Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATEEK JALAN
College of Education – Appellant
Versus
National Council for Teacher Education – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)
The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners assail an order of the Eastern Regional Committee ["ERC"] of the National Council for Teacher Education ["NCTE"] dated 27.06.2019 withdrawing the petitioner's recognition for conduct of the B.Ed. Course. The petitioners also assail an order of the Appellate Committee of the NCTE dated 22.01.2021, by which the aforesaid order of the ERC was affirmed.
Facts
2. The petitioner institution was established for running a B.Ed. Course in the year 1998, and was granted a recognition order on 06.03.1998. After the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2014 [hereinafter, "2014 Regulations"] came into force, the petitioner was issued a revised recognition order dated 22.05.2015. The revised recognition order was in respect of the petitioner's course for two units of 50 students each, i.e., for a total of 100 students. It inter alia contained the following conditions:
" xxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxx
4. AND WHEREAS, it has been decided to permit the institution to have two basic units of
An institution must comply with the NCTE's built-up area requirements to maintain recognition, and inspection is not obligatory if documentation clearly shows non-compliance.
Compliance with the minimum built-up area requirements is essential for the recognition of teacher education institutions.
Compliance with NCTE Regulations is essential for recognition; failure leads to withdrawal of recognition, as demonstrated in this case.
The appellate authority must consider the documents submitted by the petitioner and make acceptable findings before making a decision on the withdrawal of recognition.
The interpretation of 'temporary structure' versus 'permanent structure' in the context of educational institution regulations must consider regional practices and the overall compliance with built-u....
An institution's clear and unequivocal option under recognition regulations prevents subsequent claims of error in basic unit selection.
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.
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.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
