Back
2020 Supreme(P&H) 1179
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Sudhir Mittal, J.
Janta Kalyan Samiti Administrative, Rewari, Haryana - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And Others - Respondent
CWP No.24910 of 2016 (O&M)
Decided On : 22-01-2020
Mr. Anil Malhotra, Advocate and Mr. Ranjit Malhotra, Advocate, for the Appellant None for the Respondent. No.1. Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate, for the Respondent. No.2 & 3.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the requirement of affiliation with another board for secondary and senior secondary education, and withdrawal of accreditation without providing specific details regarding lack of infrastructure, are illogical, illegal, and against the principles of natural justice.
Headnote:
Affiliation - Education - [NIOS Act, Section 4(1)(h), Section 10(2)(d)] - The court discussed the requirement of affiliation with a recognized board for secondary and senior secondary education and held that the insistence upon affiliation with another board is neither legal nor logical. The court emphasized that NIOS is at par with other national and state boards and that the requirement of affiliation with another board is illogical and illegal. The court also highlighted the necessity of providing specific details regarding lack of infrastructure before withdrawing accreditation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a registered Society, was granted provisional accreditation by NIOS for running educational courses. Subsequently, the accreditation was withdrawn due to alleged inadequate infrastructure and non-affiliation with a recognized board.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the requirement of affiliation with another board for secondary and senior secondary education was illogical and illegal. It also held that withdrawal of accreditation without providing specific details regarding lack of infrastructure was against the principles of natural justice.
Issues: The issues revolved around the requirement of affiliation with a recognized board, alleged inadequate infrastructure, and the principles of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the NIOS Act and the principles of natural justice. It emphasized that NIOS is at par with other national and state boards, and withdrawal of accreditation should be based on specific details regarding lack of infrastructure.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order withdrawing accreditation was quashed. However, respondent No.2 was given the liberty to issue a fresh show cause notice regarding lack of infrastructure with requisite details.
JUDGMENT
Sudhir Mittal, J. (Oral) - The petitioner is a registered Society established on 31.03.1976. Sometime in the year 1989-1990, it set up a centre for open learning and vide order dated 13.07.1990, respondent No.2-National Institute of Open Schooling (hereinafter referred to as NIOS) granted it provisional accreditation for a period of one year to enroll students for Bridge, Secondary and Senior Secondary Courses. Accreditation No.050001 was given. Thereafter, two more accreditation have been granted to facilities run by the petitioner, one for vocational training and another for open basic education. Although, the accreditation dated13.07.1990 was provisional and was for a period of one year only, respondent No.2 never asked the petitioner to either get it renewed or to get the same finalized. It continued to provide the necessary support to the centres of learning set up by the petitioner.
2. On 20.08.2015, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner regarding the centre running the secondary and senior secondary courses, asking it to show cause why the accreditation be not withdrawn for 'inadequate infrastructure' and 'non-affiliation with any recognized board'. An interim reply dated 26.08.2015 was submitted on behalf of the petitioner wherein it was submitted that affiliation to any other recognized board was not essential and that relevant documents/details regarding lack of infrastructure be provided. In response thereto, a communication dated 23.09.2015 was sent by respondent No.2 informing the petitioner that in an inspection carried out in February, 2013, the infrastructural facilities were found inadequate and that as per norms of NIOS, a study centre must have affiliation with a recognized board. However, the report of the inspection carried out in February, 2013 was not given nor any further details regarding the lack of infrastructure were provided. Thus, the petitioner filed his final reply dated 01.10.2015 inter alia stating that the allegation regarding lack of infrastructure is vague as no details have been provided. In fact, respondent No.2 has permitted increase of the number of students and thus, there cannot be any lack of infrastructure. Apart from that, there is no necessity of obtaining affiliation with any other board as NIOS itself is a board established by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development and the certificates issued by it are recognized allover the country. Thereafter, without granting an opportunity of personal hearing, the accreditation of the centre imparting secondary and senior secondary education was withdrawn vide letter dated 10.11.2016. A perusal of the said letter shows that the reason given for withdrawal of the accreditation was that the petitioner had failed to fulfill the norms for accreditation.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has laid great stress on the issue regarding affiliation to a recognized board. He has argued that NIOS itself is a board of school education set up by the Government of India and that the certificates issued by the said board are recognized throughout the country at par with the certificates issued by the CBSE or any other state board or the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination (CISCE). Thus, insistence upon affiliation is neither legal nor logical. He has read out in extenso from the prospectus issued by NIOS for the year 2016-2017 in which, it has been publicly represented that it is one of the three national boards, the other two being CBSE and CISCE. It has also been represented that certificates issued by the said organization are accepted for higher education and Government jobs. Further, it has been represented that it is vested with the authority to impart pre-university programs, conduct examinations and certification thereof and that it is also following the national curriculum framework brought out by National Council of Education Research and Training (NCERT). For this reason, it is at par
