1. The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that the respondents be directed to dispatch the formal order granting recognition to petitioner institute to commence B.Ed. course for academic session 2014-15.

2. According to the petitioners, the respondents had granted recognition to the petitioner institute under clause 7(11) of the National Council of Teacher Education (Recognition, Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2009 (hereafter referred to as ‘2009 Regulations’). Although the decision for issuance of recognition was published on the website, the formal recognition order has not been dispatched to the petitioner.

3. It is an admitted position that the Eastern Regional Committee (hereafter ‘ERC’) had, in its 170th Meeting held on 28.02.2014 and 01.03.2014, decided to grant approval to the petitioner institute for intake of 100 students with effect from the academic session 2014 15. The formal recognition order was also signed on 03.03.2014, however, the same was not dispatched. In the meantime, ERC received a letter from the National Council of Teacher Education (hereafter ‘NCTE’) to reconsider its decision to grant approval. Accordingly, the formal order of recognition has not been dispatched as yet. In the meantime, the petitioners acted on the approvals and have conducted the course in affiliation with the West Bengal State University.

4. It is also relevant to note that the Supreme Court had by an order dated 10.09.2013 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.4247-4248/2009 directed that all pending applications for recognition be processed as per the new regulations being framed. The new regulations, i.e. National Council of Teacher Education (Recognition, Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2014 (hereafter referred to as ‘2014 Regulations’) were notified on 01.12.2014 – although the notification is dated 28.11.2014 - and the last date for grant of recognition has been extended by the Supreme Court up to 31.05.2015.

5. Despite sufficient opportunity, respondent no. 1 - NCTE did not file a counter affidavit. However, in compliance with directions issued by this court, the member secretary of NCTE filed an affidavit which indicates that a complaint had been received alleging that applications of certain institutions had been processed contrary to the 2009 Regulations and an inquiry with respect to the same was pending. The said affidavit is bereft of any details and does not disclose the nature of the allegations. However, on inquiry, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the complaint in respect of the petitioner institute, related to grant of approval prior to the petitioner institute furnishing Fixed Deposit Receipts to be jointly operated by ERC and the petitioner institute. The learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that this was also one of the principal reasons for not dispatching the formal order of recognition.

6. In the aforesaid circumstances, the limited controversy to be addressed is whether the petitioner institute was entitled to act on the decision of the ERC prior to the formal communication and is entitled to the formal order of recognition under Regulation 7(11) of the 2009 Regulations.

7. Briefly stated the relevant facts necessary to consider the aforesaid controversy are as under:-

7.1 On 26.11.2012/27.11.2012, NCTE issued a public notice inviting application for recognition of teacher education courses for the academic session 2013-14 in accordance with the 2009 Regulations.

7.2 On 28.12.2012, Bishnupriya Memorial Trust (petitioner no.2) submitted an online application to the ERC of NCTE seeking recognition for establishing an institution in the name of Bishnupriya College of Education (petitioner no.1) for B.Ed. course for the academic year 2013-14. ERC, in its meeting held on 21st – 22nd January, 2013, rejected the application of the petitioner no.2. Petitioner no. 2 appealed against this decision under Section 18 of the National Counc