If all the pre-requisites are satisfied, then recognition must be granted: Supreme Court of India

The facts in all these bunch of petitions are almost We will refer to the facts in the lead matter i.e. Writ The petitioner college was established as unaided The petitioner college submitted an application to respondent No.1 National Council for Teacher Education 1993for conducting Respondent No. 2 Magadh University Bodh Gaya Bihar vide letter dated 2.8.2014 granted affiliation to the year B.Ed. course from Academic Year 2014­2015 till By the National Council for Teacher Education Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations 2014 hereinafter referred to as ‘2014 Regulations’) notified on one­year B.Ed. course from Academic Session 2015­2016 B.Ed. course which requires additional facilities. Vide order granted recognition for D.El.Ed. course vide order dated 2.5.2016 with an annual intake of 50 seats for two years On 3.6.2016 after receiving NOC the petitioner­college In the 280th meeting of NCTE held on 29.2.2020 and and instructional facilities for additional intake in B.Ed. and D.El.Ed. courses. However on account of Covid­19 pandemic inspection could not take place as scheduled. Subsequently inspection in the petitioner­college came to be conducted on 8.3.2021 and a letter of intent was issued in favour of the petitioner­college by NCTE for additional intake in B.Ed. and NCTE found that the petitioner­college has adequate facility required for conducting teachers’ courses. Petitioner­college D.El.Ed. course. Recognition was granted to the petitioner­ on 12.4.2021. However by the said resolution the recognition has been granted for Academic Year 2022­2023 and not for In this background the petitioner­college has from Academic Session 2016­2017. Though the petitioner’s application was pending since 2015 the Eastern Regional meeting held on 20.4.2021 decided to grant recognition to the petitioner­college from Academic Session 2022­2023. The petitioner has therefore approached this Court seeking similar relief for a direction to grant recognition from the Academic In the present case also the petitioner in pursuance to an application for running B.Ed. and D.El.Ed. courses. The Department of School Education and Literacy Department Primary Education Secretariat) State of Jharkhand has also granted ‘No Objection Certificate’ for running D.El.Ed course on 26.2.2016. The application of the petitioner was not been received from the Directorate of Primary Education and the NCTE. The Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court vide order dated 2.4.2019 allowed LPA no.1418 and directed ERC and NCTE to revive the application of the ERC of NCTE and the petitioner with regard to certain compliances. Finally ERC in its 293rd meeting held on 9.6.2021 decided to grant recognition to the petitioner for applied petitioner on 14.2.2018 to run one unit i.e. 50 students in its 291st meeting held on 12.4.2021 ERC decided to issue one course from Academic Session 2022­2023. Petitioner also The petitioner had applied on 20.10.2008 for conducting B.Ed. course with intake of 100 students held on 7th­9th July 2021 decided to grant recognition to the petitioner­institution for conducting B.Ed 2022­2023. In this background the petitioners approached In the present case also the petitioner­college in course from Academic Session 2016­2017. Vide order dated rejected by the WRC in its 262nd meeting. The petitioner preferred statutory appeal which was allowed and WRC was directed to reconsider the issue. After series of correspondences and some litigation WRC in its 337 th meeting decided to grant recognition to the petitioner for conducting B.Ed. course from the Academic Session 2022­2023. The with an annual intake of 100 students. The said application its 292nd meeting held on 20.4.2021 decided to grant recognition to the petitioner­institution for conducting B.Ed course of two years duration with an annual intake of 100 students from the Academic Session 2022­ 2023. As such petitioner has approached this Court seeking In the present case also the petitioner in response to the petitioner had approached the Delhi High Court by filing ERC in its 291st meeting held on 12.4.2021 granted 2022­2023. The petitioner therefore approached this Court In the present case also the petitioner in response to recognition for conducting B.Ed. course from the Academic for a period of six years and finally ERC in its 292 nd meeting held on 20.4.2021 granted recognition to the petitioner for In the present case also the petitioner in response to for a period of six years and finally ERC in its 292 nd meeting held on 20.4.2021 granted recognition to the petitioner for conducting D.El.Ed. course of two­year duration with an Writ Petition No.2383 of 2018. The said petition was allowed on 14.3.2018 thereby directing the respondents to reconsider the petitioner’s application. NRC in its 295th meeting issued show cause notice to the petitioner to which reply was submitted by the petitioner on 29.3.2019. The petitioner again approached the Delhi High Court by way of dated 6.11.2019. NRC in its 335thmeeting decided to grant recognition to the petitioner­institution for conducting to be issued to the petitioner. There were exchange of result. As such the petitioner filed a writ petition being Writ Petition No.1522 of 2021 before the Delhi High Court The said petition came to be disposed of by order dated NRC in its 336th meeting by order dated 28.6.2021 it granted the Academic Session 2022­2023 with annual intake of 50 We have heard Shri Amitesh Kumar Shri Shreeyash Uday Lalit and Shri Mayank Manish learned counsel for the petitioners Ms. Manisha T. Karia learned counsel for NCTE State of Rajasthan and Shri Kunal Chatterji learned