Maa Karni Bstc vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 16032 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR (1) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13291/2020

Smt. Dhapubai Bstc College, Vikram Nagar, Bomadara Road, Pali Through Its Secretary Gunesh Rawal S/o Varda Rawa, Aged 42 Years, R/o Bomadara Road, Pali

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Elementary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Deputy Secretary, Elementary Education, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan , Bikaner.

4. The Cooridinator, Pre-D.ei.ed. Exam And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education Directorate Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

----Respondents (2) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10007/2021 Surendra Kaur Memorial Teacher Training College, Parental Body Surendra Kaur Memorial Educational And Social Welfare Sanstha, Murabba No. 86, Street No. 3 Dd Road, Village 24 B.b, Tehsil Padampur District Sri-Ganganagar, Through It's Secretary Harvinder Singh S/o Sh. Sarvan Singh Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of 10 Sjm, Tehsil Anoopgarh District Sriganganagar (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Coordinator, Pre-D.ei.ed. Exam - 2021 And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education, Education Directorate Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

4. National Council For Teachers Education, Through Its Member Secretary, Wing-2, Hans Bhawan, Bahadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Delhi.

                                                                  ----Respondents




                                            (2 of 8)                  [CW-13291/2020]

(3) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10025/2021 Patel Co-Education Teacher Training College, Parental Body Patel Education And Social Welfare Trust, Kila No. 24, 25 And 64/67, Chak 3Str, Tehsil Gharsana, District Sriganganagar Through Its Secretary Nihal Chand S/o Shri Ranjeet Ram, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of Nai Mandi, Gharsana, District Sriganganagar (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Coordinator, Pre-D.el.ed. Exam-2021 And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education, Education Directorate Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

4. National Council For Teachers Education, Through Its Member Secretary, Wing-2, Hans Bhawan, Bahadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Delhi.

----Respondents (4) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10126/2021 Mahaveer Education And Social Welfare Trust College, Parental Body Mahaveer Education And Welfare Trust 84/22, Kulpi Road, Tehsil And P.o New Gharsana, District Sriganganagar Through Its Secretary Satpal Swami S/o Sh. Omprakash Swami, Ageda Bout 52 Years, Resident Of 84/22, Kulpi Road, Tehsil And P.o New Gharsana, District Sriganganagar (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Coordinator, Pre-D.el.ed. Exam-2021 And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education, Education Directorate Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

4. National Council For Teachers Education, Through Its Member Secretary, Wing-2, Hans Bhawan, Bahadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Delhi.

                                         (3 of 8)                  [CW-13291/2020]


                                                                ----Respondents

(5) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10247/2021 Maa Karni Bstc, Village Nal, Tehsil And District Bikaner Parental Body, New Millennium Public Samiti, Village Nal, Tehsil And District Bikaner, Through Its Secretary Sangeeta Vyas W/o Manak Chand Vyas, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Outside Jassusar Gate, Bikaner (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Coordinator, Pre-D.el.ed. Exam 2021 And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education, Education Directorte Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

4. National Council For Teachers Education, Through Its Member Secretary, Wing-2, Hans Bhawan, Bahadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Delhi.

----Respondents (6) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10569/2021 Marwar Shikshak Parikshan Mahavidhyalaya, Parental Body Mayurakshi Shikshak Avam Vikas Sansthan, Magra Punjal, Jodhpur Through Its Secretary Atul Sankhla S/o Shri Sanwal Singh Sankhla, Aged 40 Years, R/o Magra Punjla, Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Secretary, Jaipur.

2. The Deputy Secretary, Elementary Education, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

4. The Coordinator, Pre-D-E1.ed. Exam And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education Directorate Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

----Respondents (7) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12581/2021 Jmk Sikshan Sansthan Parental Body Jai Marudhar Kesari Edu., And Welfare Society, Near Ganesh Temple, Sikhwalon Ka

(4 of 8) [CW-13291/2020]

Mohalla, Village And Post Office Merta City, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur Through Its Secretary Anil Kumar S/o Ram Chandra Choudhary, Aged 39 Years, Resident Of Near Ganesh Temple, Sikhwalon Ka Mohalla, Village And Post Office Merta City, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Elementary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Deputy Secretary, Elementary Education, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

4. The Coordinator, Pre-D-Ei.ed. Exam And Registrar, Education Department And Examinations Rajasthan, Bikaner, Education Directorate Premises, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

5. The Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teachers Education Through Its Under Secretary, Plot No. G-7, Sector 10, Near National Highway Authority, Dwarka, New Delhi.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. C.S. Kotwani
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr.    Pankaj Sharma, AAG with
                                Mr.    Deepak Kumar Chandak
                                Mr.    Vivek Shrimali
                                Mr.    D.D. Chitlangi



                     JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                       Order

23/10/2021

1.   The   present    batch       of    writ    petitions        comprise   of   the

institutions, which have set up infrastructure for running D.El.Ed.

