The judgment in Sir Chhotu Ram was intended to benefit all similarly situated institutions, and the respondents were obligated to extend the benefit to all such institutions. The delay in approaching the court was not a valid ground for dismissal, as the judgment in Sir Chhotu Ram was intended to benefit all similarly situated institutions, and the respondents had failed to comply with the directions issued in that judgment.

JUDGMENT

Rekha Palli, J. - The present batch of petitions preferred under article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the respondents' decision to return the applications submitted by the petitioner institutes in the year 2008-09 seeking grant of recognition for conducting teacher training courses, without considering the same on merits. It is the petitioners' case that these applications were invited by the respondent no.1 through a public notice, but were returned unactioned, on account of a subsequent ban imposed by the government of Rajasthan on opening of new educational institutes.

Brief factual matrix

2. On 02.10.2008, the respondent no.1/The National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as 'NCTE'), a statutory authority responsible for the regulation and maintenance of norms and standards in the teacher education system, issued a public notice inviting applications for recognition of various teacher training courses, including B.Ed from different states across the country, including the State of Rajasthan. The petitioners being desirous of conducting various courses at their respective educational institutes, submitted their applications along with all the necessary documents and the requisite fees.

3. after the applications were submitted, the Government of Rajasthan vide its letter dated 17.11.2008, recommended to the respondent no.1, not to grant permission for commencement of any new B.Ed/STC/Shiksha Shastri course in the State of Rajasthan for the academic session 2009-10 (hereinafter be referred to as the 'state ban'). Based on this communication, the respondent no.1, vide its letter dated 19.11.2008, directed the respondent no.2/Northern Regional Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'the regional committee') to return all applications.

4. acting on this directive from the respondent no.1, the regional committee/respondent no.2, in its 134th meeting held from 20th-22th November, 2008, decided not to consider any applications for these courses from institutes in Rajasthan for the academic year 2009-10. Consequently, it decided to return all these applications, without processing them on merits.

5. Being aggrieved, some educational institutions preferred writ petitions before the High Court of Rajasthan, assailing the respondents' decision to return the applications on the basis of a subsequent state ban. This batch of petitions was allowed by the High Court on 07.01.2009 with a direction to the respondents to take a final decision whether to process these applications or not, by considering all relevant factors. In issuing these directions, the Court relied on the decision in 'State of Maharashtra vs. Sant Dyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya & Ors,' (2006) 9 SCC 1, wherein the apex Court had upheld the decision of the Bombay High Court permitting opening of new educational institutions in Maharashtra, on the basis of the recognition granted by the NCTE, despite objections from the state government.

6. In compliance with the decision of the High Court of Rajasthan dated 07.01.2009, the respondent no.1 considered the issue afresh and vide its communication dated 27.01.2009, informed the regional committees about its decision not to grant recognition for B.Ed/STC/Shiksha Shastri Courses to any institute in the state of Rajasthan for the academic year 2009-10.

7. This decision of the respondent no.1 was once again assailed before the High Court of Rajasthan by way of a number of petitions, wherein the Court vide its judgment dated 13.08.2009 in 'Sampat STC Mahavidyalya vs State of Rajasthan &Ors.' (2009) SCC OnLine Raj 5627, while declining to interfere with its decision dated 27.01.2009, directed the respondent no. 1 to take a fresh decision for grant of recognition for the next academic session of 2010-11, to the petitioners therein. Even though this decision was assailed by way of an intra Court appeal in 'Dau Baba IT College & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan &Ors.' (2010) SCC OnLine Raj 4550, t