Jan Jagruti Foundation vs National Council For Teacher ...

$~26
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                           Date of Decision: 22.01.2020
+      W.P.(C) 790/2020
       JAN JAGRUTI FOUNDATION                    ..... Petitioner
                     Through: Mr. Brijender Ghahar, Sr. Adv. with
                     Mr.Palav Agarwal, Mr. Raghvendra B. &
                     Mr.Pulkit Agarwal, Advs.

                          versus

       NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR.
                                                 ..... Respondent
                   Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, SC with
                   Ms.Niharika Rai, Adv. for R-1

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
                                    JUDGMENT

: D.N. PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral) CM APPL. 2430/2020 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 790/2020

1. Issue notice. Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, learned Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1.

2. This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred with the following prayers:

"a) Issue any appropriate Writ, Order or set aside the appointment made by the Respondent No.l to the Respondent No.2 as a member of Western Regional Committee vide Gazette Notification No. NO. F. NCTE-

th CDNo16(13)/533/2017-CDN- HQ. DATED 14 FEBRUARY 2019 published by the Respondent No. 1.

b) Direct the Respondent No.l to restrain the Respondent No.2 from participating in day to day working of the Western Regional Committee, AND also issue direction to Respondent no.2 for not participating in meetings from hereinafter,

c) Pass any other order that is deemed fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that several grievances have been ventilated by this petitioner about the working style of respondent No.2 and several aspects of the matter which are at Annexures P-5, P-9, P-10, P- 12 and P-13 to the memo of this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that looking to these annexures, it appears that there are enough material against respondent No.2 and therefore he should not have been appointed as a member of Western Regional Committee.

4. We hereby direct the respondent No.1 to look into the grievances ventilated by this petitioner in the instant writ petition including Annexures P-5, P-9, P-10, P-12 and P-13, and thereafter take appropriate decision in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policy applicable to the facts of the present case after giving an adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondent No.2.

5. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.

C.M. No.2429/2020 (Stay)

6. In view of the final order passed in W.P.(C) 790/2020, this application stands disposed of as infructuous.

CHIEF JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR, J JANUARY 22, 2020 ns W.P.(C) 790/2020 Page 3 of 3