Sant Haridass College of Higher Education v. The Registrar Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University & Ors.
Delhi High Court·07 Jul 2011·2011:DHC:3355-DB
The Chief Justice; Sanjiv Khanna
W.P. (C) Nos. 6037/2008 & 11180/2009
2011:DHC:3355-DB
administrativeappeal_allowedSignificant
AI Summary
The Delhi High Court held that while NCTE recognition is essential, the university may impose additional conditions for affiliation, and directed re-examination of recognition considering the colleges' location in unauthorized areas.
Full Text
Translation output
W.P. (C) Nos. 6037/2008 & 11180/2009 HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) 6037/2008 SANT HARIDASS COLLEGE OF HIGHER EDUCATION... Petitioner Through Mr. Laliet Kumar and Mr. Saurabh Dhawan, Advocates.
VERSUS
THE REGISTRAR GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Mukul Talwar and Mr. Mohapatra, Advocates for GGSIPU. Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for NCTE. Mr. Shoaib Haider, Advocate for Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Counsel.
W.P.(C) 11180/2009 SANKALPA EDUCATIONAL WELFARE & CHARITABLE SOCIETY & ANR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma, Advocates.
VERSUS
THE REGISTRAR GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Mukul Talwar and Mr. Mohapatra, Advocates for GGSIPU. Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for NCTE. Mr. Shoaib Haider, Advocate for 2011:DHC:3355-DB Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Counsel.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R 07.07.2011 As similar issues and contentions have been raised, these two writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience facts of W.P.(C) 6037/2008 titled Sant Hairdass College of Higher Education Vs. The Registrar Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Others have been noticed and referred to below.
JUDGMENT
2. The petitioner colleges have been granted recognition for conducting B.Ed. courses by the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE). The petitioner colleges are seeking affiliation with Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University. The degree/diploma awarded and the course prescribed are that of the respondent university. The respondentuniversity had granted provisional affiliation to the petitioner subject to „no objection certificate‟ from the respondent Government of NCT of Delhi. Government of NCT of Delhi has refused to issue „no objection certificate‟ as the petitioner colleges are located in a non-confirming area and in fact is located in unauthorized colonies. It was pointed out that NCTE while granting recognition did not examine the aspect that the colleges are located in an unauthorized area. Learned counsel for the university and the Government of NCT have raised factual objections with regard to the facilities available and provided in the said colleges. In this regard reference is made by the university to the inspection report submitted/filed by them and the report of the Board of Affiliation.
3. During the course of hearing before us, several suggestions were given to resolve the controversy.
4. Learned counsel for the parties have drawn our attention to the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, Bhartia Education Society and Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (2011) 4 SCC 527 in which it has been held as under:-
“15. The purpose of `recognition' and `affiliation' are different. In the context of NCTE Act, `affiliation' enables and permits an institution to send its students to participate in the public examinations conducted by the Examining Body and secure the qualification in the nature of degrees, diplomas, certificates. On the other hand, `recognition' is the licence to the institution to offer a course or training in teacher education. Prior to NCTE Act, in the absence of an apex body to plan and co-ordinate development of teacher education system, respective regulation and
proper maintenance of the norms and standards in the teacher education system, including grant of `recognition' were largely exercised by the State Government and Universities/Boards. After the enactment of NCTE Act, the functions of NCTE as `recognizing authority' and the Examining Bodies as `affiliating authorities' became crystallized, though their functions overlap on several issues. NCTE Act recognizes the role of examining bodies in their sphere of activity.
