CWP NO.6142 OF 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 29.7.2009 Angels College of Education ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab & Others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.Dr.Surya Parkash, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.P.C.Goyal, AAG, Punjab for respondents no.1 and 2 Mr.D.S.Patwalia, Advocate for respondent no.3 Mr.Sukhdip Singh Brar, Advocate for respondent no.4 Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar whereby the petitioner-Institution has been black-listed and the request of the petitioner to grant affiliation has been rejected. The claim of the petitioner-Institution is that the petitioner-Institution is a duly registered Society with the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Punjab. A certificate of registration has been placed on record. The petitioner-Institution also applied to the N.C.T.E for grant of recognition in accordance with law. The NCTE has CWP NO.6142 OF 2009 (O&M) 2 already accorded recognition to the petitioner vide its letter dated 27.2.2008 (Annexure P-5). While granting recognition to the petitioner, the N.C.T.E has held that the petitioner-Institution has all the infrastructure and faculties etc. However, the recognition was granted by the N.C.T.E under Section 14 (3) (a) of the NCTE Act, 1993, subject to fulfilment of certain stipulations. One of such stipulations is that the recognition is subject to fulfilment of all such other requirements as may be prescribed by other regulatory bodies like UGC and the State Government etc. wherever applicable. It is not in dispute that the NCTE only grants recognition for establishment of the Institution. In so far as the examinations of the students are concerned, these are to be held by the affiliating authorities like respondent no.3-University. The University-respondent has its own statutes, rules and regulations for the purpose of facilitating the examinations. The petitioner-Institution/students are required to comply with all rules and regulations of the University and NCTE or any other such apex body cannot impose any condition on these independent regulatory authorities. It is under these circumstances that the condition was incorporated in the recognition letter. In the reply filed by the respondents, certain allegations have been made against the petitioner-Institution including that earlier the petitioner misrepresented to the NCTE while obtaining recognition and on enquiry by the SHO, it was found that the fake documents were produced by the petitioner before the NCTE to seek recognition. The report of the SHO has also been placed on record. In the present case, the petitioner has disclosed this fact. However, it is stated that on further enquiry by the Superintendent of Police, the report of the SHO was found to be false. However, no such CWP NO.6142 OF 2009 (O&M) 3 document has been placed on record. Be that as it may. Admittedly, the impugned order has been passed by the respondent- University without affording any opportunity of being heard and even putting to the petitioner to notice. The impugned order is liable to be set aside on this score alone. This petition is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-1) is hereby set aside with liberty to the respondent-University to issue show cause notice to the petitioner within a period of one week. The petitioner shall have the liberty to reply to the show-cause notice within one week from the date of receipt of the show- cause notice and the respondents-University will pass a fresh order after taking into consideration the reply of the petitioner-Institution within one week from the date of receipt of the reply. A representative of the petitioner- Institution shall have the liberty to appear in person before the appropriate authority at the time of passing of the order for which the date will be communicated by the respondent-University. If the University-respondent finds that the petitioner has complied with all the rules and regulations and there is no deficiency, the respondent-University may grant provisional affiliation to the petitioner-Institution, in the meanwhile. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signature of Court Secretary. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 29.7.2009 MFK