Madras High Court
Association Of Unaided B.Ed. ... vs The National Council For Teacher ... on 1 December, 2022
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 01/12/2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Writ Petition Nos.19839, 19840, 21116, 21117, 21118, 21119, 21120,
21121, 21179, 21591, 21592, 21593, 21594, 21595, 21596, 21597, 21598,
21683, 21684, 21685, 21686, 21687, 21696, 21697, 21698, 21699, 21700,
21807, 21808, 21809, 21810, 21811, 21812, 21813, 21814, 21815, 21832,
21915, 21916, 21917, 21918, 21919, 21920, 21921, 21922, 21923, 21924,
21930, 21931, 21932, 21933, 21934, 21993, 21994, 21995, 21996, 21997,
21998, 21999, 22000, 22001, 22002, 22020, 22021, 22115, 22116, 22117,
22118, 22119, 22120, 22121, 22122, 22123, 22124, 22125, 22126, 22127,
22128, 22129, 22130, 22276, 22277, 22278, 22279, 22298, 22299, 22300,
22301, 22302, 22303, 22304, 22305, 22306, 22307, 22319, 22320, 22321,
22322, 22323, 22324, 22325, 22326, 22327, 22434, 22435, 22436, 22437,
22438, 22439, 22440, 22451, 22452, 22453, 22454, 22455, 22456, 22457,
22458, 22459, 22460, 22484, 22485, 22486, 22487, 22488, 22489, 22490,
22491, 22492, 22493, 22584, 22590, 22591, 22592, 22593, 22594, 22595,
22596, 22597, 22598, 22599, 22606, 22607, 22608, 22609, 22610, 22611,
22612, 22613, 22614, 22615, 22799, 22800, 22801, 22802, 22803, 22804,
22805, 22806, 22807, 22808, 22809, 22810, 22811, 22812, 22813, 22814,
22815, 22816, 22817, 22818, 22963, 23049, 23050, 23051, 23052, 23053,
23054, 23055, 23056, 23057, 23058, 23070, 23071, 23072, 23073, 23074,
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
23075, 23076, 23077, 23078, 23079, 23080, 23081, 23082, 23083, 23084,
23233, 23234, 23235, 23236, 23237, 23238, 23239, 23240, 23241, 23242,
23243, 23244, 23245, 23246, 23247, 23248, 23249, 23250, 23251, 23252,
23253, 23254, 23255, 23256, 23257, 23258, 23259, 23260, 23261, 23262,
23263, 23264, 23265, 23266, 23267, 23268, 23269, 23270, 23271, 23272,
23296, 23297, 23298, 23299, 23300, 23301, 23302, 23303, 23304, 23305,
23306, 23307, 23308, 23309, 23310, 23311, 23312, 23313, 23314, 23315,
23316, 23317, 23318, 23319, 23320, 23321, 23322, 23323, 23324, 23325,
23411, 23412, 23423, 23424, 23425, 23426, 23435, 23436, 23437, 23438,
23439, 23440, 23486, 23487, 23488, 23761, 23762, 23786, 23787, 23838,
23839, 23840, 23841, 23842, 23843, 23844, 23991, 23992, 24045, 24113,
24114, 28050, 24787, 24788, 24789, 24790, 24791, 24820, 25561, 25562,
25973 of 2017 & connected miscellaneous petitions
Association of Unaided B.Ed. College
And Teacher Training Institutions of
Pondicherry Union Territory,
Represented by its Chairman Mr.J.Narayanan,
Having Office at Vivekanandha College of Education,
E.C.R., Lawspet, Pondicherry – 607 402. ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The National Council for Teacher Eduction,
Rep. by its Member Secretary, Hans Bhaawan,
Wing II, 1, Bhahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi – 110 002.
2. The Regional Director,
2/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
Southern Regional Committee,
National Council for Teacher Education,
Jnanabarathy Campus Road,
Opp to National Law School, Nagarabhavi,
Bangaluru – 560 072. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents or
their agents from in any manner implementing decision taken in the 46th General
Body Meeting held on 28.03.2017, which is notified in the gazette dated
09.06.2017, by the respondent before the completion of the process of the
committee constituted by the First respondent as assured before this Court in
W.P.No.999 of 2015 and Order dated 23.02.2016 and as per Public Notice dated
03.10.2016 again reiterated by the respondent vide No. F 64-7/2015/
NCTE/Legal – Vol-III dated 27.07.2017 for giving recommendations for
alterations, modifications or deletions to the Regulations of 2014, superseded by
Regulation 2017.
