IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.
Awdhesh Pratap Singh Vishwavidyalaya Department of Physical Education, District-rewa-486003, Madhya Pradesh Through Its Registrar – Appellant
Versus
National Council For Teacher Education G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 – Respondent
W.P.(C) 5340 of 2023 & CM APPL 20859 of 2023
Decided On : 28-08-2023
NCTE Act - Recognition of University - 14, 17, 18 - The court discussed the NCTE Act, 1993, specifically sections 14, 17, and 18, and emphasized the importance of proof of service of the Show Cause Notice, violation of principles of natural justice, and the mandate of the NCTE Act, 1993 in reaching its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a State University, sought relief against the withdrawal of recognition for its B.P.Ed. course and the dismissal of its appeal by the Appellate Authority of NCTE. The petitioner argued that the withdrawal was based on erroneous grounds and without proper service of the Final Show Cause Notice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the withdrawal of recognition and dismissal of the appeal were in violation of the principles of natural justice and the NCTE Act, 1993, as there was no proof of service of the Final Show Cause Notice. The court set aside the impugned decision and directed a fresh consideration by the WRC.
Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice, compliance with NCTE Regulations, 2014, and the importance of proof of service of the Show Cause Notice.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of proof of service of the Show Cause Notice, violation of principles of natural justice, and the mandate of the NCTE Act, 1993 in reaching its decision.
Final Decision: The impugned decision to withdraw recognition and the dismissal of the appeal were set aside, and the case was directed to be considered afresh by the WRC.
ORDER
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J. (Oral)--The petitioner in the instant petition prays for the following reliefs:
a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ or order quashing & setting aside the impugned withdrawal order dated 23.01.2019 issued by WRC and also the Appeal Order dated 26.09.2019 passed by Appellate Authority of NCTE; and
b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction to the Respondent No.2 to restore the recognition of petitioner university for B.P.Ed. Course with Two Basic Units (100 Seats); and
c) issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ or order or direction to the respondent No.2 to reflect/display the name of petitioner university in the list/category of recognised institutions for conducting B.P.Ed. Course on their website and to inform the Department of Higher Education, Government of Madhya Pradesh regarding recognized status of petitioner university enabling inclusion and participation in the counselling & admission process for admission in B.P.Ed. Course; and
d) pass any such other orders/directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case".
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a State University established and incorporated under the Madhya Pradesh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1973'). The petitioner was granted recognition by the Western Regional Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'WRC') on 19.07.1999 for the course of Bachelor of Physical Education (hereinafter referred to as 'B.P.Ed.') with an annual intake of 50 students.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, further, submits that after notification of the NCTE Regulations, 2014, the revised recognition order was also issued to the petitioner on 20.05.2015. For the compliance of the conditions of the said revised order, an initial Show Cause Notice was issued on 01.02.2017, which was duly replied to by the petitioner. It is further submitted that the Final Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioner for further compliances to be made, however, the same was not received by the petitioner and the impugned decision of withdrawal of recognition dated 23.01.2019 has been taken without verification of the service of the Final Show Cause Notice.
4. He also submits that the petitioner took the categorical stand before the appellate committee of the National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as 'NCTE'), that the Final Show Cause Notice was not received by it and without dealing with the said aspect, the appeal has also been dismissed vide order dated 26.09.2019.
5. He has placed reliance on the decisions of this court passed in the cases of Aireen Institution Of Education v. National Council For Teacher Education & Anr., 2022:DHC:2708; Yuva Rashtrasant Bhayyuji Maharaj B.Ed Womens College v. National Council For Teacher Education & Anr., W.P.(C) 16576/2022 and the order dated 19.12.2022 in Sidh Laharnath Womens S College Of Education v. National Council For Teacher Education & Anr., W.P.(C) 16927/2022 to supplement his stand that a decision cannot be taken in the absence of proof of service of the Show Cause Notice on the institutions.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on the erroneous ground that it does not possess the requisite faculty members on a regular basis. In furtherance of his argument, he submits that the petitioner had appointed the requisite faculty and had also communicated the said compliance to the respondents vide letters dated 18.06.2022 and 21.06.2022, which should have been considered by the respondents.
7. He has also placed reliance on various decisions of this court such as the decision in the case of Rambha College Of Education v. National Council For Teacher Education And Anr., 2017:DHC:1084 alongwith the order dated 09.08.2017 passed in National Council For
The importance of proof of service of the Show Cause Notice and the violation of principles of natural justice influenced the court's decision.
The appellate authority must consider the documents submitted by the petitioner and make acceptable findings before making a decision on the withdrawal of recognition.
Section 17 of the NCTE Act empowers the Regional Committee of the NCTE to withdraw recognition granted to an institution offering course or training in teacher education, for reasons to be recorded i....
Administrative action requiring withdrawal of recognition must adhere to principles of natural justice, including adequate notice and opportunity to respond, failing which the action may be deemed in....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an institution should be given a reasonable opportunity to address deficiencies before withdrawal of recognition, and additional reasons for w....
Regulatory bodies play a crucial role in maintaining educational standards, but the court has the authority to set aside orders and allow re-inspection if the petitioner claims to have fulfilled all ....
The court emphasized the importance of proper consideration of deficiencies and explanations in the withdrawal of recognition under the NCTE Act, and the requirement for a fresh inspection and issuan....
Recognition of educational institutions cannot be withdrawn without considering subsequent compliance with regulations, ensuring procedural fairness in the evaluation process.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.