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

2021 Supreme(Del) 2455

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRATEEK JALAN, J.
Smt Maniba Mahila Bed College & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
National Council For Teacher Education & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 5788 of 2021
Decided on : 03-06-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate, with Ms. Priti Kumari and Ms.Binisa Mohanty, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of clear and unambiguous communication in the process of seeking recognition under the NCTE Regulations, 2014.

Headnote:

NCTE Regulations - Recognition of Teacher Education Institution - 2014 Regulations - [B.Ed. Course, Recognition Order, Affidavit, Intake] - The court discussed the NCTE Regulations, 2014 and the process for recognition of teacher education institutions. It highlighted the option given to existing institutions to choose between one or two basic units and the requirement for submitting an affidavit in the prescribed format. The court emphasized the importance of clear and unequivocal communication of the institution's choice and rejected the petitioner's claim of a typographical error.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a teacher training institute, sought a revised recognition order for a second basic unit [50 seats] of its B.Ed. course. The institute had initially been granted recognition for an intake of 100 seats and was required to submit compliance affidavits following the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2014. The institute communicated its choice for one basic unit of 50 students, but later sought recognition for the second unit.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the institute's communication clearly and unambiguously indicated its choice for one basic unit of 50 students. It rejected the institute's claim of a typographical error and emphasized the importance of clear and unequivocal communication. The court dismissed the petition and imposed costs on the petitioner.

Issues: The key issue was whether the institute's communication regarding the choice of basic units was clear and unambiguous, or if it was a result of a typographical error.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the institute's communication clearly indicated its choice for one basic unit of 50 students, and rejected the claim of a typographical error. It emphasized the importance of clear and unequivocal communication in such matters.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and costs of Rs. 30,000/- were imposed on the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

PRATEEK JALAN, J.

The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.

CM APPL. 18145/2021 & CM APPL. 18147/2021 (Exemption)

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5788/2021 with CM APPL. 18146/2021 (for direction)

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner assails an order dated 26.09.2019 passed by the Appellate Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education [“NCTE”]. The petitioner also seeks a direction upon the NCTE to issue a revised recognition order for a second basic unit [50 seats] of its B.Ed. course.

2. The petitioner, a teacher training institute, was originally granted recognition by the Western Regional Committee [“WRC”] of the NCTE on 23.04.2005, for an intake of 100 seats. After the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2014 [“2014 Regulations”] came into force, the petitioner and all other existing institutions were required to submit compliance affidavits, following which the NCTE issued revised recognition orders to them.

3. On 24.12.2014, the NCTE issued guidelines to its Regional Committees for processing of pending applications and for existing institutions, alongwith an Explanatory Note. This document has been relied upon in the writ petition, and a copy has been annexed thereto as Annexure P-6. The following provisions of the Explanatory Note are relevant, insofar as the B.Ed. programme of existing institutions is concerned:

    “1. The NCTE Regulations, 2014 contemplate enhanced duration of B.Ed., M.Ed. and B.P.Ed. programmes from one to two years. The existing institutions offering these programmes will be given revised Recognition Order if they choose to come under New Regulations. No fresh application is necessary and they will be issued revised order of recognition w.e.f 2015-2016 provided they furnish the affidavit in the prescribed format. A copy of the revised order shall be endorsed to the affiliating university for their information and record.

The existing teacher education institutions, wherever necessary as per the revised Norms and Standards, shall provide additional built up area, create additional infrastructure, appoint additional staff and furnish additional Reserve Fund per unit per programme by October 31, 2015. However, if the institution is not willing to fulfil the norms prescribed in the New Regulations as mentioned above, its Recognition will automatically become invalid as the old Regulations have already been superceded.

xxxx xxxx xxxx

3. In the new Regulations, the size of one basic unit for B.Ed. has been reduced to 50 from 100. The institutions are eligible to have two basic units of 50 each initially. In order to have two basic units of 50 each, they need to construct additional built up area, appoint additional staff, furnish additional Endowment and Reserve Fund.

The institution shall opt for one or two basic units in the undertaking enclosed with the covering letter. Based on the undertaking. revised recognition order will be issued accordingly. In case the institution opts for two basic units of 50 each, they will be permitted to admit students for two basic units from 2015-2016 onwards, but they shall construct additional built up area. create additional infrastructure and pay additional Endowment and Reserve Fund by October 31, 2015. If they fail to adhere to this condition, the recognition for additional unit will be withdrawn from 2016-17 onwards.

In case the institution does not opt for two basic units and choose to have only one basic unit, they shall admit only 50 students from the academic year 2015-16 onwards.” (Emphasis supplied.)

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid requirements, the petitioners addressed a communication dated 12.01.2015 to the WRC enclosing therewith an affidavit of the same date. The said communication reads as follows:-

    “xxxx xxxx xxxx

Subject: For optimization of one basic unit of 50 students for B.Ed. Programme Code No:

        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
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top