 seats statewide and offering diploma and degree courses in engineering, pharmacy, business administration, computer application and hotel management be barred from admitting students for the 1998-99 academic year as they flout the criteria for recognition. One of these institutes is located in Mumbai, four in Navi Mumbai and two in Thane district.

However, the committee's report, which was expected to be tabled during the AICTE's board meeting on Monday, was dropped from discussion at the last minute. Instead, a second committee is likely to be appointed by the AICTEheadquartered in Delhi to ascertain the veracity of the first committee's report.

This, sources allege, is meant to protect the institutes many of which are run by influential persons, in politics and other other fields.The report was submitted well in advance so that its recommendations could be implemented before the ensuing admissions. Hence, dropping the discussion from the agenda has almost ensured that the ongoing admissions for 1998-99 proceeds without a hitch.

The AICTE, the apex body granting recognition to technical and professional institutes, conducts an annual review following an inspection to ensure compliance with its guidelines. However, this is the first time inspection was undertaken on such a large scale (which included 600-odd institutes in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa) and barring of admission was actually recommended.

It is also the first time that the AICTE decided not to merely push paper while deciding on the institutes' status. Ignoring written information tendered by theinstitutes on their functioning, the panel actually conducted spot inspection and recommended a ban on admission. This is why vested interests in the AICTE are trying to smother the report, saying its recommendations need to be scrutinised, sources explain.

Among the criteria for recognition, the council stipulates a 1:15 teacher-student ratio, one professor, two assistant professors and four lecturers (1:2:4) per faculty and a 10 sq mt area per student.

However, the expert committee, which visited institutes in groups of four members, found the following: principals lacked qualification as per the prescribed criteria; teachers were both insufficient and ineligible to conduct the courses; investment in laboratories, equipment, furniture and fixtures was not adequate; and the instructional area and layout of the laboratories as well as the space allotted for the library and computer room were inadequate. Some examples: