Sri Guru Teg Bahadur College of Education v. State of Punjab & Ors.

14932 of 2009 before this Court. This petition was disposed of vide order dated 24.9.2009 directing the N.R.C to consider the case for grant of recognition within a period of four weeks. It appears that the N.R.C did not decide the matter within the time specified by the Court. However, the N.R.C finally granted recognition to the petitioner-college vide its order dated 17.12.2009. Even before the formal order could be issued the petitioner informed the university vide its letter dated 14.12.2009 that the N.R.C had decided to grant recognition to the petitioner-college and the petitioner be allowed to admit the students in B.Ed classes for the session 2009-2010. In a separate writ petition being CWP No. 16720 of 2009 filed by the Self Financed B.Ed Colleges, Punjab before this Court, a detailed order was passed on 14.12.2009 permitting the petitioners to make admission in accordance with the directions issued in the said writ petition. Following directions were issued in the aforesaid writ petition:- “ Keeping in view the fact that a large number of vacancies are lying vacant and the directions issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench in CWP No. 17284 of 2008 and Civil Writ Petition No. 11272 and 11287 of 2009 by this Court, following directions are issued:- i). The petitioner-Association will issue separate Public Notices notifying un-filled seats available with the member- Colleges for allocation through the counselling by the Association concerned. The notice shall be published in two English national newspapers and two others in Vernacular (one Hindi and one Punjabi) having wide circulation between 17.12.2009 and 18.12.2009 to 23.12.2009. The admissions will be made on the basis of merit in the qualifying examinations i.e. Graduation level. The minimum eligibility criterion as notified in the Prospectus shall be strictly adhered to and there CWP. No. 20149 of 2009 -3- shall be no relaxation of any kind in the minimum eligibility criterion. It is made clear that if subsequently at any stage, it is found that students have been admitted in violation of the eligibility criterion, not only the admission of the students shall be liable to be cancelled and quashed by the university but the petitioner-institutions shall also be liable to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- per student admitted in violation of the norms of the university. (ii) After 23.12.2009, no students irrespective of the availability of the seats in any of the affiliated colleges, shall be admitted. (iii) The petitioner-institutions will make admissions on the basis of inter-se merit of the applicants who may apply and seek admission pursuant to the Public Notice issued by the petitioners. The Colleges will not charge any extra fee other than the one prescribed by the university/Govt. (iv) The fee shall be deposited by the candidates in accordance with the norms/procedure already prescribed by the respondent-university/Govt. It will also be notified in the Public Notice that the (v) students who will be granted admission will deposit the fee before or on 23.12.2009 in accordance with the norms/procedure prescribed by the respondent university/Govt. in this regard. (vi) The Guru Nanak Dev University will nominate one representative for each joint counselling to be conducted by the petitioner Association in respect to member colleges affiliated to the concerned university. Such nomination shall be made before the date notified hereinabove for counselling/admission by the colleges. If the respondent-university fails to nominate its representative or if the nominated representative fails to approach the Association of Colleges concerned, the Association may proceed to hold counselling/admission in absence of such representative with prior intimation to the respondent-university in this regard. (vii) All the colleges after making admissions will submit a list of admitted candidates along with their details and merit position to the respondent-university, within a period of one week from the date of such admissions along with proof of payment of fee right to conduct scrutiny in accordance with the norms/procedure laid down by it.” and the respondent-university shall have the CWP. No. 20149 of 2009 -4- Believing that petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of the aforesaid directions, the petitioner on its own issued advertisement in newspaper and received applications from the students. The respondent- university, however, did not acknowledge the admissions made by the petitioner-college. The petitioner, accordingly, filed the present writ petition before this Court seeking a direction to allow the petitioner-college to fill up its B.Ed seats. This writ petition, however, came to be dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23.12.2009. The petitioner filed a review petition in view of the another order passed by this Court in CWP No. 19231 of 2009 on 15.1.2010 permitting the petitioners therein to make admissions. This review petition was allowed by this Court on 2.2.2010 and the main writ petition was directed to be heard on merits. On being put to notice in the main writ petition, the respondent- university has filed its reply. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is admitted case of the parties that the petitioner-college was granted recognition and affiliation for making admissions in the year 2007-

08. It was only during the academic session 2009-2010 that the N.C.T.E declined to extend the recognition vide order dated 2.7.2009. The said order was set aside by the appellate authority and the matter remanded to the N.R.C. The N.R.C delayed the decision for quite some time which constrained the petitioner to approach this Court in CWP No. 14932 of

