1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5828 OF 2009 Adarsh Bahuudeshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha, Loni, Tq-Udgir, Dist-Latur, Kai. Ramrao Patil D.Ed. College, Udgir (Loni), Tq-Udgir, Dist-Latur, Through its President, Madhav Ramrao Patil, Age-37 years, Occu:Social Worker, R/o-Loni, Tq-Udgir, Dist-Latur. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, (Through its Secretary for Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai), 2) The Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education, Manas Bhawan, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal 462 002, 3) The Director of State Council of Education, Research and Training, Sadashiv Peth, Pune, 4) National Council for Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, Wing 11, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5836 OF 2009 Adarsh Bahuudeshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha, Loni, Tq-Udgir, Dist-Latur, Vatsalabai Patil D.Ed. College, Ahmadpur (Tembhurni), Tq-Ahmadpur, Dist-Latur, Through its President, Madhav Ramrao Patil, Age-37 years, Occu:Social Worker, R/o-Loni, Tq-Ahmadpur (Tembhurni), Dist-Latur. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, (Through its Secretary for Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai), 2) The Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education, Manas Bhawan, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal 462 002, 3) The Director of State Council of Education, Research and Training, Sadashiv Peth, Pune, 4) National Council for Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, Wing 11, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002. ...RESPONDENTS. 3 ... Shri.A.S. Bayas Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.V.B. Ghatge, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Shri. Satyajit S. Bora Advocate for Respondent No.2. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 28TH JUNE, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.) : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage. 2. The Petitioners applied for permission to start D.Ed. College. By an order dated 1/10th April, 2009 Western Regional Committee of National Council for Teacher Education rejected the proposals of the Petitioners. The Petitioners filed appeals before the National Council for 4 Teacher Education (for short "N.C.T.E."). By orders dated 14th July, 2009 the appeals came to be dismissed confirming the orders of Western Regional Committee. The said orders are impugned in these Petitions. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the impugned orders are passed on the ground of negative recommendation of the State Government only. The over-all merit of the proposals have not been taken into consideration. This issue is settled, according to the counsel for the Petitioners, under the Orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.6749 of 2009, Writ Petition No.3943 of 2009, Writ Petition No.5834 of 2009 and Writ Petition No.1277 of 2010. It is submitted that this Court had directed the N.C.T.E. - Appellate Authority to scrutinise the applications in accordance with law and in the light of the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyala and others, 2006 5 D.G.L.S. (Soft) 192. 4. Shri. Satyajit Bora, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 submits that the view adopted by this Court as reflected in the earlier orders as referred above, is required to be followed in the present cases also and in case this Court directs and remands the matters back, the proposals/applications of the Petitioners will be scrutinised afresh by the Appellate Authority. 5. In the light of the view adopted by this Court in the orders cited supra, we quash and set aside both the impugned orders passed by the Appellate Authority. The matters are remanded back to the Authorities concerned. The appeals of the Petitioners shall be considered in accordance with law and in the light of the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya (supra). All issues are kept open. We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of 6 the matter. The N.C.T.E. - Appellate Authority shall dispose of the Appeals as expeditiously as possible. . Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above. [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/JUNE10/wp5828.09