Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 19009 of 2008 Date of Decision. December 03, 2008 Saint Soldier Educational Society, Janakpuri New Delhi and another ...... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ..... Respondents Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh Present Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sushma Chopra and Mr. G. S. Mann, Advocates for the petitioners. Ms. Ambika Luthra, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. D. S. Patwalia, Advocate for respondent No. 3. Mr. Vinod Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No. 6 Hemant Gupta , J (Oral ) The petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 with one of the Aim and Objective to provide good education to the children. The petitioner was granted permission to start a new institute for “Bachelor of Education Course” for the Session 2003-04 in the name of St. Soldier College of Education, Jalandhar with intake of 100 seats. The State Government vide notification dated 2.7.2003 authorized Guru Nanak Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [2] Dev University, Amritsar ( hereinafter referred to as University ) for admission to B.Ed Course. Thereafter, University granted temporary affiliation vide notification dated 29.7.2003 for admitting 100 students. The college has been admitting 100 students during the each academic session from the year 2003-04 onwards. The petitioner applied for additional intake of 100 seats in existing Institute of B.Ed Course on one year duration. The National Council of Teachers Education ( hereinafter referred to as NCTE) granted permission vide order dated 14.7.2007. As per the petitioner, such permission was granted after the team of Northern Regional Committee of NCTE had visited the College and was satisfied with the infrastructure, library, accommodation, financial resources, labs and faculty etc. On the basis of recognition granted by NCTE, the petitioner sought permission from the University and the State Government for the additional 100 seats in the Session 2007-08. On 19.1.2008, The State Government granted permission of additional intake of 100 students subject to the conditions mentioned therein. One of the condition was that the norms of staff are fulfilled before admission. The University on 28.7.2008, communicated to the petitioner that the petitioner does not fulfil the condition for additional 100 seats. It is the said communication which is challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition. It is the case of the petitioner that once NCTE has granted recognition and permission for additional intake of 100 seats, thereafter, the University or the State Government has no jurisdiction to refuse the affiliation or permission, as the case may be. In support of such argument, reliance is placed by the petitioner on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [3] Court in State of Maharashtra Sant Dayaneshwar Shiksha Shashtra Mahavidalaya, (2006) 9 SCC 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Section 14(6) of NCTE Act, 1993 ( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and Regulation 7(iii) of National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the Regulations”) to contend that once, recognition has been granted by NCTE, then the University or the State Government have no jurisdiction to sit over the opinion of the NCTE regarding availability of infrastructure or faculty etc. On the other hand, learned counsel for the University has pointed out that in terms of the permission granted by NCTE on 14.7.2007 and in terms of the permission granted by State Government, the University is duty bound to examine the facilities available with the petitioner particularly that of the faculty. It is pointed out that in terms of Appendix IV to the Regulation, the petitioner is required to have one Principal and 7 Lecturers for a basic unit of 100 student and for each additional students, it is required to have 7 lecturers. Such appointments are required to be made on full time and regular basis. It has been contended that petitioner has only seven lecturers on regular basis and has appointed 7 lecturers on ad hoc basis. Such fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. As per learned counsel for the University, the deficiency is in respect of regular and full time members of teaching staff. Before we proceed further, certain extracts from the communication of NCTE and the State Government is necessary to be reproduced. NCTE while granting recognition on 14.07.2007, had sought fulfillment of certain requirements from the petitioner which is to the Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [4] following effect: “ 2. And whereas on scrutiny of the application submitted by the Institution, the documents attached therewith the affidavit and the input received from the visiting team in the form of report and video-graphy, the Committee is satisfied that the Institution/Society fulfills the requirements under the provisions of NCTE Act, Rules and relevant Regulations including the Norms and Standards for the Secondary Teacher Education Programme such as Instructional facilities, Infrastructure facilities, Library, accommodation, financial resources, laboratory etc. for running the programme and has selected/appointed duly qualified teaching staff as per NCTE norms. 3. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers vested under Section 15(3)(a) of the NCTE Act, 1993, the Northern Regional Committee hereby grants recognition to St. Soldier College of Education behind PTU, REC (NIT), Jalandhar-144004, Punjab for conducting B.Ed course of one year duration with an additional intake of 100 posts making total ( 100+ 100) students under clause 7(12) of Regulation dated 13.1.2008 subject to fulfilment of the following: (i) The Institution shall, within one month of the receipt of recognition order, convert the endowment fund account into a joint account to be operated along with an official of the Northern Regional Committee. (ii) The Institution shall comply with the various other norms and standards prescribed in the NCTE regulations, as amended from time to time. 4. Further, the recognition is subject to fulfillment of all such other requirements as may be prescribed by other regulatory bodies like UGC and the State Government etc., wherever applicable”. Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [5] Thereafter, the State Government vide communication dated 19.8.2008 granted approval with the following conditions:- 1. That the norms of staff are fulfilled before admission. 