2009. This Court while disposing of the writ petition issued directions to the N.R.C to decide the issue of extension of recognition within four weeks. CWP. No. 20149 of 2009 -5- The N.R.C delayed the matter for the reasons known to it for more than two months. It was only on 17.12.2009 that the N.R.C finally granted extension in recognition to the petitioner. By this time regular admissions had already been made. The petitioner having failed to admit the students, filed this petition. In the reply filed by the respondents, the main contention is that the petitioner will not be in a position to complete 180 teaching days required for the course as also the practicals comprising of 30 days. It is stated that after including Sundays, Saturdays and other Gazetted Holidays only 75 working days are available and if 15 days are given as preparatory days prior to the start of the examination, only 60 days are left and it will be difficult for the students to complete the course. The respondent-university has also placed on record a schedule for the examinations. For B.Ed course the annual examination are scheduled to start on 4.6.2010 and supplementary on 25.9.2010 as is evident from the Annexure R-1. The university has also placed on record the regulations governing the B.Ed course. It may be useful to refer to the relevant regulations, which are as under:- “ 12.(A)(i) If a candidate fails in the internal assessment of Part-I (General Professional Courses) Theory Papers and/or Part-II i.e. Student Teaching and Work Experience (Art & Craft), he shall not be allowed to appear in the examination of that particular part/s. He can appear in the remaining part/s in the examination but his result of annual examination will not be declared. He shall rejoin the college in the succeeding session or a minimum period of one month in order to qualify for the internal assessment of the particular part/s. The Principal shall be CWP. No. 20149 of 2009 -6- empowered to extend this period but the extension must expire on week before the commencement of the next annual examination. If he passes in the internal assessment, his result of annual examination will be declared and if he fails to qualify in the internal assessment his candidature for the previous annual examination will be cancelled and result filed. (ii) (ii) Internal assessment ineach paper will be based on two house tests or one house test and assignment. The Principal will be the overall incharge of internal assessment and will have authority to modify it where necessary. (iv) Students of B.Ed class falling short of required lectures/lessons in teaching practice/practicals may be allowed to take following supplementary or April examination after making up the deficiency by rejoining their respective colleges.

14. (c) A candidate who does not complete atleast six weeks teaching practice comprising two discussion Lessons and 60 lessons, 30 in each subject, and observations of 40 lessons, 20 in each subject, is required to rejoin the college in the next session in order to undergo the teaching practice of the remaining period. The Principal will intimate the name and roll number of such candidates immediately after the termination of teaching practice so that the result of the annual examination of these candidates may be with-held. If any candidate fails to complete the six weeks teaching practice in the next session his candidature will be cancelled and result filed.” Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner while referring to the aforementioned regulations has strenuously argued that the ordinarily the annual examination are to be conducted in April but the university has decided to hold the annual examination in June and the supplementary examination in September as per the regulation no.2 and 3 respectively. CWP. No. 20149 of 2009 -7- Further referring to Regulation 12 (a) (iv) it is submitted that a student of B.Ed course who falls short of the lectures is entitled to appear in the supplementary examination. Similarly, if, a candidate who does not complete the teaching practicals experience, he is entitled to rejoin the college in the next session to undergo the teaching practicals of the remaining period. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner-college has suffered on account of inaction on the part of the N.R.C and of no fault of it. It is also a fact that despite directions by this court to the N.R.C to decide the question of extension of recognition within four weeks, N.R.C delayed the matter for over two months and finally granted the recognition on 17.12.2009. The petitioner-college is operating since 2007. In view of the regulations referred to above, if, the petitioner is allowed to make admissions at this stage, the students can appear in supplementary examination as well which is to be held in September, 2010 and for practicals the students can even rejoin the course in the next academic session. Keeping in view the above and the fact that the delay has been caused by the N.R.C, this petition is disposed of with the following directions:- The respondent-university will consider the claim of the petitioner for making admissions for the academic session 2009-2010 for B.Ed course in the light of the above mentioned regulations and if, the university finds that the students can complete the requisite lectures by the time the supplementary examinations are held, the university may either allow the petitioner to make admissions out of the applications already CWP. No. 20149 of 2009 -8- received or direct the petitioner to invite fresh applications within a reasonable time for making admissions. The university shall pass the appropriate order within one week.

15.3.2010. Whether to be reported to the Reporters? Yes. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE