IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No : 8225 of 2008 Between: Seven Hills B.Ed. College, Thimmayapalem Road, Door No. 11-434, Vinukonda (M), Guntur District (AP) rep by its Correspondent Dalari yedukondalu S/o Venkateswarlu aged 49 years Telaga r/o Vinukonda, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) (A staturoty Body of the Government of India) Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Banglore-560 003, repby its chairperson. 2 Southern Regional Committee, rep by its Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Banglore .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, or direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, declaring the action of the respondents herein conducting inspection of petitioner's college under Section 17 (1) of National Council for Teacher Education Act (NCTE) 1993, which is scheduled on 24-04-2008 vide proceedings F. SrO/NCTE/2007- 08/205, dt 09-04-2008, without there being any particulars as to on whose behalf the proceedings are initiated and without mentioning as to which provision, rules and regulations etc., are contravened by the petitioner's college, as illegal, arbitrary, vioaltive of constitutional provisions and against all cannons of fair-play and natural justice apart from contrary to the provisions of national council for Teacher Education act (NCTE) 1993, and consequently set- a side the impugned proceedings F. SrO/NCTE/2007-08/205, dt 09-04-2008 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Sitaram Chaparla Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Sri B. Adinarayana Rao The Court made the following O R D E R: Heard Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, learned Standing Counsel for National Council for Teacher Education and with his consent, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. This writ petition has been instituted by a College of Education to declare the action of the respondents in conducting inspection of the petitioner – College in terms of Section 17(1) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993, Act No. 73 of 1993 (henceforth referred to as ‘ the Act’) as bad. The writ petitioner – institution has been accorded the necessary permission and recognition by an order passed on 12th April 2007 by the Southern Regional Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education, for the purpose of imparting training in B.Ed. course. However, through the impugned notice, dated 9th April 2008, the Southern Regional Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education has proposed to inspect the writ petitioner – institution on 24th April 2008. That inspection was opposed in the writ petition for the reason that the Southern Regional Committee can undertake such an inspection only upon being satisfied that the writ petitioner – institution has contravened any of the provisions of the Act or the Rules, Regulations, Orders made or issued thereunder or any condition subject to which recognition under sub-section (3) of Section 14 or permission under sub-section (3) of Section 15 was granted to the institution, but it cannot undertake an inspection for the sake of ascertaining the compliance with the conditions. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the absence of any material indicating the contravention of the provisions of the Act or Rules, Regulations or any of the conditions of the grant, it is not open to the 2nd respondent to undertake the inspection. Nextly, the learned counsel would submit that the second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 17 specifically provides that no order withdrawing or refusing recognition shall come into force prior to the end of the academic session next following the date of communication of such order and, hence, the inspection itself could not have been undertaken halfway through the academic session. The Act has been ushered in for establishment of the National Council for Teacher Education, with a view to achieve planned and coordinated development of the Teacher Education system through out the country and for the purpose of regulating and securing proper maintenance of norms and standards in the Teacher Education system and for matters connected therewith. In terms of Section 3 of the said Act, the National Council came to be constituted. Section 12 of the Act conferred power on the National Council to take all such steps, as it may think fit, for ensuring planned and coordinated development of Teacher Education, for the determination and maintenance of standards for Teacher Education and for achieving those objectives, the Council has been accorded the power to examine and review periodically the implementation of the norms, guidelines and standards laid down by the Council and to suitably advise the recognized institutions in that regard, under clause (j) of Section 12. Therefore, the proposed inspection to be undertaken on 24th April 2008 by the Southern Regional Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education is not only to achieve the objectives for which the statute has been made and specifically conferred the power upon the National Council, but also for the purpose of ascertaining whether the recognized institutions are functioning in accordance with the provisions of this Act or not. Specific power has been conferred to undertake such inspections to be made by such persons as it may direct and the manner in which such inspections may be carried out also can be prescribed in terms of Section 13. Therefore, only upon inspection and in case the National Council or the Southern Regional Committee of it had reason to suspect or believe that there is any violation, the further consequential action can be initiated in terms of Section 17. At this stage, it will be purely speculative to think that the petitioner had already violated any of the norms or guidelines or Rules or Regulations or conditions of the grant. The inspection cannot be, therefore, objected to and in case the inspection reveals to the satisfaction of the Southern Regional Committee of the National Council of any of the violations, then it is bound to put the petitioner on notice, duly furnishing it the material, which had come for its adverse notice and then consider the explanation, which may be submitted by the petitioner. No further action pursuant to the inspection is bound to be taken without following that procedure, which has already been built into under Section 17. So far as the second proviso incorporated under sub-section (1) of Section 17 is concerned, it will have applicability only in case the National Council has come to the conclusion that an adverse order is needed to be passed against the institution and such an adverse order will be given effect to not during the currency of the academic year but only at the end of the academic session, for, no student should ever be put to inconvenience, loss or sufferance not wholly due to his/her fault. Therefore, the second proviso incorporated under sub-section (1) of Section 17 cannot be involved for prevention of any inspection during the currency of academic session. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition, inasmuch as a combined reading of Sections 12, 13 and 17 of the Act gives adequate power for the respondents to undertake such an inspection during the currency of the academic session. I have no doubt in my mind that the respondents will comply with the necessary prescription contained in Section 17, apart from faithful compliance with the principles of natural justice, in case any further action is warranted to be initiated against the petitioner. With this, the writ petition stands disposed of, but however, without costs. ---------------------------------- (Nooty Ramamohana Rao,J) 17th April 2008 ksld ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}