Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sri Venkateswara College Of Education vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 15 October, 2024
APHC010427652024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
[3330]
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NOs. 21849, 21877,22430 and 22526 of 2024
W.P.NO. 21849 of 2024
Between:
Sri Satyadeva College Of Education ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
W.P.NO: 21877 of 2024
Between:
Sri Venkateswara College Of Education ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
W.P.NO: 22430 of 2024
Between:
Dr.Zakir Hussain College of Education ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
2
W.P.NO: 22526 of 2024
Between:
S.S.Mahita College of Education ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):
1. Y ANUPAMA DEVI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. S PARINEETA
2. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION
The Court made the following common order:
3
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION Nos. 21849, 21877, 22430 and 22526 of 2024
COMMON ORDER:
As the issue in these writ petitions is one and the same,
these writ petitions are being disposed of by way of this common
order.
2. These writ petitions are filed to declare the action of the 3rd
and 4th respondents in not granting the recognition for annual
intake of 200 students for 4 units for admission into Bachelor of
Education Courses for the academic year 2024-2025 as being
arbitrary and causing the petitioner-colleges unable to participate
total 200 intake in admission process for admission into regular
B.Ed., Course for the academic year 2024-2025 is illegal, arbitrary
and contrary to the provisions and violation of principles of natural
justice and consequently direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to issue
Formal Recognition for another seats in addition to existing seats
to the petitioner-colleges for total annual intake of 200 students for
4 units and permit to participate in admission process for total
intake of 200 students for 4 units for the academic year 2024-2025
to the said courses.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-Colleges, learned
Government Pleader for Higher Education for respondent No.1,
Ms.S.Parineeta, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2,
Sri V.Hemanth Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent 3
and 4 and Sri Murali Lincoln, learned Standing Counsel for
respondent No.5, in all the writ petitions.
4. The petitioner-colleges are seeking a direction from this
Court for the respondents 3 & 4 to increase the number of
additional intake seats beyond the existing ones, which have not
been considered, hence, these writ petitions.
5. In this regard, it is appropriate to refer Section 12 and 14 of
National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 which is
extracted here under:
Section 12 : Functions of Council. It shall be the duty of the
Council to take all such steps as it may think fit for ensuring
planned and co-ordinated development of teacher education
and for the determination and maintenance of standards for
teacher education and for the purposes of performing its
functions under this Act, the Council may--
(a) undertake surveys and studies relating to various
aspects of teacher education and publish the result
thereof;
(b) made recommendations to the Central and State
Governments, Universities, University Grants
Commission and recognized institutions in the matter of
preparation of suitable plans and programmes in the
field of teacher education;
(c) co-ordinate and monitor teacher education and its
development in the country;
(d) lay down guidelines in respect of minimum
qualifications for a person to be employed as a teacher
in schools or in recognized institutions;
(e) lay down norms for any specified category of courses or
trainings in teacher education, including the minimum
eligibility criteria for admission thereof, and the method
of selection of candidates, duration of the course,
course contents and mode of curriculum;
(f) lay down guidelines for compliance by recognized
institutions, for starting new courses or training, and for
providing physical and instructional facilities, staffing
pattern and staff qualifications;
(g) lay down standards in respect of examinations leading
to teacher education qualifications, criteria for
admission to such examinations and schemes of
courses or training;
(h) lay down guidelines regarding tuition fees and other
fees chargeable by recognized institutions;
(i) promote and conduct innovation and research in
various areas of teacher education and disseminate the
results thereof;
(j) examine and review periodically the implementation of
the norms, guidelines and standards laid down by the
Council, and to suitably advise the recognized
institutions;
(k) evolve suitable performance appraisal systems, norms
and mechanisms for enforcing accountability on
recognized institutions;
(l) formulate schemes for various levels of teacher
education and identify recognized institutions and set
up new institutions for teacher development
programmes;
(m) take all necessary steps to prevent commercialization
of teacher education; and
(n) perform such other functions as may be entrusted to it
by the Central Government.
Section 14 : "Recognition of Institutions offering course or
training in teacher education.
(1) Every institution offering or intending to offer a course or
training the teacher education on or after the appointed
day, may, for grant of recognition under this Act, make
an application to the Regional Committee concerned in
such form and in such manner as may be determined by
regulations.
Provided that an institution offering a course or training in
teacher education immediately before the appointed day,
shall be entitled to continue such course or training for a
period of six months, if it has made an application for
recognition within the said period and until the disposal
of the application by the Regional Committee.
(2) The fee to be paid along with the application under Sub-
section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed.
