IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9144 of 2008 Between: 1 Kadiri Subba Rayudu (K.S.R.) Educational Society, D.No.16/374, D.C. Road, Kadapa, Rep. by its Secretary K. Nagendra Kiran S/o. K.N. Prasad. 2 Prasad College of Education D.No.16/374, D.C. Road, Kadapa, Rep. by its Secretary K. Nagendra Kiran S/o. K.N. Prasad. 3 K. Nagendra Kiran S/o. K.N. Prasad D.No.16/374, D.C. Road, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1 Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi, rep. by its Member Secretary. 2 National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Souther Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Bangalore rep. by its Regional Director. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, one more particularly in the nature of a "Writ of Certiorari" (i) Calling for the records relating to the orders of the 1st respondent issued in Proceedings No.F.No.89-94/2007- Appeal/71232, dated 07.09.2007 in confirming the orders of the 2nd respondent issued in proceedings No.F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2006-07/1144 Dated 19.04.2007 and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of NCTE Act, 1993 and the regulations made thereunder (ii) And pass such other order or ordes Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.NIRANJAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.ADINARAYANA RAO (SC FOR N.C.T.E) The Court made the following : ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO.9144 OF 2008 O R D E R; This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners 3 in number with a prayer to issue writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of a writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to the orders of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) in proceedings No.F.No.89-94/2007-Appeal/71232 dated 07.9.2007 in confirming the orders of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) - second respondent issued in proceedings No.F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed./2006-07/1144 dated 19.4.2007 and quash the same. Petitioner No.1 K.Nagendra Kiran, who is the third petitioner, has sworn to the writ affidavit. The writ affidavit, in brief, is that the petitioner No.1 herein is a society registered under A.P.Societies Registration Act, 2001. It has been formed with the object of promoting different sections of the society by establishing educational institutions. In accomplishment of the object of the society, a college of education for imparting training in B.Ed course at B.C.Road, Kadapa is proposed to be established. An application has been submitted to the National Council of Teacher Education as required under National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition of Norms & Procedure) Regulations, 2005. An inspection team inspected the premises of the society and found it suitable. The Southern Region Committee –first respondent rejected the permission on the ground that leased building is not suitable for B.Ed programee as per NCTE norms. The petitioners assailed the order by filing an appeal before the National Council for Teacher Education. That appeal came to be rejected. Hence, this writ petition with the prayer stated supra. Notice before admission came to be issued on 24.4.2008. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the appellate authority without applying the contents of V.T.Report proceeded to reject the appeal and therefore, the order passed by the appellate authority- first respondent is to be set aside. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the inspection team have taken VCD and as per the VCD, the leased building is not suitable for B.Ed programmee and therefore the order passed by the Primary Authority and the appellate authority are legal and proper and the same are not required to be interfered. The Primary Authority rejected the application on the ground that as per the VCD, the lease building is not suitable for B.Ed programme as per NCTE Programmees. Whereas, the appellate authority rejected the appeal after considering the oral submission and perusing the records of the case and VT report. The VT report finds place in pages 40 and 41 of the material papers. The remarks of the VT members read as hereunder: “The institution is functioning in a leased (30 years) permanent building with a built up area of 1501.79 sq.mts within a land area of 759.3 sq.mt. One part of the building is three storied and the rest of it single storied. The building provides 4 class rooms 540 sq.ft. each, 2 halls 1360 sq.ft each, 7(seven) labs 520 sq.ft each and a library and reading room with 870 sq.ft. Principal’s room, staff room, office room, a store room have the required space. Separate waiting rooms are provided for boys and girls. All rooms are well ventilated. All these rooms are well furnished with required number of and type of furniture. The reading room provided 30 seating outdoor games facilities are provided. The library has 3048 volumes, 8 journals and 9 encyclopedia. The two science labs are well equipped with apparatus, chemicals, special models and charts suitable for Bed curricular transaction. ET lab and computer lab are equipped with hardwares, softwares, psychology lab with essential instruments – all adequate for the proposed course. Apart from the social science, physical education lab materials are all provided. The instructional inputs are adequate. The management has selected 8(1+7) qualified factulty members for appointment. Supporting and administrative staff are also selected. The institution is located in an area free from pollution and has conveyance access to various destinations. The arrangements made by the management in the form of space, procurement of books and lab material identification of human resources clearly demonstrates sincerity and preparedness for running the proposed course.” Apparently there is nothing adverse against the petitioners in the VT report. But the appellate authority proceeded on the premise that VT report is against the petitioners. The ground for rejection of the appeal is contrary to the observations made by the visiting Team in its report. It indicates misappreciation of the material brought on record by the appellate authority. Hence, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the order passed by the lower court and remanding the matter back to the appellate authority for passing appropriate order after putting on notice to the parties within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J 23rd June, 2008. PNV To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO.9144 OF 2008 23rd JUNE,2008