For petitioners ... Dr.Fr.A.Xavier Arulraj, Senior Counsel
for Ms.A.Arul Mary
Mr.R.Kannan,
Mr.P.Ebenezer Paul
Mr.Kandhan Dorasami
Mr.P.Srinivas
Mr.K.Ramesh Kumar
Mr.Pawan Jhabakh
Mr.N.K.Ponraj
Mr.P.Nagaraju
Mr.B.Balavijayan - in all cases
For respondents ... Mr.Su.Srinivasan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
Senior Standing Counsel of NCTE,
& Mr.J.Harikrishna &
Mr.R.Thirunavukkarasu
Standing Counsel of NCTE – for R1
in all cases
Mr.S.Bhuvaneswari
Standing Counsel of Tamilnadu
Teachers Education University – in all cases
COMMON ORDER
These Writ Petitions have been filed forbearing the respondents or their
agents from in any manner implementing decision taken in the 46th General Body
Meeting held on 28.03.2017, which is notified in the gazette dated 09.06.2017,
by the respondent before the completion of the process of the committee
constituted by the First respondent as assured before this Court in W.P.No.999 of
2015 and Order dated 23.02.2016 and as per Public Notice dated 03.10.2016
again reiterated by the respondent vide No. F 64-7/2015/ NCTE/Legal – Vol-III
dated 27.07.2017 for giving recommendations for alterations, modifications or
deletions to the Regulations of 2014, superseded by Regulation 2017.
2. Originally when the Writ Petitions have been filed in various High
Courts, transfer petitions have been filed in Transfer Petition [s] [Civil] No [s].
1728 – 1733 of 2017, before the Honourable Supreme Court, wherein the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
Honourable Supreme Court has held as follows :
“All the Transfer Petitions that have been filed before this
Court whether, before today or today, shall stand transferred to
the Delhi High Court.”
However, these matters are kept pending before this Court in which few of them
are subject matters of the transfer petitions waiting for the outcome of the
judgment of the Delhi High Court. All the matters transferred are disposed of by
the Delhi High Court by an Order dated 19.09.2019 on the ground that since the
National Council for Teacher Education have withdrawn circulars, the Transfer
Petitions have been disposed of. These Writ Petitions have been filed
challenging not only with regard to the circular relating to powers of quality
control but also some of the regulations of the year 2014. Therefore, these
matters are kept pending before this Court.
3. When the matters are taken up today, the learned Senior Counsel
Mr.Xavier, appearing for the petitioners submitted that as far as the challenge to
the circular to Quality Council of India is concerned, the circular has been
withdrawn by the National Council for Teacher Education in view of the Order of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
the Delhi High Court, on 19.09.2019, the Writ Petitions become infructuous.
Further he submitted that the regulations were amended subsequently in the year
2017, 2019 and 2021 and implemented. Therefore, submitted that the Writ
Petitions have become infructuous.
4. Though the challenge has been made to the regulations of the year
2014, the regulations itself based on the recommendations made by Verma
Commission. In this regard it is relevant to refer to the judgment of the Delhi
High Court in Laxmi College of Education Vs. National Council for Teacher
Education and another in W.P. [C] 766/2019 and CM No.31863 of 2019,
wherein it has been held as follows :
“31. The report of the Verma Commission was filed, before
the Supreme Court, in SLP (C) 4247-4248/2009 supra which, vide
its order dated 10th October, 2012, noted that it had carefully gone
through the recommendations of the Verma Commission and were
"of the view that the same deserves to be accepted". The following
passages, from the order, dated 10th October, 2012, of the
Supreme Court, merit reproduction:
"The learned Solicitor General pointed out that the High-
Powered Commission appointed pursuant to the directions given by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
the Court has submitted its report in three volumes. The report of
the Commission has been taken on record.
We have carefully gone through the recommendations made
by the Commission and are of the view that the same deserves to
be accepted.
With a view to enable the Government of India and NCTE
to indicate the steps proposed to be taken for implementation of the
recommendations made by the Commission, we deem it proper to
adjourn the case for two months within which affidavits of the
competent authorities be filed on the issue of implementation of the
recommendations of the Commission."
(Emphasis supplied)
32. In its subsequent order, dated 29th January, 2013, the
Supreme Court opined that it was "in the interest of the society in
general and the students community in particular that a time bound
schedule is framed by the Government and the NCTE for
implementation of the recommendations made by the Committee
headed by Hon"ble Sh.
Justice J. S. Verma (Former Chief Justice of India)." Again,
in order dated 28th February, 2013, the Supreme Court required
the Central Government to file another affidavit, clearly specifying
the concrete steps already taken for implementation of the
recommendations made by the Verma Commission. Thereafter, on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
3rd May, 2013, the Supreme Court opined that a small group, from
the members of the Verma Commission, could be requested to
supervise the implementation of the recommendations of the
Commission. Acting on the said direction, the Central Government
constituted a sub-group, comprising four members of the Verma
Commission, to monitor the progress, in the matter of
implementation of the recommendations of the Verma Commission
and to report, to the Supreme Court, with respect thereto. This
action was appreciated by the Supreme Court, in its order dated 6th
August, 2013, which went on to direct thus:
"In order to facilitate further implementation of the report of
the Verma Commission, we direct that the recommendations which
may be made by the sub-Group shall be binding on the
Government of India and the Governments of all the States and
Union Territories as also NCTE and University Grants
Commission and all of them shall implement the same without any
objection and without modifying the same."
33. The aforesaid sub-Group was designated, by the
Supreme Court, vide its subsequent order dated 10th September,
2013 - wherewith the proceedings in SLP (C) 4247-4248/2009
were closed - as the "Implementation Committee". The Supreme
Court reiterated, in the said order, its earlier mandate that the
recommendations of the Implementation Committee would be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
binding on all States, Union Territories, the Central Government,
the NCTE and the UGC, who would be bound to implement the
same without reservation or modification. The following passages,
from the order dated 10 th September, 2013, are relevant:
"One of the recommendations made by the Implementation
Committee is the revision of the regulations framed by NCTE.
With a view to ensure that there is no further complication in the
matter of grant of recognition for establishment of new Teacher
Training Colleges/Institutions and permission to the existing
Colleges/Institutions to run the Teacher Training Courses, we
direct the concerned authorities including the NCTE to notify the
new regulations latest by 30.11.2013.
We also reiterate the direction given earlier and make it clear
that all the recommendations made by the Implementation
Committee shall be binding on the Government of India, the
Governments of all the States and the administration of Union
Territories as also NCTE and University Grants Commission and
all of them shall implement the same without any objection and
without modifying the same.
With the above direction, the proceedings of these petitions
are closed and the special leave petitions are disposed of."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
34. Consequent on the above directions of the Supreme
Court, the 2014 Regulations came to be promulgated, superseding
the existing 2009 Regulations.
35. Clearly, it would not be open to any Court to question
the wisdom of any provision, in the 2014 Regulations, or in any
amendment effected to the said Regulations, which is in line with,
or furthers, any of the recommendations of the Verma Commission.
The recommendations of the Verma Commission, having been
sanctified by the imprimatur of the Supreme Court, were binding
on the NCTE, and are also binding on every judicial authority,
hierarchically below the Supreme Court.”
Therefore, mere challenging of the regulations is not permissible. That apart, the
learned Senior counsel further submitted that 2014 Regulations have been
subsequently amended in the year 2017, 2019 and 2021 and therefore, nothing
survives in these Writ Petitions.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents also have not
disputed the withdrawal of the circulars and subsequent amendments to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
regulations.
6. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
01/12/2022
vrc
Index : Yes / No
Internet: Yes
Speaking/non speaking order
To
1. The National Council for Teacher Eduction,
Rep. by its Member Secretary, Hans Bhaawan,
Wing II, 1, Bhahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi – 110 002.
2. The Regional Director,
Southern Regional Committee,
National Council for Teacher Education,
Jnanabarathy Campus Road,
Opp to National Law School, Nagarabhavi,
Bangaluru – 560 072.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Petition No.23309 of 2010
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
vrc
W.P.No.19839 of 2017 etc., batch
01/12/2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