16. x x x x
17. Sub-section (6) of Section 14 no doubt mandates every examining body to grant affiliation to the institution on receipt of the order of NCTE granting recognition to such institution. This only means that recognition is a condition precedent for affiliation and that the examining body does not have any discretion to refuse affiliation with reference to any of the factors which have been considered by the NCTE while granting recognition. For example, NCTE is required to satisfy itself about the adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, and laboratory required for proper functioning of an institution for a course or training in teacher education. Therefore, when recognition is granted by NCTE, it is implied that NCTE has satisfied itself on those aspects. Consequently, the examining body may not refuse affiliation on the ground that the institution does not have adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, or laboratory required for proper functioning of the institution. But this does not mean that the examining body cannot require compliance with its own requirements in regard to eligibility of candidates for admissions to courses or manner of admission of students or other areas falling within the sphere of the State government and/or the examining body. Even the order of recognition dated 17.7.2000 issued by NCTE specifically contemplates the need for the institution to comply with and fulfill the requirement of the affiliating body and state government, in addition to the conditions of NCTE. We extract below conditions 4, 5 & 6 of the order of recognition issued by NCTE in this behalf:
4. The admission to the approved course shall be given only to those candidates who are eligible as per the regulations governing the course and in the manner laid down by the affiliating University/State Government.
5. Tuition fee and other fees will be charged from the students as per the norms of the affiliating University/State Government till such time NCTE regulations in respect of fee structure come into force.
6. Curriculum transaction, including practical work/activities, should be organized as per the NCTE norms and standards for the course and the requirements of the affiliating University/Examining body. The examining body can therefore impose its own requirements in regard to eligibility of students for admission to a course in addition to those prescribed by NCTE. The state government and the examining body may also regulate the manner of admissions. As a consequence, if there is any irregularity in admissions or violation of the eligibility criteria prescribed by the examining body or any irregularity with reference to any of the matters regulated and governed by the examining body, the examining body may cancel the affiliation irrespective of the fact that the institution continues to enjoy the recognition of the NCTE. Sub-section (6) of section 14 cannot be interpreted in a manner so as to make the process of affiliation, an automatic rubberstamping consequent upon recognition, without any kind of discretion in the examining body to examine whether the institution deserves affiliation or not, independent of the recognition. An institution requires the recognition of NCTE as well as affiliation with the examining body, before it can offer a course or training in teacher education or admit students to such course or training. Be that as it may.
18. Certain facts peculiar to this case requires to be noticed. The Institute apparently proceeded under the mistaken impression that the recognition by NCTE on 17.7.2000, which was granted after the State Government issued a NOC, resulted in automatic affiliation with the examining body. The Board had granted affiliation to the Institute for an earlier period and has also granted affiliations for the subsequent period. The students admitted in 2002 and 2003 have already completed the course and have also been permitted by the Board which is the examining and affiliating authority to appear for the examinations. In the peculiar circumstances, to do complete justice, we are of the view that the admissions of students to the Institute in the years 2002 and 2003 should be regularized subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria prescribed by the Board and their results should be declared. To this limited extent, the appeals relating to 2002 and 2003 admissions succeed. CA NO. 1227/2011 and 1230-1231/2011 are disposed of accordingly.”
5. By the interim order passed by us, it has been directed that the petitioner institutions shall be included in the list of colleges eligible for enrolling students for B.Ed. in the academic session 2011-2012. Keeping in view of the aforesaid aspects, we feel that the NCTE should examine the matter afresh and take a decision with regard to the recognition with effect from next academic session i.e. 2012-2013. While examining the said aspect, NCTE shall call upon Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to submit and state whether or not the said colleges/institutions are located in a non-confirming area and cannot be permitted to operate/function in view of Delhi Development Act, 1957 and the Master Plan of Delhi,
2021. It may be noticed here that the learned counsel for the university and the Government of NCT of Delhi have raised an apprehension that these colleges/institutions can be sealed and prosecuted under the provisions of Section 14/28 of Delhi Development Act, 1957 and thus, the students admitted of these colleges/institutions can suffer and can be put to a lot of harassment and inconvenience. Unfortunately, DDA has not been impleaded as a party to the present writ petition. The respondentuniversity and the Government of NCT of Delhi can also project their point of view on the said aspects before the NCTE. This will curtail any controversy or conflicting views interse the respondents and prevent conflicting orders or opinions by the government authorities. The aforesaid exercise will be completed by the NCTE or competent authority within the shortest possible time and preferably on or before 31st October,
2011.
6. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.
8,883 characters total
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE JULY 07, 2011 NA
Upgrade to Pro
This feature is available on the Pro plan. Upgrade to unlock full AI summaries, PDF downloads, and more.