Compliance with statutory provisions and timely legal redressal are essential for obtaining relief under the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993.

J.N.Bhatt, J.

1. By this Letters Patent. Appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent, the appellant #28;Arajkiya Khwaja Shahid Hussain Primary Teacher Training College#29; (in short, the college) has assailed the judgment of the learned single Judge rendered in CWJC No. 5539 of 2004, passed on 16-3-2005., whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant-College for the direction for declaration of result of the examination of the students of the College for the Sessions, 1987-89, 1988-90 to 1992-94 came to be rejected on the grounds that; (1) the petition suffers from the delay, laches and negligence and acquiescence, (2) there was no explanation offered for a period since 1988 till 1997, as to why earlier legal redressal was not sought, (3) upon inquiry the College did not fulfil the requisite requirements even on the date of the inspection and, therefore, the affiliation was cancelled and revoked by the respondents-authorities from the date as it was granted temporary affiliation, (4) that the original petitioner had not disclosed that the affiliation was cancelled by the order, dated 16-12-1999, and therefore, the original petitioner appellant college is guilty of suppression of material facts and misleading the court in obtaining the process of the Court, and (5) that the appellant-institution had not applied for recognition in terms of sec. 14 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (Act No. 77/1993) (in Short, The Act), which came on the statute on 1-7-1995, as such, the date 1-7-1995 was appointed Day, on which it came into operation.

2. We have heard learned Counsels appearing for the parties, threadbare and, dispassionately the record emerging from the present appeal is examined. The relevant case law, as well as, provisions of the Act are taken into consideration.

3. A few material facts relevant and useful for the purpose of consideration and adjudication of the merits of the Letters Patent Appeal may be highlighted, at this juncture:

(1) That the appellant-institution is running a College, which was not granted recognition and thereafter temporary recognition was given till the writ petition was filed and the order was obtained, though, it was started in 1985.

(2) That in the writ petition filed by the appellant, this Court by an order dated 22nd September, 1987 directed the state Government to consider the issue of grant or otherwise on recognition within three months.

4. The recognition of the College was not considered and decided for long and, therefore, a SLP, No. 12014/1987 came to be filed by the appellant and the Hon#25;ble Supreme Court by an order, dated 18-8-89 directed the concerned competent Board to permit the students of the College for the Sessions 1985-87 to appear in the examinations.

5. The students of the College were allowed to appear in the examinations of the Sessions 1985-87, and 1986-88 and their results were, also, published by the Board.

6. The students of the College for the Sessions 1987-89 were also allowed to appear in the examination but the result was not published by the Board. It is, in this context, the petition filed by the original-petitioner-appellant College failed, hence, this Letters Patent Appeal, mainly, on the ground that as the students are bona fide students and are not responsible and also have completed training, they should be given an opportunity for appearing in the examination of the Board. There is no dispute about the fact that the respondents authorities had cancelled or revoked the recognition of the College by a letter, dated 16 December, 1999

7. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-College has, forcefully, submitted that the action of the respondents-authorities is illegal, as, according to him, they have no power to cancel the recognition after coming into force of the new Act, 1993.

8. We have examined the content and colour of the judgment. The views recorded by the learned single Judge and ultimate conclusions recorded