Ram Bhajan Singh vs National Council For Teacher ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 5116 Del

#100

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                             Judgment delivered on: 28.08.2018


W.P.(C) 9036/2018
RAM BHAJAN SINGH                                         ..... Petitioner


                             versus


NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION
& ANR                           ..... Respondents


Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner  : Mr. Mayank Manish and Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocates
For the Respondents : Ms. Arunima Dwivedi and Ms. Preeti Kumra, Advocates

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

                                JUDGMENT

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)

1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

instituted on behalf of the petitioner prays as follows:-

"A. Issue an appropriate writ(s)/direction(s) or order(s) directing to respondent No.2 to intimate the current status of the petitioner institution application bearing

application ID No.NCRAPP13840 dated 23.06.2015, and/or;

B. Direct the respondents to process the application of the petitioner institution for the B.Ed. course; and/or C. Pass any such other order/directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. The petitioner had applied to the National Council for Teacher

Education (for short 'NCTE') vide its application No.NRCAPP13840 dated

23.06.2015, seeking recognition for starting a B.Ed course for the academic

session 2016-17.

3. In terms of the NCTE communication dated 07.09.2016, it is evident

that the concerned State Government is required to furnish its

recommendation on the petitioner's application to the office of the concerned

Regional Committee of the NCTE. It is only thereafter that, the NCTE will

take up the petitioner's application for consideration.

4. In this behalf, it is observed that the NCTE vide its communication

dated 07.09.2016 addressed to the Principal Secretary, Basic Education,

Government of Uttar Pradesh, asked the latter to forward their

recommendation, in relation to the petitioner's application to the concerned

Regional Committee of the NCTE within 45 days.

5. The petitioner is yet to receive any communication from the NCTE, in

relation to the said representation dated 23.06.2015.

6. In view of the foregoing, it is considered just, necessary and expedient

to direct the NCTE to inform the petitioner about the current status of the

latter's application dated 23.06.2015, within four weeks from today.

7. With the above directions, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of

accordingly.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE)

AUGUST 28, 2018 dn