Delhi High Court

Sant Haridass College Of Higher ... vs The Registrar Guru Gobind Singh ... on 7 July, 2011

Author: Sanjiv Khanna

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      W.P.(C) 6037/2008

SANT HARIDASS COLLEGE OF HIGHER EDUCATION... Petitioner
                    Through Mr. Laliet Kumar and Mr. Saurabh
                            Dhawan, Advocates.
             versus


THE REGISTRAR GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA
UNIVERSITY & ORS                             ..... Respondent
                 Through  Mr. Mukul Talwar and Mr.
                          Mohapatra, Advocates for
                          GGSIPU.
                          Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for
                          NCTE.
                          Mr. Shoaib Haider, Advocate for
                          Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Counsel.

+      W.P.(C) 11180/2009

SANKALPA EDUCATIONAL WELFARE & CHARITABLE SOCIETY
& ANR                                       ..... Petitioner
                Through  Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma,
                         Advocates.

              versus
THE REGISTRAR GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA
UNIVERSITY & ORS                               ..... Respondent
                     Through Mr. Mukul Talwar and Mr.
                             Mohapatra, Advocates for
                             GGSIPU.
                             Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for
                             NCTE.
                             Mr. Shoaib Haider, Advocate for
W.P. (C) Nos. 6037/2008 & 11180/2009                     Page 1 of 8
                                            Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Counsel.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

                                  ORDER

% 07.07.2011

As similar issues and contentions have been raised, these two writ

petitions are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of

convenience facts of W.P.(C) 6037/2008 titled Sant Hairdass College of

Higher Education Vs. The Registrar Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha

University and Others have been noticed and referred to below.

2. The petitioner colleges have been granted recognition for

conducting B.Ed. courses by the National Council for Teachers Education

(NCTE). The petitioner colleges are seeking affiliation with Guru Gobind

Singh Indraprastha University. The degree/diploma awarded and the

course prescribed are that of the respondent university. The respondent-

university had granted provisional affiliation to the petitioner subject to

„no objection certificate‟ from the respondent Government of NCT of

Delhi. Government of NCT of Delhi has refused to issue „no objection

certificate‟ as the petitioner colleges are located in a non-confirming area

and in fact is located in unauthorized colonies. It was pointed out that

NCTE while granting recognition did not examine the aspect that the

colleges are located in an unauthorized area. Learned counsel for the

university and the Government of NCT have raised factual objections

with regard to the facilities available and provided in the said colleges. In

this regard reference is made by the university to the inspection report

submitted/filed by them and the report of the Board of Affiliation.

3. During the course of hearing before us, several suggestions were

given to resolve the controversy.

4. Learned counsel for the parties have drawn our attention to the

recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, Bhartia

Education Society and Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

(2011) 4 SCC 527 in which it has been held as under:-

"15. The purpose of `recognition' and `affiliation' are different. In the context of NCTE Act, `affiliation' enables and permits an institution to send its students to participate in the public examinations conducted by the Examining Body and secure the qualification in the nature of degrees, diplomas, certificates. On the other hand, `recognition' is the licence to the institution to offer a course or training in teacher education. Prior to NCTE Act, in the absence of an apex body to plan and co-ordinate development of teacher education system, respective regulation and

proper maintenance of the norms and standards in the teacher education system, including grant of `recognition' were largely exercised by the State Government and Universities/Boards. After the enactment of NCTE Act, the functions of NCTE as `recognizing authority' and the Examining Bodies as `affiliating authorities' became crystallized, though their functions overlap on several issues. NCTE Act recognizes the role of examining bodies in their sphere of activity.

16. x x x x

17. Sub-section (6) of Section 14 no doubt mandates every examining body to grant affiliation to the institution on receipt of the order of NCTE granting recognition to such institution. This only means that recognition is a condition precedent for affiliation and that the examining body does not have any discretion to refuse affiliation with reference to any of the factors which have been considered by the NCTE while granting recognition. For example, NCTE is required to satisfy itself about the adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, and laboratory required for proper functioning of an institution for a course or training in teacher education. Therefore, when recognition is granted by NCTE, it is implied that NCTE has satisfied itself on those aspects. Consequently, the examining body may not refuse affiliation on the ground that the institution does not have adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, or laboratory required for proper functioning of the institution. But this does not mean that the examining body cannot require compliance with its own requirements in regard to eligibility of candidates for admissions to courses or manner of admission of students or other areas falling within the sphere of the State government and/or the examining

body. Even the order of recognition dated 17.7.2000 issued by NCTE specifically contemplates the need for the institution to comply with and fulfill the requirement of the affiliating body and state government, in addition to the conditions of NCTE. We extract below conditions 4, 5 & 6 of the order of recognition issued by NCTE in this behalf:

4. The admission to the approved course shall be given only to those candidates who are eligible as per the regulations governing the course and in the manner laid down by the affiliating University/State Government.

5. Tuition fee and other fees will be charged from the students as per the norms of the affiliating University/State Government till such time NCTE regulations in respect of fee structure come into force.

6. Curriculum transaction, including practical work/activities, should be organized as per the NCTE norms and standards for the course and the requirements of the affiliating University/Examining body.

The examining body can therefore impose its own requirements in regard to eligibility of students for admission to a course in addition to those prescribed by NCTE. The state government and the examining body may also regulate the manner of admissions. As a consequence, if there is any irregularity in admissions or violation of the eligibility criteria prescribed by the examining body or any irregularity with reference to any of the matters regulated and governed by the examining body, the examining body may cancel the affiliation irrespective of the fact that the institution continues to enjoy the recognition of the NCTE. Sub-section (6) of section

14 cannot be interpreted in a manner so as to make the process of affiliation, an automatic rubber- stamping consequent upon recognition, without any kind of discretion in the examining body to examine whether the institution deserves affiliation or not, independent of the recognition. An institution requires the recognition of NCTE as well as affiliation with the examining body, before it can offer a course or training in teacher education or admit students to such course or training. Be that as it may.

18. Certain facts peculiar to this case requires to be noticed. The Institute apparently proceeded under the mistaken impression that the recognition by NCTE on 17.7.2000, which was granted after the State Government issued a NOC, resulted in automatic affiliation with the examining body. The Board had granted affiliation to the Institute for an earlier period and has also granted affiliations for the subsequent period. The students admitted in 2002 and 2003 have already completed the course and have also been permitted by the Board which is the examining and affiliating authority to appear for the examinations. In the peculiar circumstances, to do complete justice, we are of the view that the admissions of students to the Institute in the years 2002 and 2003 should be regularized subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria prescribed by the Board and their results should be declared. To this limited extent, the appeals relating to 2002 and 2003 admissions succeed. CA No. 1227/2011 and 1230-1231/2011 are disposed of accordingly."

5. By the interim order passed by us, it has been directed that the

petitioner institutions shall be included in the list of colleges eligible for

enrolling students for B.Ed. in the academic session 2011-2012. Keeping

in view of the aforesaid aspects, we feel that the NCTE should examine

the matter afresh and take a decision with regard to the recognition with

effect from next academic session i.e. 2012-2013. While examining the

said aspect, NCTE shall call upon Delhi Development Authority (DDA)

to submit and state whether or not the said colleges/institutions are located

in a non-confirming area and cannot be permitted to operate/function in

view of Delhi Development Act, 1957 and the Master Plan of Delhi,

2021. It may be noticed here that the learned counsel for the university

and the Government of NCT of Delhi have raised an apprehension that