Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9572 of 2013 ====================================================== Apsam College of Education through its Chairman namely Madheshwar Singh, Plot No. 2878/3670, situated over NH 30, Utar Wari Jungle, P.S.- Jagdishpur, Dist. Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The Members Secretary National Council Of Teacher Education, New Delhi. 2. The Eastern Regional Committee, National Council of Teachers Education, 15, Neelakanth Nagar, Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar (Orissa). 3. The Regional Director, Eastern Regioinal Committee, National Council of Teacher Education, 15, Neelakanth Nagar, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar (Orrisa). 4. The Veer Kunvar Singh University through its Vice Chancellor, Ara, Bihar. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9243 of 2013 ====================================================== Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad Teachers Training College, Darbhanga, Village- Jeewachghat West, P.O- Kharua, Distt- Darbhanga Through Secretary Dr. Najeeb Akhtar S/O Md. Noorul Hoda Resident Of B.K. Road, Laheriasarai, Distt- And Town- Darbhanga. Versus 1. The National Council For Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, I.T.O. .... .... Petitioner/s New Delhi. 2. The Eastern Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, 15 Neelakanth Nagar, Nayapalli, Bhubneshwar, Odisha- 751012 3. The Regional Director, Eastern Regional Committee, National Council 15, Neelakantha Nagar,Nayapalii, For Teacher Education- Bhubneshwar, Odisha- 851012
Legal Reasoning
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. S.N. Pathak, Advocate Mr. Sarvadeo Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 2 08-05-2013 Heard learned Counsel for the parties in respect of the Patna High Court CWJC No.9572 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 2/5 following relief prayed which in C.W.J.C. No. 9572 of 2013 reads as follows:- "(i) For direction to the respondent concerned particularly the Respondent No. 1 to examine and consider the appeal filed by the petitioner namely Appeal No. APPL1200 of 29.04.2013 for grant of recognition of B.Ed. course for Academic Session 2013-14 in the meeting being held on 9th of May, 2013. (ii) For direction to the respondent concerned to grant recognition for B.Ed. course to the petitioner's college for the Academic Session 2013-14 instead of 2014-15." and in C.W.J.C. No. 9243 of 2013 reads as follows :- "(i) For issuance of a writ or writs in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to correct the typographical mistake in order dated 17.04.2013 passed by National Council for Teacher Education, Eastern Regional Committee vide
Decision
order dated ECR/153.6.3/NCTE/B.Ed./2013/17660 whereby recognition is granted to the petitioner college for conducting B.Ed. Course but academic session is wrongly granted for 2014-2015 whereas it ought to have been for the academic session 2013-2014. (ii) For issuance of writ or writs commanding the respondents to immediately correct the academic session of the college for 2013-2014 as the L.N. Mithila University the process of affiliation in the month of Patna High Court CWJC No.9572 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 3/5 May and the petitioner college may be adversely affected due to the anomaly in the impugned order dated 17.04.2004. (iii) For issuance of a writ or writ in the nature of certiorari in alternative to quash the second last line of paragraph 3 of the order dated 17.4.2013 whereby the academic session of recognition granted to the petitioner college is 2014-2015 if the respondent failed to correct the same at their end and allow the academic session of the current session as the petitioner college has already fulfilled all the requirements as per the directing of the respondents in compliance of the NCTE Act and Regulation and I have already invested huge sum in the infrastructure and employment of regular teachers and non-teaching staffs. (iv) For issuance of direction/directions, order/orders granted suitable relief to the petitioner college by protecting loss of salary to the teaching and non-teaching staffs and to safeguard financial loss to the petitioner college for the loss of one session and loss of one academic year." Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, learned senior counsel followed by Mr. Rashid Izhar, Advocate have submitted that the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same that the recognition to the petitioner institutions which was granted by the National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE) ought to have been for the session 2013-14 onwards but in place of that such Patna High Court CWJC No.9572 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 4/5 recognition has been given from the year 2014-15 session and that has been sought is to be assailed in the appeals filed by the petitioners and, therefore, if such appeal is not disposed of within a fixed time frame, it may become infructuous because the sessions for 2013-14 shall commence in the month of July, 2013. Mr. S.N. Pathak, learned counsel for the NCTE, at this stage having placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court dated 13.12.2012 in the writ application (Civil) No. 276 of 2012 (Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) has submitted that such decision for grant of recognition to the both the institution for the session 2014-15 onward was consciously taken in view of the judgment of the Apex Court dated 13.12.2012 in writ petition (Civil) No. 276 of 2012, Ma Vaishno Devi Mahila Vidyalaya Vs. State of U.P. and others and, therefore, nothing can be done now by anyone in the NCTE. Repelling such submission, Mr. Sinha has explained that since the petitioners institutions had already fulfilled all the requirements in the time schedule given by the Apex Court, the appellate authority will at least have to examine as to whether the decision of grant of recognition for the year 2014-15 is correct on the facts. In the considered opinion of this Court, there could be Patna High Court CWJC No.9572 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 5/5 no two views that the order passed by the NCTE granting approval to the petitioners institutions for the year 2014-15 can be made subject matter of appeal so far they relate to the allotment or fixation of session. What would be the result of the appeal is not known to any of the party but then such appeal has to be disposed of if it has been or is to be filed. To that extent, submission of Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, learned senior counsel, seems to be most reasonable that in case the appeal is not disposed of within the fixed time frame, it may become infructuous even if the same is ultimately allowed after commencement of academic session of 2013-2014. which is even not allowed. Keeping all these facts and submissions in view, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to disposed of the appeal of the petitioners strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 18 of the NCTE Act read with the judgment of Apex Court dated 13.12.2012 in the case of Ma Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya (supra) within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations and directions both the writ petitions are disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Rishi/-