Kunhitharuvai Memorial ... vs National Council For Teacher ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 16178 Ker

WP(C) No.9498/2021                           1/5

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                         PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
            Wednesday, the 4th day of August 2021 / 13th Sravana, 1943
                            WP(C) NO. 9498 OF 2021(J)
   PETITIONER:

          KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
          TRUSTEE, DR.K.M. MEHBOOB, CHATHAMANGALAM, N.I.T.C. (P.O.),
          KOZHIKODE- 673 601.

   RESPONDENTS:

      1. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL
         DIRECTOR, G-7,    SECTOR 10, DWARAKA, NEW DELHI-110075.
      2. SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR,
         NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION, G-7, SECTOR 10, DWARAKA, NEW
         DELHI-110075.
      3. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,
         KOZHIKODE- 673 635.
      4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER
         EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

        Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
   stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
   pleased to stay the operation of Ext.p7 decision to withdraw the
   recognition to the Petitioner's college, namely, KMCT College of
   Education, for Academic Year 2021-22 onwards, pending disposal of the Writ
   Petition.
        This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and
   the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of
   M/S.T.K.SANDEEP, ARJUN SREEDHAR, ARUN KRISHNA DHAN & ALEX ABRAHAM,
   Advocates for the petitioner, Sri. Abraham P Meachinkara, STANDING COUNSEL
   for respondents 1 & 2, SRI. P.C.SASIDHARAN, STANDING COUNSEL for
   respondent 3 and of GOVERNMENT PLEADER for respondent 4, the court passed
   the following:-




                                                                        P.T.O.
 WP(C) No.9498/2021                      2/5


EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.03.2005 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT GRANTING RECOGNITION TO THE PETITIONER'S COLLEGE.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.
F.SRC/NCTE/APSO0478/BED./KL/2018-19/110211      DATD 03.10.2019.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15.10.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE
PRINCIPAL, KMCT COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. (LONG WITH
TYPED COPY).
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL SHOW CAUSE LETTER NO. F.NO.SRC/NCTE/APSO
0478/BED./KL/2020/120121 DATED 23.10.2020.
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF DECISION TAKEN
AT 397TH MEETING OF SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE, NCTE WITHDRAWING THE
RECOGNITION TO KMCT COLLEGE OF EDUCATION HELD ON 25TH -26TH MARCH 2021
EXT.P15. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.F.SRO/NCTE/APSO0478/B.Ed./397TH(KL)/2021/26220 DATED 16-04-2021 BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P16. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.F.SRO/NCTE/APSO0752/D.El.Ed/397TH(KL)/2021/126119 DATED 15-04-2021 BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
 WP(C) No.9498/2021                               3/5




                             RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
                             -------------------------------------
                               W.P.(C) No.9498 of 2021
                            --------------------------------------
                          Dated this the 4th day of August, 2021

                                         ORDER

I have heard Sri.Arun Krishna Dhan, the learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri.Abraham P Meachinkara, the learned Standing Counsel for the

respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned Standing Counsel

appearing for the University of Calicut.

2. Sri. Arun Krishna Dhan, the learned counsel submitted that

Ext.P7 decision taken by the SRC is clearly illegal and arbitrary. Referring to

Ext.P1, order of recognition, it is pointed out by the learned counsel that the

KMCT College of Education, Chathamangalam P.O., Kozhikode was granted

recognition for starting Secondary course of one-year duration from the

academic session 2004-2005. The Code allotted to the institution is

APSO0478 as is evident from Ext.P1.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel that Ext.P3 show cause

notice was issued on 3.10.2019 calling upon the petitioner to produce certain

documents. The learned counsel would refer to Ext.P4 reply and it is pointed

out that the petitioner had duly informed the Regional Director by providing WP(C) No.9498/2021 4/5

details that the entire documents had been submitted on 30.10.2015.

However, without adverting to any of these facts, Ext.P6 final show cause

notice was issued. The learned counsel contends that in an arbitrary manner,

the recognition granted to the KMCT College of Education was withdrawn.

4. The learned counsel would refer to paragraph No. 8 of the writ

petition and it was argued that the reasons given for the withdrawal of

recognition are clearly illegal and arbitrary. For instance, it is pointed out that

one of the accusations levelled against the institution is that they had

submitted the Land Use Certificate issued by the competent authority instead

of the CLU which was ordered to be produced. The learned counsel points

out that in Ext.P6 show cause notice, the petitioner was asked to produce the

Land Use Certificate and it was the said document duly certified by the

Tahsildar (LR), that was produced. As to what is a CLU is anybody's guess.

He would then highlight that another reason for withdrawal of recognition is

that the institution had not submitted a non-encumbrance certificate in

Regional Language. According to the learned counsel, nowhere in Ext.P6

show cause notice was the petitioner directed to produce the English

translation of the encumbrance certificate. Another reason for withdrawal of

recognition is that two of the faculty members, one of which was the

Principal, did not possess NET/Ph.D. which is a mandatory requirement for

appointment after the amendment regulations, 2017. The petitioner contends WP(C) No.9498/2021 5/5

that the appointments are fully valid as the faculty had joined the institution

in 2005 and 2017 respectively and only the faculty appointed after 9.6.2017 is

required to have the requisite qualification as per NCTE Regulations, 2014 as

amended by NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2017 as

held by this Court in the judgment dated 7.10.2020 in W.P.(C) No.

19665/2020 and connected cases. Yet another reason for withdrawal of

recognition is that the institution has not provided details of faculty for

D.El.Ed. programme. It is pointed out that the above accusation clearly

displays total non-application of mind as the KMCT College of Institution is not

conducting any D.El.Ed. programme.

Prima facie, I find considerable merit in the submission of the learned

counsel. Pending further consideration of this writ petition, the operation of

Exts.P15 and P16 orders will stand stayed for a period of one month from

today.

Sd/-

                                                            RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
                                                                     JUDGE
            IAP




04-08-2021                          /True Copy/                               Assistant Registrar