IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3750 of 2011(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MADHAVAM FOUNDATION, REG.NO.T 4044/2001, ELIMALA, KOTTOOR.P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SANGEETH.S.P. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION, SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE, IST FLOOR, CSD BUILDING, HMT POST, BANGALORE-560 031, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. S SRI. V.M. KURIAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.3750 OF 2011(P) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Head the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Petitioner is a charitable Society which has established a TTC and B. Ed college. Exts.P1 and P2 are the orders issued by the NCTE, granting recognition to the petitioner. These orders provided that the institution shall shift its own premises within 3 years from the date of recognition. The period specified for providing infrastructure is almost over. Therefore, NCTE has issued Exts.P3 and P4 notices of inspection. Permanent infrastructure is not yet ready and therefore seeking postponement of the inspection petitioner has made Ext.P5 request. 3. In this writ petition what the petitioner seeks is a direction to the respondents to postpone the inspection of the petitioner's institution as the permanent building is not yet completed. In my view, no useful purpose will be served by conducting an inspection at this stage. Even According to the WPC.No. 3750/2011 :2 : petitioner the permanent building is not yet completed. Therefore, it is only appropriate that the inspection should be deferred so that the inspection can be scheduled and conducted as and when permanent facility is available. 4. Be that as it may it is essentially a matter for the respondent to consider and pass orders in this regard. Therefore on the production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition, respondent will consider Ext.P5, the representation made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in the light of what is stated above. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/