Course and have submitted their applications for grant of

recognition/approval before the National Council for Teacher

Education (hereinafter referred to as 'NCTE').

(5 of 8) [CW-13291/2020]

2. The petitioners' applications for recognition, after being duly

processed by the NCTE and staff approval by the state

government, have been allowed and they are recognized colleges.

3. The petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance

that the respondents have not allowed them to take part in the

counseling because of the policy decision dated 20.07.2021,

issued by the State Government.

4. Mr. Kotwani, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that

the state does not have any power to restrain the petitioner-

institution from admitting the students; the state is rather obliged

to allow intake of the students, particularly when all the requisite

formalities including staff approval by the state and recognition by

the NCTE has been granted.

5. He argued that the state's action of denying admission of the

students in petitioners-institutions on the basis of policy decision

dated 20.07.2021 is arbitrary. While maintaining that the policy

decision dated 20.07.2021 is beyond the powers of the state

government available under the NCTE Act and National Council for

Teacher Education (Recognition, Norms and Procedure)

Regulations, 2014 (for short, 'the Regulations of 2014') and

arbitrary, learned counsel argued that the same is contrary to a

number of judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, in which it

has been specifically laid down that the state government does not

have any power to conduct inspection and/or deny grant of staff

approval because the field is already occupied by an enactment

framed by the Central Government, i.e. NCTE Act, 1993 and

regulation framed thereunder.

(6 of 8) [CW-13291/2020]

6. Learned counsel relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble the

Supreme Court rendered in the cases of State of Maharastra Vs.

Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyala & Ors. [(2006)

9 SCC 1] and State of Rajasthan Vs. LBS B.Ed. College & Ors.

[(2016) 16 SCC 110] and various other judgments in order to

substantiate his agreement that it has been consistent view of

Hon'ble the Supreme Court that the power to legislate and power

to grant recognition solely vests in the Central Government/NCTE

and the state has only to perform the role assigned under the

Regulations of 2014.

7. Learned counsel submitted that the state itself has permitted

the petitioners to admit the students for the academic session

2019-20, though under the orders of this Court, however, this

time, the petitioners have not been allowed to take part in the

counseling in the guise of the policy decision dated 20.07.2021.

8. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General,

submitted that state's NOC is mandatory, as has been provided

under Regulation No.5(3) of the Regulations of 2014 and since

there are already sufficient number of institutions, state can very

well restrict number of institutions taking part in the counseling.

9. Indisputably the petitioners are recognised institutions which

were having due NOC and staff approval duly granted by the state

government. Such being the position, the state cannot put an

embargo upon petitioners' right of running teacher education

programme. The denial of admission to the students on the basis

of policy decision dated 20.07.2021 is clearly arbitrary. The policy

decision dated 20.07.2021, even if presumed to be valid, cannot

(7 of 8) [CW-13291/2020]

be applied to the petitioners institutions which have been granted

recognition much before the policy decision came into being.

10. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioners institutions,

which are having recognition by NCTE, staff approval from the

state, cannot be denied admission of the students merely because

of the fortuitous circumstance that under some misconception, the

petitioners decided to apply for grant of NOC.

11. Petitioners' case stands at a much better footing than the

bunch of cases decided by this Court today, being S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.2359/2021 (Surender Kaur Memorial College of Higher

Education Vs. State & Ors.).

12. In view of what has been noticed above and following the

reasoning given in the judgment of even date in a batch of writ

petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2359/2021 (Surender

Kaur Memorial College of Higher Education Vs. State & Ors.), the

present writ petitions are allowed.

13. The respondent state/Director, Education is directed to

permit the petitioners institutions to take part in the counseling to

be conducted for the admission of the students in D.El. Ed. Course

for academic year 2021-22 and onwards.

14. The stay applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

15. At this stage, Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate

General submitted that there are many irregularities or

deficiencies in the institutions and thus some check should be

allowed to be kept by the state.

16. In the opinion of this Court, even if the state has found

certain deficiencies or lack of facilities, it is required of the state

government to intimate the NCTE in this regard. This Court is sure

that the NCTE will take appropriate action against such institution

(8 of 8) [CW-13291/2020]

in accordance with law. But, on the pretext of the discrepancies,

the state, at its own, cannot deny the petitioners their right to

carry on the courses.

(DINESH MEHTA),J

32,43-46,48,54-skm/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)