HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13539 of 2009 Date: 08.10.2009 Between: Hazarath Ameeruddin College of Education, Yedavalli, Giddalur, Prakasam District Rep., by its Joint Secretary. … Petitioner And The Chairman, National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi and 5 others. … respondents HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13539 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner is a College of Education established in the year 2003-04 at Yedavalli Village, Giddalur, Prakasam District. The said institution was accorded recognition by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) on 13.02.2004. It is not in dispute that at the time of grant of recognition the petitioner– institution made fixed deposits of a duration of five years in a Nationalised Bank for Rs.5 lakhs towards Endowment Fund and another Rs.3 lakhs towards Reserve Fund in terms of NCTE Financial Management Regulation. While so, the 2nd respondent-Regional Director of Southern Regional Committee of NCTE, by letter dated 12.06.2009 called upon the petitioner-institution to submit the original Fixed Deposit Receipts pertaining to Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund stating that henceforth, the original Fixed Deposit Receipts would be maintained by the Office of the Southern Regional Committee. It was also stated in the said letter that in the event of failure to submit Fixed Deposit Receipts, the recognition would be withheld with effect from 2009-2010. In the said letter, the petitioner was also called upon to furnish the following documents on or before 10.07.2009. a. Copy of Land documents (attested by Notary) b. Approved building plan. c. Building Completion Certificate. d. Land Usage Certificate. e. Encumbrance Certificate. f. Affidavit in the prescribed format g. Staff details in prescribed format. Aggrieved by the said action of the 2nd respondent, the present writ petition is filed contending inter alia that there is no need to continue the fixed deposits after completion of the initial period of five years and at any rate, it is not necessary to keep the fixed deposit receipts with the respondents. It is also contended that the production of “land use certificate” by the petitioner institution under the A.P. Agricultural Land (Conversion of Non- Agricultural Purposes ) Act, 2006 (for short, ‘the Act’) cannot be insisted upon since the petitioner institution was established long back in the year 2003 with the permission of the competent authority whereas the said Act came into force with effect from 02.01.2006 and has no retrospective operation. At any rate, according to the petitioner, it is impossible to produce such land use certificate on or before 10.07.2009 as directed in the impugned letter dated 12.06.2009. It is also pleaded that since they have admitted students who were eligible for scholarship/fee reimbursement under the State Government Scheme without collecting tuition fees at the time of admission and since there was abnormal delay in granting scholarships and sanctioning fee reimbursement, the petitioner-institution was compelled to withdraw the Reserve Fund amount to pay the salaries to the teaching and non-teaching staff of the institution. Since the Government failed to release the amount of reimbursement fees for the years 2007-08 as well as 2008-09, there is no Reserve Fund fixed deposit as on today and the same can be deposited only after the amounts are received from the State Government. Though the said fact has been informed by letter dated 20.06.2009, the 2nd respondent has been insisting on production of Fixed Deposit Receipts and other documents specified in the impugned letter dated 12.06.2009. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, it is stated that the 2nd respondent has forwarded a letter to all the recognized institutions on 12.06.2009 including the writ petitioner regarding maintenance of norms and standards to be maintained in accordance with para 10(1) of the NCTE Regulations 2007. It is further explained that the Chairperson, NCTE vide Note dated 06.01.2009 directed that fixed deposit receipts of all recognized institutions as well as new applicants should be thoroughly checked and they should be preserved in original. The NCTE headquarters by subsequent letter dated 13.03.2009, further informed that certain institutions have submitted forged FDRs with regard to Endowment and Reserve Fund while seeking recognition/permission. In the circumstances, the FDRs in original are being sought and the same is in conformity with the Regulations which provide that Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund shall be maintained in joint account of Regional Director SRC and the representative of the management. It is only for the purpose of converting the FDRs into a joint account and to prevent misuse of the FDRs by the institution. So far as the additional documents sought to be produced in the letter dated 12.06.2009, it is explained that the said documents are required for updating the information in the software in MIS as per NCTE Regulations 2007. Thus, it is contended that the impugned action being strictly in accordance with the statutory regulations, the contentions of the petitioner are untenable and the writ petition is misconceived. I have heard the learned counsel for both parties. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 32(2) of the NCTE Act, 1993, the National Council for Teacher Education made National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations 2007. Para 10 of the said regulations, which is relevant for the purpose of the present case runs as under: 10. Financial Management: (1) In the case of self financed institutions including Government/Government aided institutions running a course on self-financing basis, there shall be an endowment fund of Rs.5.00lakh per course per unit and a reserve fund of Rs.3.00 lakh per course per unit of approved intake, in the form of a Fixed Deposit of a duration of and above 5 years of a nationalized bank. The endowment fund and reserve fund shall be operated jointly by the authorized representative of the management and an officer of the Regional Committee concerned. (2) The academic and other staff of the institutions shall be paid such salary as may be prescribed by the concerned Government/Board by account payee cheque or as per Advice into the bank account of employee specially opened for the purpose. (3) Following statements of Accounts, duly certified by a Chartered Accountant, shall be maintained and displayed on its official website by every institutions every financial year by 30th September of the year. (i) Balance Sheet as on the last date of the financial year. (ii) Profit and Loss Account for the financial year. (iii) Receipt and Payment Account for the financial year. A perusal of the above provision shows that the Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund should be operated jointly by the authorised representative of the management and an Officer of the Regional Committee of the NCTE. Further, the Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund shall be in the form of a fixed deposit of a duration of and above five years of a Nationalised Bank. It is apparent that the Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund are for the purpose of ensuring the financial viability of the institution and therefore, the institutions are bound to maintain the same as long as the institution is existing. Each time, the fixed deposit shall be for a duration of five years or more. There is absolutely no reason to presume that such funds shall be maintained only for the initial period of five years. Even as per the norms and standards for Secondary Teacher Education Programme and the National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations 2005 which were in force at the time of establishment of the petitioner institution, the institutions were required to operate the Endowment Fund as well as the Reserve Fund, and there was no Rule which either expressly or by necessary implication provided that the FDRs shall be only for the initial period of five years. Hence, the impugned action of the respondents in insisting upon the petitioner to produce the original Fixed Deposit Receipts as well as other documents cannot be held to be contrary to any statutory provision. There is also no justifiable reason to hold that the impugned action is arbitrary or illegal. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Date:08.10.2009 KLP