BIDAR VIDYA KENDRA COLLEGE v. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION (NCTE SRC)

(BY SRI. AKASH B. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION (NCTE SRC) G-7 SECTOR -0, DWARKA NEW DELHI - 110 075, REPRESENTD BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE (BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:49241 WP No. 34184 of 2025 HC-KAR THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER WITHDRAWING RECOGNITION PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 17(1) OF THE NCTE ACT, 1993 DATED 10/12/2019 IN F.SRO/NCTE/APSO2215/B.ED/KA/2019/12966- 2972, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER Sri Vinod Kumar M, leaned counsel accepts notice for the respondent.

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: I. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order withdrawing recognition passed by the Respondent under Section 17(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 F.SRO/NCTE/APSO2215/B.ED/KA/2019/12966- 2972, Annexure-A. vide 10/12/2019 II. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing Respondent to reconsider the representation dated 19/06/2025 seeking restoration of recognition granted to the Petitioner Institution, produced at Annexure-B. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49241 WP No. 34184 of 2025 HC-KAR III. Pass such other writs, orders, or directions may be deemed just and necessary in the interest of justice and equity.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner could not submit a reply to the show cause notice issued by the respondent, who proceeded to pass the impugned order withdrawing the recognition granted in favour of the petitioner. It is also submitted that due to various administrative reasons and ill health of the persons in- charge of the affairs of the petitioner's institution, the petitioner could not file appropriate appeal before the Appellate Authority challenging the impugned order and as such, the present petition may be disposed of condoning the delay by permitting the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority under Section 18 of NCTE Act, 1993. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:49241 WP No. 34184 of 2025 HC-KAR

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

Though several contentions have been urged by the petitioner in support of his claim, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that its inability and omission to submit a reply to the show cause notice as well as to prefer an appeal against the impugned order within the prescribed period was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file an appropriate appeal before the Appellate Authority by issuing further directions in this regard.