Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 965

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Jasmeet Singh, J
Kalra College Of Education Kud Patnitop – Appellant
Versus
National Council For Teacher Education – Respondent
W.P.(C) 141/2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Akhilesh K. Srivastava, Archana Joshi, Rajnandini Chaturvedi
For the Respondents: Mohinder J S Rupal, Hardik Rupal, Aishwarya Malhotra, Tripta Sharma

The High Court may issue a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution to direct a statutory body to dispose of a pending appeal within a time-bound manner, especially when time-sensitive academic admission processes are affected.

Headnote:The petitioner moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to hear a pending statutory appeal filed on 22.10.2025. The facts indicate that the petitioner sought recognition to increase its intake capacity for a B.Ed. programme from 50 to 100 students. Despite receiving initial recognition for 50 seats, the petitioner sought an increased intake, pending adjudication before the appellate authority. The Court, acknowledging that university counseling processes were underway, found it appropriate to intervene to ensure the timely disposal of the appeal. The central issue was whether the statutory authority could be directed to expedite the hearing of a pending appeal to facilitate academic admission processes. The Court reasoned that given the impending admission schedule for the academic session 2025-2027, the interest of justice required the appellate body to hear the matter without delay, ensuring procedural fairness through the grant of a personal hearing. The Court directed the respondent to decide the pending appeal within a period of two weeks, subject to providing the petitioner a personal hearing, and communicated the result accordingly.

Table of Content
1. overview of the petition for expeditious disposal of a pending statutory appeal regarding institutional intake capacity. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. judicial intervention to expedite statutory appellate processes in the interest of academic timelines. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)

O R D E R

07.01.2026

CM APPL. 724/2026

Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 141/2026

1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

“(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction for directing respondent no. 1 to decide the pending statutory appeal dt. 22.10.2025 filed by the petitioner proposing an increase in the intake capacity of B.Ed. programme from 50 to 100 seats in accordance with law expeditiously in a time bound manner.”

2. Mr. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner had submitted an application seeking recognition for B.Ed course for two units (100 Students). The NRC i.e., respondent No. 2, issued a Letter of Intent dated 27.05.2025 to the petitioner.

3. Subsequently, vide recognition order dated 01.09.2025, the NRC granted recognition to the petitioner for B.Ed. course for (One Unit) an intake of 50 students. After that the NRC, NCTE issued a Corrigendum dated 03.09.2025 regarding paragraph No. 5 of the recognition order dated 01.09.2025.

4. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed statutory appeal proposing an increase in the intake capacity of B.Ed. programme from 50 to 100 seats. As per the petitioner, the appeal of the petitioner is pending with respondent No. 1.

5. The petitioner has only prayed that the appeal of the petitioner may be heard and decided, as the University of Jammu has issued notification for the counselling for the admission in B.Ed Course for the academic session 2025-2027.

6. For the said reasons, issue notice to the respondents.

7. Ms. Malhotra, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and seeks time to obtain instructions.

8. In view of the facts as mentioned above and in view of the prayers sought by the petitioner, it is directed that the appeal of the petitioner be heard and decided (if it has not been decided) within a period of 2 weeks from today.

9. The petitioner shall be granted personal hearing before deciding the appeal and the decision shall be communicated to the petitioner/ counsel of the petitioner.

10. The petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 965

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIJasmeet Singh, JKalra College Of Education Kud Patnitop – AppellantVersusNational Council For Teacher Education – RespondentW.P.(C) 141/2026

The High Court may issue a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution to direct a statutory body to dispose of a pending appeal within a time-bound manner, especially when time-sensitive academic admission processes are affected.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Jasmeet Singh, J
Kalra College Of Education Kud Patnitop – Appellant
Versus
National Council For Teacher Education – Respondent
W.P.(C) 141/2026