Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Ker) 593

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J.
Indu Memorial Teachers Training Centre and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
National Council for Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, (Near Sector-10 Metro Station) Dwarka, New Delhi-110075, Represented By Its Member Secretary and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) NO. 12142 of 2021
Decided On : 30-07-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sajith Kumar V., Vivek A.V., Godwin Joseph, Advs.
For the Respondent: Dr. Abraham P.Meachinkara, SC, NCTE, Sri. P.C. Sasidharan, Sc, Advs.

Point of Law: Recognition Of Institutions Offering Course Of Training In Teacher Education – Inspection - Only infringement noted is regarding non-shifting of premises and failure of petitioners to prefer a formal application for shifting - Appellate committee was under impression that petitioner was still functioning its institution and that they had failed to shift to its own premises within a period of three years.

Headnote:
National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 - Section 18, 2(c), 12, 14, 16, 17 and 32(2) - National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2009 - Regulations 7 and 8 - Recognition of Teacher Education Programmes and Permission to Start New Course or Training) Regulations, 2002 - Recognition of Institutions and Permissions to Start New Course or Training) Regulations, 1995 - Indu Memorial Teachers Training Centre - Regional Committee - Conditions for grant of recognition - Change of premises, prior approval of Regional Committee - Affiliating body to grant affiliation after recognition or permission by the Council Seeking order or direction commanding 1st respondent to extend recognition to Petitioner Institute in view of compliance of all requirements including prescribed application with fees for shifting of building as expeditiously as possible - To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding 2nd respondent to conduct Inspection in terms of NCTE Regulations at their Kuzhalmannam campus as expeditiously as possible - Whether 1st petitioner Institution had complied with conditions mentioned in revised recognition order.
Finding of the Court :
There will be a direction to the respondents to process application after conducting an inspection in terms of provisions of NCTE Act, 1993 and Regulations of 2014 to ascertain as to whether institution conforms to Act, Rules and Regulations - Change may be permitted to a site which, if applied initially, would have qualified for establishment of an institution as per specified norms of Council - As derecognition or withdrawal of recognition of a recognised institution is a drastic measure as it would result in dislocating students, teachers and staff, said measure will have to be taken with great circumspection. In case on hand, I am of the opinion that withdrawal without carrying out an inspection as to whether petitioner had shifted institution cannot be sustained. Court find that petitioner has already filed an application for shifting of premises, appending all relevant documents and inspection fee.
Result: Order accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

Indu Memorial Teachers Training Centre, the 1st petitioner herein, is an Institution recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education to conduct B.Ed Course at Nemmeni, Palakkad. The 2nd petitioner herein is the Principal of the College. They have approached this Court being aggrieved by Ext.P9 order passed by the respondents withdrawing the recognition granted to the petitioner for conducting B.Ed Course for two years duration with effect from the next academic session. Though the aforesaid order was challenged by the petitioners by preferring an appeal under Section 18 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (NCTE) (‘the Act’ for the sake of brevity), the same stands dismissed by Ext.P1 order. The aforesaid order is also under challenge.

2. A thumbnail sketch of the facts are as follows :

The 1st petitioner Institute was granted recognition by the NCTE to commence B.Ed courses at Nemmeni, Palakkad by Ext.P2 order dated 15.07.2006. As per the said order, recognition was granted to commence and conduct Secondary (B.Ed) Course of 1-year duration from the academic session 2006-2007. In the said order, it was mentioned that the institution has made arrangements for conducting the course in rented premises and that they have acquired the land for setting up the Teacher Education Institution. Recognition was accordingly granted by imposing a condition that the 1st petitioner shall shift to its own premises/building within three years from the date of recognition.

3. According to the petitioner, though the Southern Regional Committee, the 2nd respondent herein, had recognized the courses for the academic year 2006-2007, the 1st petitioner was not in a position to commence the course as they were yet to receive affiliation from the 3rd respondent University. The Syndicate of the University in its meeting held on 05.11.2007 considered the question of granting affiliation and decided to grant provisional affiliation to the 1st petitioner for the year 2007-2008 with an intake of 100 students. The management was required to abide by the Rules, Regulations and Orders issued by the NCTE/Govt./University from time to time. Since W.P.(C) No.11019/2007 was pending before this Court, the provisional affiliation was granted subject to the result of the writ petition. Ext.P3 is the order issued by the 3rd respondent as per which provisional affiliation was granted.

4. The petitioners contend that by the time, inspection was conducted by the 3rd respondent University, the petitioners’ Institute had completed the construction of its permanent premises/buildings at Kuzhalmannam, Palakkad District, and had shifted the premises from Nemmeni. They were under the impression that the condition as regards the shifting of the premises to the permanent building as stipulated in Ext.P2 stood complied as the courses had only commenced from the new premises. However, it is admitted that the petitioner had not remitted the requisite fees with the NCTE and neither had submitted a formal request for change from the rented premises to their own permanent building.

5. In the year 2014, the NCTE came out with the National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition, Norms and Procedure), 2014 in supersession of 2009 Regulations and the Institute was required to follow the revised norms. Ext.P4 order was issued to the petitioner on 15.05.2015, pointing out that the requirement to shift the premises to its own building/property as required under the formal recognition order has not been complied with by the 1st petitioner. It was also stated in the order that the NCTE has decided to permit the Institution to have two basic units of 50 students each, subject to production of all documents relating to land, building, encumbrance certificate, land use certificate, building plan, approved staff lists and documents pertaining to shifting to own premises before the Southern Regional Committee (SRC) by 31.07.2015, and they were also cautioned tha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(Ker) 593

Cases Referred (2)