1711wp4881.09.odt 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4881 OF 2009 SHRI CHAKRADHAR SWAMI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA VS. WESTERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE, NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS & 3 OTHERS Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr. R. L. Khapre, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. C. S. Kaptan, Advocate for respondents No. 1 & 2. Mr. S. K. Mishra, Asst. Solicitor General for R-3. Mr. N. W. Sambre, Govt. Pleader for respondent No. 4. CORAM: D. D. SINHA & F. M. REIS, JJ. DATED : 17th NOVEMBER, 2009. 1. Heard. 2. The writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 07/15.3.2009 passed by the National Council for Teachers Education, whereby proposal of the petitioner for grant of recommendation to D. Ed. College came to be rejected on the ground that the State Government has given negative recommendation. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the claim of the petitioner is protected by the Apex Court, relying on the interim order passed on 21/7/2009 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 4009 & 4010 of 2009, copy of which is annexed with the petition at Annexure-20. The said order reads thus: “Taken on board. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned Counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra. Learned Counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra submits 1711wp4881.09.odt 2/2 that the State Government is ready to sponsor candidates for admission for the year 2009-10. I. As. are disposed of accordingly.” 4. It is contended that the above referred order shows that the State Government is ready to sponsor candidates for admission for the year 2009-10. It is submitted that if this is the stand before the Apex Court, in that view of the matter, the State Government ought not to have given negative recommendation. 5. Mr. Sambre, Government Pleader has submitted that the contentions canvassed by the Counsel for the petitioner are not based on the factual aspect of the matter. 6. Be that as it may, in absence of adequate data of the colleges and institutions which were before the Apex Court and are covered by the order passed by the Apex Court, it is difficult for us to hold whether the interim order passed by the Apex Court supports the claim of the petitioner. Undoubtedly, the National Council for Teachers Education rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the State Government has given negative recommendation. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for showing indulgence in the present petition. Hence, writ petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE