Delhi High Court - Orders
Yuva Rashtrasant Bhayyuji Maharaj B Ed ... vs National Council For Teacher Education ... on 19 December, 2022
$~83
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 16576/2022
YUVA RASHTRASANT BHAYYUJI MAHARAJ B ED WOMENS
COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gaurav Arora, Advocate.
versus
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rahul Madan, Advocate for
NCTE.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 19.12.2022 CM APPL. 52118/2022(exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 16576/2022 & CM APPL. 52117/2022(for stay)
3. The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"(a) Issue a writ of certiorari and quash the decision taken by Respondent No.2 qua Petitioner at S.No.124 in minutes of 321st meeting held from 09th to 11th November, 2020 vide which recognition of Petitioner for B.Ed course has been withdrawn;
and
(b) Issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dt. 12.07.2022 passed by the respondent no. 1 vide which statutory appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected; and
(c) Issue a writ of mandamus for directing the respondent no.2 to forthwith pass an order of restoration of recognition of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ARUNA KANWAR Signing Date:20.12.2022 19:09:54 petitioner for B.Ed course and reflect the status of the petitioner as a recognized institution on its official website & also to send copy of such restoration order to the affiliating university of the petitioner and Department of Higher Education, Maharashtra and permit the petitioner to take part in counselling for academic session 2022-23 & to admit students."
4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that recognition of the petitioner for B.Ed. course has been withdrawn by the decision taken by WRC-NCTE in its 321st meeting held from 9th to 11th November, 2020, which was followed by withdrawal order dated 20th December, 2020. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid order which came to be dismissed vide order dated 12 th July, 2022. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no show-cause notice was given in terms of the provisions of the NCTE Act (in short "the Act"). He draws the attention of the Court to the printouts of the pages from the official website of NCTE, which have been handed over in the Court, wherefrom it becomes evident that the notice sent to the petitioner was returned back undelivered, therefore, he contends that the principles of natural justice have not been complied with before passing an order of withdrawal of recognition.
5. He also relies on the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 20th July, 2022 passed in WP(C) No.3069/2022, wherein under the similar circumstances, this Court allowed the petition and consequently the decision taken by the WRC in its 321st meeting qua the petitioner therein was set aside on the ground that service of show-cause notice was not proved. The operative part of the judgment reads as under:-
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ARUNA KANWAR Signing Date:20.12.2022 19:09:54"13. Further as regards the controversy regarding service of the show-cause notice dated 29th September, 2020, the Court would lean in favour of Petitioner-institute. Service of show- cause notice is a vital communication for an institute as it affords an opportunity to them to put forth their stand qua the alleged deficiencies, failing which adverse consequences are bound to follow. This opportunity is thus, crucial for the institutes whose recognition and operation are at stake. To prove the service, Respondents have relied upon a dispatch report, but failed to annex any proof of dispatch therewith. The show-cause notice dated 29th September, 2020 mentions the mode of dispatch as "but Speed Post/Regd. Post" but no speed post receipt or tracking report has been brought on record which can convince the court that a show-notice was indeed served on Petitioner-institute.
14. In light of the above, the Court is inclined to allow the present petition and accordingly, the decision taken by WRC qua Petitioner-institute in the 322nd meeting held from 23rd to 24th November, 2020, and the withdrawal order, is set aside. The WRC shall now issue an order of restoration of recognition and reflect the status of Petitioner-institute as a recognised institution for B.Ed. course and send a written communication in this regard to the affiliating university of Petitioner-institute and to the Department of Higher Education, Government of Maharashtra with instructions that the Petitioner-institute is entitled to take part in counselling and admit students for all academic sessions within a period of two weeks from today.
15. It is clarified that this order shall not preclude Respondents from issuing a fresh show-cause notice to Petitioner-institute as per their discretion. It is further clarified that the Court has not expressed any opinion on the contentions advanced by the parties qua the issuance of a second show-cause notice as Petitioner-institute is entitled to succeed on other grounds. The Court has not delved into the merits of the case and views expressed herein are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition."Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ARUNA KANWAR Signing Date:20.12.2022 19:09:54
6. Issue notice. The learned counsel above-named accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
7. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that since the notice was sent on the correct address therefore a presumption of service needs to be drawn.
8. I find from the printouts of the website of the NCTE that the show- cause notice issued to the petitioner has come back undelivered. The learned counsel for the respondents does not controvert the factum of non- delivery of the show-cause notice as is borne out from the printouts of the pages of the website of NCTE.
9. I also do not find any merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents that presumption of service of show-cause notice is to be drawn. Once the record reveals that the show-cause notice came back undelivered, no presumption could be drawn with regard to the service of the same.
10. In the circumstances, the present writ petition is allowed with the following directions:
(i) The decision taken by the WRC qua petitioner in 322nd meeting held from 23rd to 24th November, 2022 and the consequent withdrawal order dated 20th December, 2020, as well as order dated 12th July, 2022 dismissing the appeal, are set aside.
(ii) Resultantly, the WRC shall issue an order of restoration of recognition and reflect the status of petitioner/institute as recognized institution for B.Ed. course and send a written communication in this regard to the affiliating university of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ARUNA KANWAR Signing Date:20.12.2022 19:09:54 petitioner/institute and to the Department of Higher Education, Government of Maharashtra with specific instructions that the petitioner/institute is entitled to take part in counseling and admit students for all academic sessions within a period of two days from today.
11. It is also clarified that this order shall not preclude respondent from issuing fresh show-cause notice to the petitioner/institute in terms of the provisions of the Act.
12. The present writ petition along with application for stay, is disposed of in the above terms.
13. It is also made clear that the Court has not delved into the merits of the case and the question with regard to the shifting of petitioner/institute to its own premises, is also left open to be decided by the WRC, NCTE.
14. The copy of printouts of pages from the official website of NCTE, be brought on record.
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J DECEMBER 19, 2022 ak Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ARUNA KANWAR Signing Date:20.12.2022 19:09:54