IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5834 OF 2009 Manganga Shikshan Sanstha Bhimai Ambedkar Adhyapak Vidyalay ...Petitioner Vs. National Council for Teacher s Education, Western Regional Committee & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. A.V. Anturkar wth Mr. Sugandh B. Deshmukh, for the Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Masurkar, Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Mr. Uday Warunjikar for Respondent No.1. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND K.K. TATED,JJ. DATED : 6 th November, 2009. P.C.: Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. The petitioner had applied to Respondent No.1 for recognition of the institution for starting the D.Ed. Course. By communication dated 20th April, 2008 the petitioners were informed that the file of the petitioners would not be processed in view of what has been observed in para.3 of the impugned order. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the order discloses total non-application of mind on the part of the respondents and hence the present petition. Various other contentions have been raised which, in our opinion, need not be considered in view of the order to be passed. 3. A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents NCTE by Dr. Pawan Kumar Sharma. In the said reply it is set out that NCTE called for recommendations of the State Government vide its letter dated 23rd January, 2009. The State Government had not sent any recommendation in reply thereof. This is borne out from the affidavit itself. 4. In para.11 of the petition the Respondent NCTE has set out that the decision taken at the 100th meeting held on December 17/19, 2007. One of the decisions is as under:- If the Government has not communicated any positive or negative remarks within 60 days from the date of issue of the letter from the WRC to the concerned State Government, case will be considered on merit basis . 5. In the instant case from the affidavit which we have referred to earlier and the decision of the NCTE it will be clear that as the State Government has not filed any reply, the matter had to be considered on merits. This admittedly has not been done if the impugned order is considered. 6. The impugned order refers to negative recommendation received from the Maharashtra Government in respect of D.Ed. Course. There is nothing before us to show that the Maharashtra Government had as a policy decision proceeded to advise the NCTE that no D.Ed., Institutions should be recognised in the State of Maharashtra for the academic year 2009-2010 and the reasons in support thereof. 7. For the aforesaid reasons we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for considering the matter de novo. It will be open to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 also consider recommendation of the State Government, if any, while taking a decision. The case of the petitioners now can be considered for the academic year 2010-2011. 8. Rule made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. (K.K. TATED,J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)