The recognition once granted can only be subject to cancellation under Section 17 of the Act, and the NRC can take a final decision based on the institution's reply to the SCN.

JUDGMENT :

(Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.) :—

1. The issue involved in both the writ petitions is common, therefore, the same are being decided by a common order.

2. The petitioner-institution is being run by Doon Valley Trust and was granted recognition by National Council for Teacher Education (in short ‘NCTE’) under the provisions of NCTE Act, 1993 (in short ‘Act of 1993’) vide orders dated 16.08.2004 and 29.09.2006. Vide order dated 16.08.2004, the petitioner-institution was granted recognition for 100 seats for B.Ed. course and vide order dated 29.09.2006, the petitioner-institution was granted recognition for an additional intake of 200 seats for B.Ed. course.

3. It is the case of the petitioner-institution that since the name of the petitioner-institution was not displayed by the NCTE on its official website as a recognised institute, therefore, the petitioner-institution had to approach this court in W.P.(C) 1679/2023, seeking appropriate relief.

4. On 09.02.2023, the said writ petition was taken up for hearing and notice was accepted on behalf of NCTE through its Standing Counsel and time was given to seek instructions. The matter was thereafter, taken up for hearing on 27.02.2023 and the learned counsel appearing for NCTE was granted further time to place on record the decision with respect to the prayer made in the writ petition. The matter was accordingly adjourned for 13.04.2023 and is now listed for consideration along with W.P.(C) 4854/2023.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-institution states that instead of taking any decision in terms of the prayer made in W.P.(C) 1679/2023, the Northern Regional Committee (in short ‘NRC’) issued a Show Cause Notice (in short ‘SCN’) dated 21.03.2023 under Section 17 of the Act of 1993, requiring the petitioner-institution to submit various documents. He, therefore, states that the NRC has not acted in a fair manner and is unnecessarily harassing the petitioner-institution to avoid the appropriate decision being taken in pursuance to the prayer made in the earlier writ petition i.e. W.P.(C) 1679/2023. He, further submits that as on date there is no final decision taken by the NCTE in terms of the Act of 1993 and therefore, the NRC cannot withhold the name of the petitioner-institution from the list of recognised institutions. He also states that the decision taken by the NRC and communicated in the impugned SCN dated 21.03.2023, is to the effect that admission of the students for the Academic Session 2023-2024 will be subject to final outcome of the SCN, which is without jurisdiction. According to him, even under the proviso of Section 17 of the Act of 1993, if any decision of withdrawal of recognition is taken, the same shall have to be given effect from the next Academic Year and in no case the admission for the Academic Year 2023-2024 can be made subject to the final outcome of the SCN. He, therefore, states that such an observation of the SCN creates an impression amongst the student community that the petitioner-institution is not properly maintained and the same is suffering final proceedings on NRC's end.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-NCTE opposes the prayer and he states that the NRC is fully competent to issue the SCN, calling upon the petitioner-institution to submit the explanation if the NRC finds that the college is lacking sufficient infrastructure or finds violation of the provisions of the Act of 1993, Rules and the applicable regulations made there under. He, therefore, states that W.P.(C) 4853/2023 is not maintainable against the SCN and in W.P.(C)1679/2023, no further orders are required to be passed as the NRC has specifically noted that the petitioner-institution is lacking sufficient infrastructure. According to him, unless the deficiencies pointed out in the SCN are fulfilled, no directions can be given to include the name of the petitioner-institution in the list of recognised institutes.

7. I have heard learned counsel