JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order issued by the second respondent herein in Na.Ka.No.1731/E1/2019, dated 28.09.2020, quash the same, and further direct the second respondent herein to approve the admission of all the eligible students in the petitioner institute for the academic year 2020-2021 in pursuance to the recognition granted by the first respondent herein.

1. The petitioner is a Teacher Training Institute which was established during the year 1953-1954. The recognition of the institution was granted by the State Government in 1954. After the formation of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), the institute obtained necessary recognition as per Section 14(3)(a) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 for conducting elementary course training for a duration of two years with an intake of 40 students from the academic year 1998-1999. Subsequently, the intake was increased from 40 to 80 students from the academic year 2002-2003. Originally, the institute was admitting only male students and subsequently, it became a co-educational institute from the academic year 2011-2012.

2. In the last few years, there has been a steady decrease in admission of students in the institute, as the chance for getting employment after being imparted training in the institute, was becoming bleak. In the last academic year 2019-2020, only 18 students were admitted out of the total intake of 80 students.

3. The Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.87, School Education Department, dated 28.05.2019 in which it is stated that any institute which runs with a student strength of less than 30%, not to admit any students in future from the academic year 2020-2021. As per the Government Order, the petitioner institute which had admitted as low as 18 students was directed to give explanation by the second respondent. In response to the show-cause notice, the petitioner institute submitted its explanation on 17.10.2019 stating that they had addressed a letter to the first respondent for reducing the intake from 80 to 40 students and requested the second respondent to consider the fact that the petitioner institute is prepared to withdraw the total intake from 80 students to 40 students.

4. The second respondent, however, was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the petitioner institute, therefore, by proceedings dated 07.03.2020 directed the petitioner not to admit any students from the academic year 2020-2021 and appropriate steps will be taken for closure of the institution. As against the said proceedings, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P. (MD)No.7991 of 2020. When the matter came up for hearing before this Court, on behalf of the first respondent, it was represented that the request of the petitioner institute was being considered for reducing intake form 80 to 40 students. On such submission being made by the learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent, this Court, by order dated 04.08.2020 set aside the proceedings of the second respondent dated 07.03.2020 and remitted the matter back to the second respondent for fresh consideration and pass appropriate order by providing an opportunity to the petitioner and also directed the petitioner institute to furnish all the documents.

5. In the meanwhile, the petitioner institute submitted a letter on 05.08.2020 to be included in the forthcoming counselling for admitting students for the academic year 2020-2021. In the meanwhile, the first respondent vide proceedings dated 17.08.2020 communicated withdrawal of the additional intake of 40 students from the petitioner institute on the basis of the resolution dated 23.07.2020 and 24.07.2020.

6. While matter stood thus, the second respondent once again by its letter dated 28.09.2020 rejected the request of the petitioner for admission of students for the ac