2010 (8) Supreme 111
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.V. Raveendran and H.L. Gokhale, JJ.
Bhagwan Budha Prathmik Technical Training College Nirmali — Appellant
versus
The State of Bihar & Others — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 9896 of 2010
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 6511 of 2009)
with
Bhagwan Budha Prathmik Technical Training College Nirmali — Appellant
versus
Union of India & Others — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 9897 of 2010
(Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 9378 of 2009)
Decided on : 23-11-2010
(b) Administration of Justice – Order dated 16.3.2007 withdrawn by order dated 2.9.2008 – Not disturbed by High Court – Order dated 2.9.2008 cannot be challenged on the basis of High Court order when Order dated 16.3.2007 was subsisting. (Para 19)
(c) National Council for Teacher Education Act 1993 – Section 16 – Institution never recognized by State Government or NCTE – After coming into force of the Act recognition cannot be granted for the period prior to ‘appointed date’. (Para 20)
(2007) 10 SCC 150; Civil Appeal 8239-8240 of 2009 – Distinguished
(d) National Council for Teacher Education Act 1993 – Sections 14 and 16 – To become a teacher a person has to have qualification as well as training – The Institution having been closed down there is no scope of the students in question to be trained. (Paras 24 and 25)
1986 Supl. SCC 166; (1993) 3 SCC 595; (2000) 7 SCC 618; (1992) 4 SCC 435 – Relied upon
(e) National Council for Teacher Education Act 1993 – Sections 14 and 16 – Power to recognise a training institute is vested in Regional Committee of NCTE – State Government cannot grant recognition to any institution after coming into force of the Act. (Para 28)
(f) Judicial Review – Delay and latches – A party not diligent in protecting his rights and approaching the Court belatedly cannot wholly blame the inaction on the part of the State alone for their plight. (Para 29)
Facts of the case:
These appeals raise the questions as to whether after coming into force of the National Council for Teacher Education Act 1993 the State Governments have the power to grant recognition to the colleges which train the teachers, and whether students from the colleges not recognized by National Council for Teacher Education can be permitted to appear for the requisite examination to become teachers.
Finding of the Court:
State Government rightly rescinded its earlier order.
Cost imposed by the High Court on the appellant is not sustainable.
Result : Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Gokhale J. —
Leave Granted.
2. These two appeals raise the questions as to whether after coming into force of the National Council for Teacher Education Act 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NCTE Act’) the State Governments have the power to grant recognition to the colleges which train the teachers, and whether students from the colleges not recognized by National Council for Teacher Education (in short NCTE) can be permitted to appear for the requisite examination to become teachers. Since both these appeals are filed by the same institution, they are being disposed of by a common judgment.
3. Both these matters have had a chequered history. There have been several rounds of litigation which are being recorded herein below.
4. The appellant claims to be an institution set up by the minority Buddhist religious community. The appellant has established a Teachers’ Training College at Nirmali, District Supaul (Bihar), in the year 1987. It claims that the Chief Minister’s Secretariat instructed the Director, Research and Training, Primary Education, Patna (vide a letter dated 13.02.1987) to issue a permission to the appellant to establish this minority educational institution. Thereupon, the appellant proceeded to admit students pending the approval/recognition of its course, by the State Government for training of the students to become primary teachers.
5. The appellant waited for the order of recognition for more than three years, and thereafter filed a Writ Petition bearing CWJC No. 5084 of 1990 in the High Court of Patna, seeking a direction to the State Government to grant the recognition. The prayers in the petition were two-fold. Firstly, a direction to the State Government to consider and finally dispose of the matter regarding recognition, and secondly, a direction to the Bihar School Examination Board (for short-Board) to allow the students of the appellant institution to appear for the ensuing primary teachers training examination. The appellant claimed that two batches of its students had completed their course in the meanwhile, i.e. 1987-89 and 1988-90. A Division Bench of the High Court issued three-fold directions on that petition vide its order dated 3.11.1990 :
(i) to the State Government to decide one way or the other the question of recognition of the institution and (ii) to the Board, if it was so satisfied, as to the bona fides and genuineness of the claims of the students of the two batches, to allow them to appear for the examination. (iii) to the Secretary of the appellant college also, to submit full particulars of its students (not exceeding 100 in number for each session) within 10 days from the date of the order. The High Court, however, made it clear that the students appearing in the examination will be appearing at their own risk and no right shall enure to them merely on that basis. Their results will not be published until the question of recognition of institution is finally decided by the State Government, and the publication of results will abide by the final decision in the recognition matter, that is to say, results will be published only in case recognition is granted.
6. Accordingly, students of the appellant institution appeared for the examination conducted by the Board in January 1991. However, the decision of the State Government on the aspect of recognition was not forthcoming, and hence the appellant institution filed the second Writ Petition bearing CWJC No.293 of 1992. When this Writ Petition was heard, it was pointed out on behalf of respondents that the appellant had yet not submitted the application for inspection and grant of recognition in proper proforma, and other requirements were also not fulfiled. In view of this position, the Division Bench declined to pass any direction in this behalf. It, however, granted liberty to the appellants to apply afresh in proper proforma, which shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned authorities in accordance with
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.