Delhi High Court
Vishwa Ganga Btc Collage vs National Council For Teacher ... on 26 October, 2017
$~11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 26.10.2017
+ LPA 645/2017
VISHWA GANGA BTC COLLAGE ..... Appellant
versus
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION &
ANOTHER ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant : Mr Sanjay Sharawat
For the Respondent : Mr Kishan Nautiyal
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (OPEN COURT)
CM No.35897/2017(exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
LPA 645/2017
1. The appellant's complaint is that the Single Judge has not
redressed the grievance with respect to non-compliance with the
Statute by the respondent No.1 - National Council for Teacher
Education (hereinafter referred to as „the NCTE‟) and respondent
No.2 - Northern Regional Committee (hereinafter referred to as „the
Committee‟) of the respondent No.1 - the NCTE, as regards the
condition prescribed by Section 14(3)(b) and 14(4) of the National
Council of Teacher Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as
„the Act‟).
2. The Appellant had approached this Court under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India complaining that the denial of recognition to
the Institute was contrary to the Statute and that reasons for rejection
of its application were not given to it in order to enable it to avail of
the statutory available remedies.
3. In this regard, the appellant had complained Section 14
mandates that the application, along with the inspection report, had to
be considered by the concerned Regional Committee, the second
respondent in this case, which, after due consideration, had to decide
in accordance with Section 14. In case the decisions were adverse, the
Committee is under mandate to record reasons and ensure its
communication to the concerned aggrieved party/Institution. It was
contended that this statutory prescribed course was not adopted in the
present instance.
4. The Single Judge rejected the petition holding that if the formal
order had not been communicated, the Appellant should not have
waited for more than a year to approach this Court. The appellant's
plea of visits and verbal communications with the NCTE was rejected.
The Single Judge also declined liberty to approach the NCTE and
avail of the statutory remedy of Appeal provided under Section 18 of
the Act.
5. In this case, the decision of the Committee recorded in its
Meeting held between 22.08.2016 and 25.08.2016 till the extent it is
relevant records as follows:-
111 NRCAPP- Vishwa Ganga D.El.Ed. The original file of the
11958 B.T.C.College, Institution along with other
Plot No.24, Street related documents, NCTE
No.NA, Village- Act, 1993, Regulations
Ranepur, P.O. were carefully considered
Ranepur, Tehsil - by NRC and following
Sakaldiha, Town- observation was made:-
Chandauli, The institution has
District - not submitted any
Chandauli - proof/evidence to
232108, Uttar prove that it is a
Pradesh. composite
institution as per
clause 2(b) of
NCTE Regulations,
2014.
Building plan
submitted by the
Institution does not
mention the name
of applicant
Institution.
The institution has
not submitted the
proof to show that
furniture in the
resource centre is as
per NCTE norms.
No proof to show
that library is per
NCTE norms.
Building
Completion
Certificate is not in
the name of Vishwa
Ganga BTC
College.
Hence, the Committee
decided that the
application is rejected
and
recognition/permission is
refused u/S.14/15(3)(b) of
the NCTE Act, 1993.
FDRs, if any, be returned
to the Institution.
6. Section 14 of the Act reads as follows:-
"14. RECOGNITION OF INSTITUTIONS
OFFERING COURSE OR TRAINING IN TEACHER
EDUCATION
(1) Every Institution offering or intending to offer a
course or training in 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 under sub-section(1), and
after obtaining from the 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 for 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 does not
fulfil 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."
7. During hearing, it was informed that in most other cases, formal
orders are communicated to the concerned parties. Counsel for the
NCTE did not dispute this proposition. He, however, suggested that
the minutes of the Meeting contain reasons and those were sufficient
for the Appellant to avail the remedy under Section 18.
8. The appellant had relied upon the Online Submission of
Appeals. The relevant extracts of the said Instructions especially
point Nos.3, 8 & 12 read as follows:-
"Application for preferring Appeal under section 18 of
the NCTE Act should be submitted in the format as
prescribed with the following essential documents:
1. *****
2. *****
3. Copy of the Orders of the Regional Committee
appealed against.
***** ***** *****
8. Once the payment is made, take a print-out of the
Online-Appeal submitted form. You should make two
copies of the print-out and sent two copies of the same
with the proof of the payment and relevant documents in
support of your appeal for setting aside the Regional
Committee‟s refusal/withdrawal order by registered
post/speed post to „The Member Secretary, NCTE, Wing-
II, Hans Bhawan, 1, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New
Delhi-110002‟. The documents shall be posted within
seven days of online submission of the application. You
should keep a copy of the Appeal preferred and
supporting documents which has been sent to NCTE
Headquarters, with you for reference.
***** ***** *****
12. The Memorandum of Appeal
(i) should have a copy of the order appealed against
enclosed to the Memorandum of Appeal. No appeal shall
be processed, if copy of the minutes of the Regional
Committee‟s meeting are enclosed with appeal.
(ii) *****
***** ***** *****"
9. It is quite evident from the above instructions that the NCTE
has understood the contents of Section 14(3)(b) to mean that formal
orders are to be communicated to the concerned parties. This course
was not adopted. If the NCTE/Committee's decision was that reasons
embodied in the Minutes of the Meeting were sufficient to file an
appeal, the instructions facilitating the availing of the Appeal would
have been appropriately amended. Clearly, they have not been.
10. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the judgment
and conclusions of the learned Single Judge cannot be sustained.
They are hereby set aside.
11. The second respondent - Committee shall ensure that the
reasons for rejection of the Appellant's application for recognition are
communicated - preferably within two weeks. In such event, the
Appellate remedy may be resorted to by the Appellant, if so advised.
12. The Appeal is allowed in the above terms.
13. Order Dasti.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT
(JUDGE)
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 26, 2017
'Sn'