2. That the applicant trust has a land/building as per norms of NCTE. The relevant extract from Section 14 of the Act, relied upon by the petitioner reads as under:- “(3) On receipt of an application by the Regional Committee from any institution under sub section (i), and after obtaining from the institution concerned such other particulars as it may consider necessary, it shall- (a) if it is satisfied that such institution has adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and that it fulfills such other conditions required for proper functioning of the institution for a course or training in teacher education, as may be determined by regulations, pass an order granting recognition to such institution, subject to such conditions as may be determined by regulations; or (b) if it is of the opinion that such institution does not fulfil the requirements laid down in sub-Clauses (a), pass an order refusing recognition to such institution for reasons to be recorded in writing: Provided that before passing an order under sub-clause(b), the Regional Committee shall provide a reasonable opportunity to the concerned institution for making a written representation. (4) Every order granting or refusing recognition to an institution for a course or training in teacher education under sub-section (3) shall be published in the Official Gazette and communicated in writing for appropriate action to such institution and to the concerned examining body, the local authority or the State Government and the Central Government. Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [6] (5) Every institution in respect of which recognition has been refused shall discontinue the course or training in teacher education from the end of the academic session next following the date of receipt of the order refusing recognition passed under clause(b) of sub section(3). (6) Every examination body shall , on receipt of the order under sub-section (4);- (a) grant affiliation to the institution, where recognition has been granted, or (b) cancel the affiliation of the institution, where recognition has been refused”. The relevant extracts from the Regulations read as under:- National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations, 2005. “ 7. Processing of Applications (1) and (2) xx xx xx xx (3)On receipt of the communication, the State Government/ UT Administration concerned shall furnish its recommendations on the applications to the office of the Regional Committee concerned of the National Council for Teacher Education within 60 days from receipt. If the recommendation is negative, the State Government/ UT Administration shall provide detailed reasons/ grounds thereof, which could be taken into consideration by the Regional Committee concerned while deciding the application. If no communication is received from the State Government/ UT Administration within the stipulated 60 days, it shall be presumed that the State Government/ UT Administration concerned has no recommendation to make. (4) To (14) xx xx xx xx xx xx”. Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [7] APPENDIX-4 Norms and Standards for Secondary Teacher Education Programme leading to Bachelor of Education [B.Ed.] Degree. “ 5.0 Staff 4.1 Academic 4.1 a (i) Number (for a basic unit of 100 students) Principal / Head - 1 Lecturers - 7 4.1a(ii) For additional intake will be in the multiple of 100 and the number of full time teacher educators shall be increased by seven for each increase in the basic unit. However, on each occasion additional intake of one basic unit shall be considered. 4.1 a (iii) Appointment of teachers shall be such as to ensure the availability of expertise for teaching all foundation and methodology courses i.e. Arts, Science and Commerce stream. 4.4 Terms and condition of service (a) The appointment shall be made on the basis of recommendations of the Selection Committee constituted as per the policy of the UGC/ Affiliating University. (b) All appointments are to be made on full time and regular basis excepting those specified as part time”. The learned counsel for the petitioners has placed strong reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya's case (supra). In the said case, the State Government has taken a policy decision not to grant No Objection Certificate for establishing Institutes for imparting teachers education. Apart Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [8] from such decision of the State Government, Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, contemplated permission from the Government before a B.Ed. College could be opened. The challenge before the High Court was to the policy decision and permission from the State Government being intrusion in the Central Legislation i.e. National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. It was found by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that it is not open to the State Legislature to encroach upon the field occupied by an Act of Parliament and covered by Entry 66 of List 1 of Schedule VII. Thus, it was found that it was not open to the State Government to refuse permission relying on a State Act or on policy consideration. While considering the Sections 82 and 83 of the Maharashtra University Act, 1994, it was held that once recognition has been granted by NCTE under section 14 (6) of the Act, every University (examining body) is obliged to grant affiliation to such institution and Sections 82 and 83 of the University Act do not apply to such cases. The said case is not applicable in the facts of the present case. In the present case, NCTE has granted recognition subject to fulfilment of all such other requirements, as may be prescribed by the other Regulatory Body, such as UGC etc, wherever applicable. The State Government granted permission subject to condition that norms of staff are fulfilled before admission. The University is a Regulatory Body in respect of conduct of examination. Therefore, in terms of Para 4 of permission granted by NCTE and the permission granted by the State Government, the University was duty bound to examine the fulfillment of requirements as per norms fixed by the NCTE itself. As per norms reproduced above, the petitioner has seven members on regular teaching faculty, whereas other Civil Writ Petition No.19009 of 2008 [9] seven have been engaged on ad hoc basis. Such undisputed fact shows that the norms fixed by the NCTE itself have not been satisfied by the petitioners. The University or the State Government has not refused the permission but, after examining the norms and standards for Secondary Teacher Education Programme framed by the NCTE itself, it has found that the teaching faculty is not suitable. Such power has been exercised in terms of the liberty granted by the NCTE to the State Government and the University. The University, as examining body, is, thus, justified in refusing permission till such time proper teaching faculty is engaged by the petitioner as in the absence of proper teaching faculty, the standard expected in respect of imparting of teachers education is likely to be suffered. In view of the above, we do not find that the action of the University in refusing to grant affiliation suffers from any patent illegality or lacks jurisdiction, which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Dismissed. ( Hemant Gupta) Judge December 03, 2008 ( Nawab Singh) mamta/ ks Judge