Shrishakuntal Secondary Teachers Training College & Anr. v. Dr Vineet Josfflias Chairperson National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

2. He also submits that further consideration will be contingent upon the replies,documents,etc.being furnished.

3. However, the Court would note that the LOIs have been issued much after thetime granted to NOTE. The applications were to be considered and disposed-off by March 2020 but that month itself the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted normal life throughout the country. Later, the Supreme Court extended the time for compliance till 31.03.2021. Again, in April 2021, C0VID^9 paralysed normal life for,another 8to 10 weeks.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the LOIs have been issued in the aforementioned 7 cases. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has not received any instructions in this regard. The learned counsel forthe respondents has sent the said LOIs through e-mail with the learned counsel for the petitioners, during the course of the proceedings. He also submits that in CONT.CAS(C)213/2021,a revised order has been issued, and in CONT.CAS(C) 515/2020, application has been refused. The processing ofthe first7cases would depend upoirthe response to the LOI.He says thatthe contempt petitions were filed even at a time when the Supreme Court had extended time for compliance.

5. The petitioners contend that the extension of time was only till 30.03.2021 and it was conditional; the petitioners' cases were not processed and they have lost the academic year of2021-22. Now, with the response of the NCTE, of whatever worth it be, the petitioners can only expect due recognition for the academic year 2022-23.

6. The loss caused to them is an issue for which they may pursue their remedies, as may be available in law. The fact remains that there is delay of many months in compliance and the same has happened only pursuant to the filing ofthe contempt petitions for which the petitioners have expended monies towards legal expenses. It is not in dispute that the respondents have been in breach for many months.

7. Since the petitioner has been constrained to approach this court by way ofpresentcontemptpetition for which he musthave expended monies,token costs ofRs.9,000/- is imposed upon the respondent NCTE,to be deposited in two weeks,with the Deputy Conservator of Forests (South), GNCTD. The monies shall be used for purchase oftrees from government owned nursery for plantation of trees in the Central Ridge. The said DCF is aware is ofwhere and which type oftree are to be planted, as in the last two years the Forest Department has planted over 43,000 trees in the Central Ridge pursuant to costs/trees deposited with it, under scores of court orders. All such planted trees, are said to be in healthy condition.

8. Depending upon the soil type and topography, the DCF may consider planting the following variety oftrees:

(i) Dhau (ii) Hingot

(iii) Khair (iv) Kumttha

(v) Dhak (vi) Phulai

(vii) Kareel (viii) Salai

(ix) Kala siris/safed siris (x) Kaniar

(xi) Pilkhan (xii) Pisangan

(xiii) Amaltas (xiv) Chudailpapdi

(xv) Ronjh (xvi) Bistendu