counsel recognition to the petitioners­colleges institutions for the Academic Year 2022­2023 for no reason the recognition is not requirements of the NCTE and there is no reason as to why the NCTE submitted that taking into consideration the time frame as is prescribed by this Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others1 the recognition has been granted only 12 SCC 617 proposal of the petitioners for grant of recognition for have been pending for considerable periods. In some cases necessary requirements have granted recognition for dated 19th April 2021 passed by the NCTE in the lead matter AND WHEREAS on scrutiny of the application submitted by the institution the documents attached therewith the affidavit that the applicant fulfils the requirements under the provisions of NCTE Act Rules and Standards for the said teacher education programme such as instructional facilities infrastructural facilities financial resources identical or similar reasons have been given while granting recognition. It could thus be seen that recognition has been applications submitted by the institutions the documents attached therewith the affidavits submitted and the reports that the Committee was satisfied that the applicant(s) fulfills relevant Regulations after considering the certificates issued from the affiliating bodies. The order also records its education programme such as instructional facilities infrastructural facilities financial resources etc. for running that there can be no rational for NCTE or its Regional Committee to deny the recognition from the Academic Year 2021­2022 and insist on recognition for Academic Session 2022­2023. It is not in dispute that the counselling for admission is yet to commence. Insofar as the time­line prescribed in the judgment of this Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya is concerned this Court itself in catena of orders placed on record has needs to be followed in the present matter particularly when the delay is not attributable to the petitioners but on the The cut­off date fixed by this Court in Maa be entitled to the recognition granted by Committees from the Academic Session 2021­ iii) The Respondent NCTE and its Regional Committees are directed to issue formal iv) The State and other Authorities would consider grant of affiliation and or other requisite permissions within a period of 15 days from The petitioners would be entitled to admit the the sanction granted by NCTE for the Academic The name of the petitioner­colleges institutions shall be included in the counselling programme The writ petitions are allowed and disposed of in the above terms. Consequently all pending applications shall

Summary: When all the pre-requisites given under a particular act to get permission/recognition are satisfied, then the concerned authority cannot deny the granting of such permission/recognition. This was held by the Hon’ble Justice R. F, Nariman and Hon’ble Justice B. R. Gavai in the case of Devendra Pathak Sarvodaya College of Education Vs. National Council for Teacher Education and Ors. [WRIT PETITION (C) NO.518 OF 2021] on the 11th of August before the Hon’ble Supreme Court at New Delhi. The brief facts of the case are, the petitioner college was established as unaided training college to impart Bachelor in Teacher Education (B.Ed.) and Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) courses in the year 2011. The petitioner college submitted an application to respondent No.1 – National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as ‘NCTE’) for grant of recognition under Section 14(1) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the said Act’) for conducting B.Ed. course with an annual intake of 100 students. Vide order dated 25.2.2014, NCTE granted recognition for B.Ed. course under one-year programme for Academic Year 2014­2015 with an annual intake of 100 students. Respondent No. 2 – Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Bihar, vide letter dated 2.8.2014 granted affiliation to the petitioner college to conduct admission with 100 seats of one year B.Ed. course from Academic Year 2014­2015 till continuation of accreditation of NCTE. In the 280th meeting of NCTE, held on 29.2.2020 and 1.3.2020, a visiting team was constituted under the provisions of Section 15 of the said Act so as to inspect the infrastructure and instructional facilities for additional intake in B.Ed. and D.El.Ed. courses. However, on account of Covid­19 pandemic, inspection could not take place as scheduled. Subsequently, inspection in the petitioner­college came to be conducted on 8.3.2021 and a letter of intent was issued in favour of the petitioner­college by NCTE for additional intake in B.Ed. and D.El.Ed. courses as to the proposal submitted by the petitioner­ college on 10.6.20216. In the 290th meeting held on 3.3.2021, NCTE found that the petitioner­college has adequate facility required for conducting teachers’ courses. Petitioner­college was therefore asked to intimate its willingness on an affidavit about the number of units sought for the purpose of granting of the formal recognition. Petitioner­college replied thereto stating that the petitioner­college has the necessary infrastructure for additional intake of two units for B.Ed. course and two units for D.El.Ed. course. Recognition was granted to the petitioner­ college for additional intake of two units in B.Ed. course and two units in D.El.Ed. course in the 291st meeting of NCTE, held on 12.4.2021. However, by the said resolution, the recognition has been granted for Academic Year 2022­2023 and not for Academic Year 2021­2022. In this background, the petitioner­college has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to grant recognition for Academic Year 2021­2022.