IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
VIJAY BISHNOI, SUMAN SHYAM, JJ.
Biren Bora, S/o Late Umaram Bora – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And Ors. – Respondents
WA 9 of 2024
Decided on : 23-04-2024
B.Ed. Degree - Appointment Dispute - NCTE Act, 1995 - [NCTE Act, 1995] - The court discussed the validity of the B.Ed. degree obtained by the respondent, the rejection of the college's application for recognition, and the subsequent grant of recognition by the NCTE. The court relied on the principle established in the case of Bhupendra Nath Tripathi, where it was held that even in case of refusal of recognition, the institution offering the course is entitled to award the degree until the end of the academic session. The court also emphasized that the recognition granted by the NCTE would relate back to the date of the institution's application, ensuring that individuals obtaining degrees during the pendency of the application are not disadvantaged.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute arose from the appointment of a Principal at Kherajkhat Senior Secondary School, Lakhimpur, based on the validity of the B.Ed. degree possessed by the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the B.Ed. degree obtained by the respondent was valid, considering the rejection of the college's application for recognition and the subsequent grant of recognition by the NCTE. The court emphasized the principle that the institution offering the course is entitled to award the degree until the end of the academic session, as established in the case of Bhupendra Nath Tripathi.
Issues: Validity of the B.Ed. degree, rejection and subsequent grant of recognition by NCTE, applicability of legal principles from relevant case law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle established in the case of Bhupendra Nath Tripathi, emphasizing that the institution offering the course is entitled to award the degree until the end of the academic session, and the recognition granted by the NCTE would relate back to the date of the institution's application.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was dismissed, upholding the validity of the B.Ed. degree possessed by the respondent.
2. The learned Single Judge has observed that, while entertaining the claim of the respondent No.7/writ petitioner, due hearing shall also be given to the appellant. It is further observed that the requirement of considering the acceptability of the B.Ed. degree of the respondent No.7/writ petitioner be done by the Director within a period of 2(two) months and whatever decision be taken shall be strictly in terms of all applicable laws including the principle of natural justice in respect of all the parties.
3. The brief facts of the case are that, on 14.12.2018, an advertisement was issued inviting application from the eligible candidates for appointment on the post of Principal of Kherajkhat Senior Secondary School, Lakhimpur. The appellant as well as the respondent No.7/writ petitioner have applied pursuant to the said advertisement. However, vide order dated 07.02.2020, the appellant was appointed as the regular Principal of the said school. The claim of the respondent No.7/writ petitioner for appointment on the post of Principal of the said school was negated on the ground that the B.Ed. degree possessed by him is not a valid degree under the law.
4. Being aggrieved with the same, the respondent No.7/writ petitioner preferred WP(C) No.2057/2020 before this Court challenging the appointment of the appellant as the Principal of the Kherajkhat Senior Secondary School as well as the action of the respondent State of not recognizing his B.Ed. degree as valid degree.
5. The aforesaid writ petition, i.e. WP(C) No.2057/2020 came to be disposed of by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 03.12.2020, whereby the Regional Director of Eastern Regional Committee of the NCTE was directed to decide the question regarding the validity of the B.Ed. degree of the respondent No.7/writ petitioner within a period of 3(three) months.
6. Upon receiving an application filed by the respondent No.7/writ petitioner, the matter was taken up by the Eastern Regional Committee in its 289th meeting held on 15.02.2021 and the Committee decided to refer the matter to the Secretary to the Department of Education, Government of Assam and to the Registrar of the Dibrugarh University, who is the concerned affiliating body, to take a decision regarding the validity of the B.Ed. degree of the respondent No.7/writ petitioner.
7. The Secondary Education Department, vide order dated 16.03.2021 has opined that the B.Ed. degree possessed by the respondent No.7/writ petitioner is invalid as per the NCTE Act, 1995. However, the Registrar, Dibrugarh University has communicated to the Regional Director, Eastern Regional Committee, NCTE that the B.Ed. degree possessed by the respondent No.7/writ petitioner be treated as valid.
8. Being aggrieved with the opinion dated 16.03.2021 given by the Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam, the respondent No.7/writ petitioner had filed WP(C) No.3166/2021 before the learned Single Judge which came to be disposed of as observed in the earlier part of this order.
9. Assailing the impugned order dated 05.12.2023, Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the respondent No.7/writ petitioner took admission in the B.Ed. course offered by Bihpuria PGT College in August, 1996 in the academic session 1996-97. However, the application filed by Bihpuria PGT College before the NCTE came to be rejected by the NCTE in December, 1996. It is further contended that though the respondent No.7/writ petitioner appeared in the B.Ed. exami
Adarsh Shiksha Mahavidyalaya & Ors. Vs. Subhash Rahangdale & Ors.
Maa Vaishno Devi Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of UP
National Council for Teacher Education Vs. Venus Public Educational Society
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Bhupendra Nath Tripathi & Ors.
The institution offering the course is entitled to award the degree until the end of the academic session, and the recognition granted by the NCTE would relate back to the date of the institution's a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a B.Ed. degree obtained from an institution, even if unrecognized, would be valid if the course was undertaken in the given year when the reco....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 14 of the NCTE Act and the validity of B.Ed. degrees obtained from an institute prior to its recognition by the NC....
Qualifications obtained from unrecognized institutions prior to the N.C.T.E. Act are valid and should be recognized for employment purposes, as established by the Supreme Court.
Point of Law : Post of Principal of Secondary School - Selection Process - Matter back to Additional Secretary for a fresh consideration by taking into account that in Pranita Sarma judgment last dat....
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.