The NCTE Act mandates that affiliation must follow recognition, and the power to determine recognition lies with the NCTE. Any action for violation of conditions should be taken only by the NCTE, and the University cannot override the NCTE's power in determining recognition and affiliation.

Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.

1. This petition seeks quashing of order dated 17.8.2007, Annexure P.20 passed by the Punjabi University, Patiala, cancelling affiliation granted to the petitioner. Further consequential relief has also been sought.

2. Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an educational institution, granted recognition by the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) under the provisions of National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (in short, NCTE Act) after due inspection with reference to parameters laid down under the Act. Recognition was granted vide letter dated 25.7.2006, Annexure P. 2 under section 14 of the Act, for starting B.Ed. course of 2006-07 with an annual intake of 100 students. However, certain observations were made in the order of recognition which was a conditional one, namely that duly selected staff with requisite qualification will be appointed before the commencement of the academic session within 21 days from the date of issue of the order. The staff will be selected by a duly constituted selection committee. This was followed by letter dated 31.7.2006, Annexure P. 3 granting temporary affiliation by the Punjabi University, Patiala. As per norms under the National Council for Teachers Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations 2005 (in short, `the Regulations), the College is required to have 2500 square meters of land with 1500 square meters of built area. The petitioner already had 5 acres of land with built area of 2600 square yards. The NCTE had given extension upto the session 2009-10 under the regulations and allowed non-NET/SLET qualified lecturers till then. The Principal is allowed to be appointed on contract basis out of Professors/Readers. On 28.7.2006, Selection Committee constituted by the University appointed five NET qualified lecturers but no other eligible lecturer being available, the petitioner appointed 4 lecturers on ad hoc basis who were not NET qualified, which was permissible upto the year 2009-10. Advertisement dated 17.9.2006 was issued for inviting applications for the posts of Principal and lecturers. Since the University nominee did not come, interview could not be held on 13.11.2006. The petitioner appointed four regular lecturers and four ad hoc lecturers. Another advertisement dated 5.12.2006 was issued but no response was received from the University. The College was not under an obligation to associate a nominee of the University for selection of its staff in view of law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, AIR 2003 SC 355 : [2002(6) SLR 627 (SC)], Islamic Academy of Education and another v. State of Karnataka and others, AIR 2003 SC 3724 and PA Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2005 SC 3226.

3. The petitioner-Institution was included in the counselling conducted for admission to the B.Ed. course for the session 2006-07 and 100 students were allotted to the college who completed the course and out of 100 students, 98 appeared and all passed. 97 were placed in first division.

4. For the session 2007-08, the petitioner applied to the University for affiliation and though, the petitioner-college was included in the prospectus for conducting Joint Entrance Test for 2007-08, vide letter dated 13.6.2007, Annexure P.9, fine of Rs. 8 laes was imposed on the petitioner-college for deficiencies for not having regular Principal, regular teachers and website which was illegal. Action for violation of provisions of the Act could be taken only by the NCTE under section 17 of the Act.

5. The petitioner-college pointed out that deficiencies pointed were non- existent. The website was functional since 28.4.2006 and was accessible on the internet. Time for appointment of regular principal and regular lecturers had been extended by the NCTE itself. Five regular lecturers and four ad hoc lecturers had already been appointed. Some of the lecturers had left the college and the posts were re-a