(3) On receipt of an application by the regional Committee
from any institution concerned such other particulars as it
may consider necessary, it shall:--
(a) if it is satisfied that such institution has adequate
financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified
staff, laboratory and that it fulfils such other
conditions required for proper functioning of the
institution for a course or training in teacher
education, as may be determined by regulations,
pass an order granting recognition to such institution,
subject to such conditions as may be determined by
regulations; or
(b) if it is of the opinion that such institution docs not
fulfill the requirements laid down in sub-Clause (a),
pass an order refusing recognition to such institution
for reasons to be recorded in writing:
Provided that before passing an order under sub-
clause (b), the Regional Committee shall provide a
reasonable opportunity to the concerned institution
for making a written representation.
(4) Every order granting or refusing recognition to an
institution for a course or training in teacher education
under Sub-section (3) shall be published in the Official
Gazette and communicated in writing for appropriate
action to such institution and to the concerned examining
body, the local authority or the State Government and
the Central Government.
(5) Every institution, in respect of which recognition has
been refused shall discontinue the course or training in
teacher education from the end of the academic session
next following the date of receipt of the order refusing
recognition passed under Clause (b) of Sub-section (3).
(6) Every examining body shall, on receipt of the order under
Sub-section (4),--
(a) grant affiliation to the institution, where recognition
has been granted; or
(b) cancel the affiliation of the institution, where
recognition has been refused.
6. On reading of the statutes it requires the Council to grant
recognition by taking note of adequate financial resources of the
educational institution, accommodation, library, qualified staff,
laboratory and such other conditions. The object of the Act is to
enhance the standard of the teachers who are to impart education
at various levels for providing physical and instructional facilities,
staffing pattern and staff qualifications.
7. The Apex Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila
Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh1 and State of
Rajasthan Vs. LBS B.Ed. College & Ors.2 held that the views of
the State Government are to be taken into consideration by NCTE,
(2013) 2 SCC 617
(2016) 16 SCC 110
which is the final authority and the decision taken by it would be
binding on the respective parties, State will have no further say in
the matter and decision of NCTE would prevail.
8. In view of the judgment of the Apex court referred above the
decision of the NCTE prevails, that the NCTE has the authority
and jurisdiction to grant approval to institutions after evaluating the
infrastructure they provide. This principle also applies to the
increase the strength or number of seats of the institution. To allow
any additional seats the respondents have to follow guidelines and
regulations of the council under the Act. The council is vested with
powers to permit additional seats basing upon infrastructure
and accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and such
other conditions and standards for the academic year 2024-
25. That is the decision of the council under the Act is final.
9. To issue a direction or writ of mandamus, the petitioner-
Colleges must show that the actions of the State or its
instrumentality or any public authority or person whose
actions demonstrably arbitrary, capricious, irrational, discriminatory
or violative of constitutional or statutory provisions, otherwise, the
Court cannot go into the wisdom of the State policy. The decision
is solely rests on wisdom of the council whether to permit
additional intake.
10. Even assuming that the petitioner-colleges argues that the
fact a similarly situated college was granted permission for
additional intake, while the petitioner-colleges was not, is not
sufficient ground to direct the respondents. In support of this
proposition, this Court refers to the judgment of the Apex Court
observed in Chandigarh Admn. v. Jagjit Singh3 that the
respondent-authority has passed a particular order in the case of
another person similarly situated can never be the ground for
issuing a writ in favour of the petitioner on the plea of
discrimination. The order in favour of the other person might be
legal and valid or it might not be. Following the aforementioned
judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Usha Mehta vs.
Government of Andhra Pradesh4 , held that a mandate cannot
be issued to the State to commit illegality or pass a wrong order
because in another case such an illegality has been committed
and wrong order was passed.
11. Hence it is for the council to consider the case of the
petitioner request whether to permit the petitioners institutions to
increase the intake capacity for the relief prayed that a judicial
review can neither expand and direct the council to permit the
(1995) 1 SCC 745
(2012) 12 SCC 419
petitioners institutions to allow to give admissions as requested,
this Court cannot determine in the exercise of the power of judicial
review. The intake capacity should be allowed or not be allowed is
a matter for the council under the Act, which is based upon the
infrastructure provided by the petitioner-colleges. The petitioner-
institutions are hereby directed to approach the concerned
authorities for their relief and this Court cannot direct the
respondents to permit or grant additional seats to the petitioner-
institutions that is for the State to consider as there is any
requirement to grant additional seats.
12. With the said observation, the Writ Petitions stand
dismissed.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in
these Writ Petitions shall stand closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
Date: 15.10.2024
Harin/SPP
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO
WRIT PETITION Nos. 21849, 21877, 22430 and 22526 of 2024
Date: 15-10-2024
Harin/SPP
