Full Text
Translation output
.$-54 & 55 j :
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.rO 493/2015 NAY CHETANA SHIKSHA SAMITI BADHRA Petitioner
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.rO 493/2015 NAY CHETANA SHIKSHA SAMITI BADHRA Petitioner
VERSUS
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ORS. Respondents
AND
W.P.(C) 494/2015
SANTRA DEVI SHIKSHA SAMITI Petitioner
SANTRA DEVI SHIKSHA SAMITI Petitioner
VERSUS
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR: TEACHER EDUCATION & ORS. Respondents
Through: Mr Vineet Bhagat, Ms Manju Bhagat and Mr Akash Tyagi, Advocates for
4' petitioners.
Mr T. Singhdev and Mr Vishu Agarwal, I '' Advocates forR-L
Mr Arun Bhardwaj with Ms Gunjan Bansal, Advocates for R-2.
Through: Mr Vineet Bhagat, Ms Manju Bhagat and Mr Akash Tyagi, Advocates for
4' petitioners.
Mr T. Singhdev and Mr Vishu Agarwal, I '' Advocates forR-L
Mr Arun Bhardwaj with Ms Gunjan Bansal, Advocates for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAIOIRU
: 16.01.2015 The petitioners have filed the above petitions challenging the rejection and return of their application for recognition of B.Ed, and D.EI.Ed. courses on the ground that the State of Haryana'had given a general direction to return such applications. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that a batch of similar petitions titled as 'Divine Mission Society (Rescl.) v. National Council for
Teacher Education & Anr.\ W.P.(C) No.2889/2013' and other connected matters were disposed of by this Court by an order dated 24.11.2014 whereby this Court had directed as under:-
"6. This Court is of the view that after filing of an application, an institution is legally entitled to have it processed by the: statutorily designated authority strictly in accordance with the statutorilyprescribedprocedure. The input of the State Government
2015:DHC:11494 as a stdce holder under the cuiTent rules is certainly relevant but it cannot be accepted as 'gospel truth' and that too, without giving an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioners.
: 16.01.2015 The petitioners have filed the above petitions challenging the rejection and return of their application for recognition of B.Ed, and D.EI.Ed. courses on the ground that the State of Haryana'had given a general direction to return such applications. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that a batch of similar petitions titled as 'Divine Mission Society (Rescl.) v. National Council for
Teacher Education & Anr.\ W.P.(C) No.2889/2013' and other connected matters were disposed of by this Court by an order dated 24.11.2014 whereby this Court had directed as under:-
"6. This Court is of the view that after filing of an application, an institution is legally entitled to have it processed by the: statutorily designated authority strictly in accordance with the statutorilyprescribedprocedure. The input of the State Government
2015:DHC:11494 as a stdce holder under the cuiTent rules is certainly relevant but it cannot be accepted as 'gospel truth' and that too, without giving an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioners.
ORDER
7.. Keeping in view the aforesaid as well as the judgment/orders of the Madhya Pradesh and Punjab & Haryana High Courts as well as the order dated lO"^ September, 2013 passed by Supreme Court in SLP No. 4247- 4248/2009, present writ petitions are disposed of with a direction that the petitioners shall apply afresh in accordance with new regulations if required and the same shall be considered by the NCTE/NRC for the year 2015-16 in accordance with new regulations which are to be notified in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court. If any deficiency is found, the same shall be communicated to the petitioners, who shall remove ^ the deficiency within the given time. In case, the deficiencies are removed within the given time, the application shall be processed in • accordance with Rules and Regulations. If the deficiencies are not removed, the applications shall stand rejected. With the aforesaid observations, the present batch of writ petitions is disposed of but without any order as to costs." The learned counsel for the parties point out that the new regulations have since been' notified. Consequently, the present petitions are disposed of by directing that the petitioners are at liberty to apply afresh for the academic year 2015-16 in accordance with the new regulations, if required. And, the same shall be decided in accordance with the new regulations by the respondents. In the event, any deficiency is found the same shall be conveyed to the petitioners who shall be given an opportunity to remove the same within a specified time. In case such deficiencies are removed within the specified time, the applications shall be processed in accordance with the relevant regulations. Needless to mention that if • the deficiencies are not cured within the specified time the applications shall stand rejected. Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 16, 2015