Madras High Court
The National Council For Teacher ... vs The Cor on 21 September, 2022
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.A.(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
and
W.P.(MD)Nos.6832 & 8472 of 2006
and
M.P.(MD)Nos.1,1 & 1 of 2013
W.A.(MD)Nos.919 & 920 of 2012:
1.The National Council for Teacher Education,
Hans Bhavan, Wing-II,
No.1, Bahadursha Zafar Marg,
New Delhi – 110 002,
Represented by its Director.
2.The Regional Director,
Southern Regional Committee,
National Council for Teacher Education,
I Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post,
Bangalore – 560 031. ... Appellants / Respondents 1 & 2
/Vs./
1.The Correspondent and Secretary,
St.Joseph's College of Education,
Appicode, Tholayavattam Post,
Kanyakumari District – 629 157. ...1st Respondent / Petitioner
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
2.The State of TamilNadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Department of Higher Education,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Manonmaniam Sundaranar University,
Represented by its Registrar,
Abishekapatti,
Tirunelveli – 627 012.
4.TamilNadu Teacher Education University,
Lady Willington College Campus,
Kamaraj Salai, Chennai – 600 005,
Represented by its Registrar.
... Respondents 2 to 4 / Respondents 3 to 5
W.A.(MD)No.921 of 2012:
1.The National Council for Teacher Education,
Hans Bhavan, Wing-II,
No.1, Bahadursha Zafar Marg,
New Delhi – 110 002,
Represented by its Director.
2.The Regional Director,
Southern Regional Committee,
National Council for Teacher Education,
I Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post,
Bangalore – 560 031. ... Appellants / Respondents 1 & 2
/Vs./
Page 2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
1.The Secretary,
Bishop Agniswamy College of Education,
Muttom – 629 202,
Kanyakumari District ...1st Respondent / Petitioner
2.The State of TamilNadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Department of Higher Education,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Manonmaniam Sundaranar University,
Represented by its Registrar,
Abishekapatti,
Tirunelveli – 627 012. ...Respondents 2&3/Respondents 3&4
COMMON PRAYER: Appeals - filed under Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, praying this Court, to set aside the order dated 28.09.2011 made in
WP(MD)Nos.7893, 7894 & 6800 of 2009 on the file of this Court and
thereby allow this appeal with costs.
For Appellant : Mr.Su.Srinivasan (in All Appeals)
For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasikumar (in All Appeals)
Additional Government Pleader (For R1 & R2)
Ms.H.Jasima Yasmin (in All Appeals)
For M/s.Ajmal Associates (For R3)
Mr.F.Deepak (For R4)
(in WA(MD)Nos.919 & 920 of 2012)
Page 3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
WP(MD)Nos.6832 & 8472 of 2006:
The Correspondent,
Martyr Devasagayam Teacher Training Institute,
'Thedal', No.10-8/46C, Bridge Ward,
Near Fire Station, Kuzhithurai,
Kanyakumari District – 629 163.
... Petitioner in WP(MD)No.6832 of 2006
The Correspondent,
St.Xavier's Catholic Teacher Training Institute,
Muttom – 629 202,
Kanyakumari District – 629 163.
... Petitioner in WP(MD)No.8472 of 2006
/Vs./
1.The National Council for Teacher Education,
Hans Bhavan, Wing-II,
No.1, Bahadursha Zafar Marg,
New Delhi – 110 002,
Represented by its Director.
2.The National Council for Teacher Education,
Southern Regional Committee,
National Council for Teacher Education,
I Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post,
Bangalore, Karnataka State – 560 031,
Represented by the Regional Director.
3.The Director of Teacher Education,
Research & Training,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ...Respondents in both WPs
Page 4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
PRAYER in WP(MD)No.6832 of 2006: Petition - filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring
Regulation No.9 (1) of the National Council for Teachers Education
(Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations-2005 and the consequent
communication of the 2nd respondent dated 01.07.2006 in relation to clauses
3, 4 & 5 thereof as unconstitutional, null and void, and further direct the 2nd
respondent herein to consider forthwith the petitioner's application dated
18/03/2006 for the grant of recognition to the petitioner-institution from the
academic year 2006-07 without reference to the impugned Regulation 9 (1).
PRAYER in WP(MD)No.8472 of 2006: Petition - filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring
Regulation No.9 (1) of the National Council for Teachers Education
(Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations-2005 and the consequent
communication of the 2nd respondent in F.SRO/TN/NCTE/2006-
07/DL-572 dated 22/05/2006 in relation to clauses 3, 4 and 5 thereof as
unconstitutional , null and void, and further direct the 2nd respondent herein
to consider forthwith the petitioner's application dated 22/12/2005 for the
grant of recognition to the petitioner institution from the academic year
2006-07 without reference to the impugned Regulation 9(1).
For Petitioner : Mr.Issac Mohanlal (in both WPs)
For Respondents : Mr.Su.Srinivasan (For R1 & R2) (in both WPs)
Mr.D.Sasikumar (in both WPs)
Additional Government Pleader (For R3)
Page 5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
COMMON JUDGMENT
J. NISHA BANU,J.
and
N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.
The issues involved in these cases are common and hence, they are
taken up together, heard and disposed of through this common order.
2. The Writ Appeals have been filed against the order passed by the
learned Single Judge allowing the writ petitions by declaring the Regulation
No.10(b) of the National Council for Teacher Education (Regulation Norms
and Standards) Regulations, 2002 as unconstitutional and null and void and
directing the National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to
as “NCTE” for the sake of convenience) not to insist for having an
Endowment of Rs.5,00,000/- and Reserve Fund of Rs.3,00,000/- for the
purpose of considering the application for recognition by NCTE.
3. The Writ Petitions have been filed by the Institutions seeking for a
similar declaration and for a consequential direction to consider the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
applications submitted by the petitioners on 18.03.2006 and 22.12.2005 and
to grant recognition to the Institutions, without reference to the impugned
Regulation.
4. Heard the learned counsel on both sides.
5. The issue that is involved in these writ appeals and the writ
petitions is no longer res integra. On carefully going through the order
passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, we find that there are
atleast two earlier Division Bench Judgments of this Court in Lords and
Angels Teacher Training Institute etc and others vs. The State of Tamil
Nadu and Others reported in 1997 I LW 787 and Good Shephered Out
Reach Mission Evangelical and Educational Trust (Go-Meet-India-
Trust) represented by its President, Erode vs. The Government of Tamil
nadu and another reported in 2000 (3) MLJ 44. The Division Bench of
this Court has consistently held that insofar as the Minority Institutions are
concerned, the Endowment that is insisted by NCTE for the purpose of
recognition violates the right given to such an Institution under Article
30(1) of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge, after taking
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
note of the earlier Division Bench Judgments, rightly allowed the writ
petitions and held that the Institutions are not under any legal obligation to
deposit the Endowment fund and Reserve Fund. The learned Single Judge
also gave liberty to the Institution to withdraw the amount that was
deposited, in view of the settled law.
6. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the
learned Single Judge of this Court, since the learned Single Judge merely
followed the earlier Judgments of the Division Bench and allowed the writ
petitions. We do not find any ground to differ from the view taken by the
earlier Division Bench and hence there is no justification to interfere with
the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
7. The reasoning that has been given by the learned Single Judge by
relying upon the earlier Division Bench Judgment, will equally apply, while
dealing with the issue that is involved in the writ petitions. The said writ
petitions have to be allowed by relying upon the earlier Division Bench
Judgments. In view of the above discussion, all the Writ Appeals stand
dismissed and the Writ Petitions stand allowed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
8. It is brought to our notice that the writ petitioners have deposited
the Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund, without prejudice to their rights
for the purpose of getting recognition. In view of the same, the petitioners
are at liberty to withdraw the deposited amount. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
(J.N.B.,J.) (N.A.V.,J.)
21.09.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
sm
To:
1.The Secretary,
Bishop Agniswamy College of Education,
Muttom – 629 202, Kanyakumari District
2.The State of TamilNadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Department of Higher Education,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Director of Teacher Education,
Research & Training,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
J. NISHA BANU,J.
and
N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.
sm
Common Judgment made in
W.A.(MD)Nos.919 to 921 of 2012
and
W.P.(MD)Nos.6832 & 8472 of 2006
Dated
21.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
