Hon'ble ASOPA, J.—By these writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the withholding of recognition of S.T.C./B.Ed. by the National Council for Teachers Education (in short 'N.C.T.E.').

2. Out of the aforesaid writ petitions, in S.B.C.W.P.No.12050/2008 Neelkanth Education Society vs. N.C.T.E. special leave petition was filed against the interim order dated 27.11.2008 wherein the Supreme Court on 30.1.2009 requested the High Court to dispose of the writ petition as expeditiously as possible and it was directed that pending disposal of the same, the interim order passed by the High Court shall not be given effect to.

3. In view of the above, all the connected cases have been clubbed together and are being decided together.

4. By all these writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking appropriate writ, order or direction for release of the recognition order for the year 2008-2009 which was withheld by the respondent N.C.T.E. vide its meeting dated 20-21st September, 2008 on the ground of some objections of minor nature whereas recognition orders were issued in respect of 80 colleges. The petitioners have prayed for issuance of mandamus to release the recognition order.

5. It is also pertinent to mention here that on 24.10.2008 when a submission was made by the counsel for the N.C.T.E. that the next meeting is scheduled to be held on 31.10.2008, interim orders were passed to allow the petitioners for participation in the counselling on provisional basis subject to the decision of the writ petition and the cases of the petitioners were directed to be considered even after 31.10.2008 from the waiting list in case approval is granted by the N.C.T.E.

6. It is further relevant to mention here that in one of the writ petitions – SBCWP No.11699/2008 Shri Ana Sagar STC College vs. Union of India and others, there was direction of the Delhi High Court to try to dispose of the application by 7.9.2008 but the order was not issued even after the meeting dated 20-21st September, 2008 although recognition for STC was granted to the 80 colleges.

7. The leading facts are taken from SBCWP No.11699/2008 Shri Ana Sagar STC College vs. Union of India and others wherein there are some additional facts of Delhi High Court judgment dated 1.8.2008 in W.P.(C) No.5252/2008 Shri Aanasagar STC College vs. N.C.T.E.

8. The petitioner Institution was granted recognition for STC for the academic session 2007-2008 vide order dated 12.10.2007. On 19.2.2008, the petitioner applied for recognition of the additional intake of students for STC. When the recognition was not granted, the petitioner Institution filed Writ Petition No.5252/2008 before the Delhi High Court and the respondents were directed to try to dispose of the application by 7.9.2008 so that the academic session may be started. On 8.8.2008, the petitioner Institution submitted representation for grant of recognition. On 5.9.2008, the letter of intent seeking consent from the petitioner Institution for inspection was issued and the respondents sought certain information regarding approval as to the plans, FDR, affidavit and details of the website along with mandatory disclosure form. On 8.9.2008, a letter was issued by the respondents to carry out inspection which was carried out. The matter of the petitioner Institution was placed in the 132nd meeting of the N.R.C. (Northern Regional Committee). After inspection, the orders granting approval to about 80 colleges were issued under Regulation No.7(9) and 7(11) of the National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2007 (in short `the Regulations of 2007'). Although the petitioner Institution fulfilled all the requirements but its name was not mentioned in the list of 80 colleges which was published on Internet. On enquiry, the petitioner Institution came to know that although recognition was granted but the formal orders were withheld. Thereafter, notice of demand for justice was given but no heed was paid and t