SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 284

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R. V. Raveendran and A. K. Patnaik, JJ.
Kumari Ranjana Mishra and Anr.
Versus
The State of Bihar and Ors.
Civil Appeal No. 2416 of 2011 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 29392 of 2008)
Decided On: 10.03.2011

Advocates appeared:
Sunil Kumar, Sr. Adv., Pakash Sinha and Shekhar Kumar, Advs.
Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, Lakshmi Raman Singh, Amitesh Kumar, Amaresh Kumar, Mrinal Amaresh and Shuvodeep Roy, Advs.

Headnote:A) Bihar School Examination Board Rules : R.7, R.7(1), CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.142, Art.226, NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION ACT : S.14, S.15, S.16:- This appeal arises out of the denial of the right to sit for examination for C.P.Ed. (Certificate of Physical Education) and D.P. Ed. (Diploma in Physical Education) courses for such students of the Champaran Physical Training College, who were admitted for the courses on the basis of a temporary recognition gratned to it for conducting classes in 1989-1990 to 1995-1996. The main reason cited by the High Court was that in view of the new Act, the temporary recognition granted was cancelled and the college had not applied for recognition from NCTE. Held the State Government is duty bound to allow these students to take the examination on the basis of the factsof the case.

JUDGMENT

A.K. Patnaik, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This is an appeal against the order dated 23.05.2008 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Patna in Letters Patent Appeal No. 972 of 2007.

3. The facts very briefly are that the Government of Bihar in the Department of Human Resource Development granted temporary recognition to the Champaran Physical Training College (for short 'the College') for C.P.Ed. (Certificate of Physical Education) and D.P. Ed. (Diploma in Physical Education) courses from July, 1986 alongwith permission to the students of the College to appear in the examinations subject to certain conditions stipulated in the order dated 09.08.1988. The two Appellants took admission in the C.P.Ed. course in the College in the academic session 1989-1990. Several other students also took admission in the C.P.Ed. course in the College in different academic years 1989-1990 to 1995-1996. With effect from 01.07.1995, the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (for short 'the NCTE Act') came into force and under Section 14 of the NCTE Act, the power to grant recognition was vested in the Regional Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) with effect from 17.08.1995. On 13.04.2004, the State revoked the recognition of the College and all other Non-Government Physical Training Colleges in the State. The two Appellants and five other candidates, who had undergone the C.P.Ed. course in the College during the academic years 1989-1990 to 1995-1996, moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in C.W.J.C. No. 11413 of 2007 for a direction to the Bihar School Examination Board to release the form and accept the fees and forms of the Appellants and the five other candidates on the basis of the training courses completed in the academic sessions 1989-1990 to 1995-1996 from the College and to allow them to appear in the examination to be conducted in 2007. By order dated 07.11.2007, a learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition. The two Appellants and the five other candidates then filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 972 of 2007 before the Division Bench of the High Court. By the impugned order dated 23.05.2008, the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal. Aggrieved, the Appellants have filed this appeal.

4. Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the Appellants, submitted that before the Division Bench of the High Court, the Appellants contended that the College was recognized by the State Government during the years 1989-1990 to 1995-1996 when the Appellants and five other candidates undertook the C.P.Ed. course and that the Regional Committee of NCTE was vested with the power to grant recognition only after the NCTE Act came into force on 01.07.1995 and, therefore, the Bihar School Examination Board should be directed to allow the Appellants to take the C.P.Ed. examination. He submitted that before the High Court the Appellants relied on the decision in Sunil Kumar Parimal and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Ors. (2007) 10 SCC 150 in which this Court has held that the Tirhut Physical Education College, Muzaffarpur, was duly recognized by the State Government and lost its recognition only with effect from the date the NCTE Act came into force, and hence the candidates, who had undertaken the course in the aforesaid College recognized by the State Government before the NCTE Act came into force, were eligible to appear in the examination of C.P.Ed. course. He submitted that the High Court did not accept the contention of the Appellants and instead held that Tirhut Physical Education College, Muzaffarpur, was a recognized institution and despite repeated requests of the State to allow the students to appear in the examination, the Bihar School Examination Board did not follow the request of the State Government, but in the facts of the present case no such request had been made by the State Government and no direction was issued by the Stat




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top