IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.18045 of 2009 Between: Narketpally College of Education ..... PETITIONER AND National Council for Teacher Education, Southern Regional Committee, rep.by its Regional Director, 1st Floor, CSD Buildings, HMT Post, Bangalore and others .....RESPONDENTS ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. The petitioner-College claims to have made an application to the first respondent, namely, National Council for Teacher Education, under Section 14(1) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (for short ‘the NCTE Act’) for grant of recognition to it for Secondary (B.Ed.,) Course of one year duration from the academic year 2004-05 with an annual intake of 100 students. Pursuant thereto, the first respondent, after following all the statutory formalities, granted recognition to the petitioner-College vide proceedings, dated 08.03.2005, subject to fulfillment of the conditions specified therein. Accordingly, the petitioner claims to have commenced B.Ed., Course of one-year duration from the academic year 2004-2005 with an annual intake of 100 students, after obtaining permission from the State Government and affiliation from the second respondent-Osmania University, in a rented building. The petitioner states that it had complied with all the conditions stipulated in the recognition order, dated 08.03.2005. While so, it is the case of the petitioner, without issuing any notice and pointing out the deficiencies noticed during the inspection purported to have been conducted by the visiting team on 05.06.2009, the first respondent has issued a notice, dated 05.06.2009, under Section 17 of the NCTE Act calling upon the petitioner-College to submit its explanation as to why the recognition granted to it vide proceedings, dated 08.03.2005, to start Secondary (B.Ed.,) Course of one-year duration, shall not be withdrawn, for the deficiencies stated therein. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner-College claims to have submitted its explanation on 23.06.2009. However, according to the petitioner, the first respondent, without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner-College, passed the impugned order, dated 24.07.2009, withdrawing the recognition granted to it, in exercise of power under Section 17 of the NCTE Act. Hence, the present writ petition. It is brought to the notice of this Court that similar matters, in W.P.Nos.22090 of 2008 and batch, were disposed of by this Court by a common order, dated 11.08.2009, granting liberty to the petitioners therein to file statutory appeals under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, if not already filed, within a period of four weeks and if any such appeals are preferred, the appellate authority was directed to receive treating the same as appeals filed within limitation and dispose of the same in accordance with law, after hearing both the parties, and till such time, directed to maintain status quo as on that date in all respects. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner-College has produced photographs showing shifting of the College to new premises, and he has also produced the proceedings, dated 25.07.2009, issued by the University, informing the Regional Director, NCTE, about the shifting of the College to a new premises. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file statutory appeal and till the disposal of the same, the parties shall maintain status quo. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner-College to file statutory appeal as provided under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, if not already filed, within a period of four weeks from today and on filing such an appeal, the appellate authority shall entertain the same without raising any objection as to the limitation and dispose of in accordance with law, after hearing both the parties, within a period of six weeks thereafter. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today in all respects shall be maintained. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:27.08.2009 VGB