Himachal Pradesh High Court
Blooms Education Society vs . State Of H.P. & on 22 November, 2023
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
Blooms Education Society vs. State of H.P. & Ors.
.
CWP No.9031 of 2023 22.11.2023 Present: Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Amita Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer, for respondent No.1- of State.
Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate, for respondent No.2- HPU.
rt Mr. Chander Shekhar, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Mr. Rajesh Parkash, Advocate, vice Mr. B. Nandan Vashisht, Advocate, for respondent No.4.
CMP No.16784 of 2023Heard learned Senior Counsel for the applicant/petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The prayer of the petitioner, inter alia, is for issuance of direction to the respondents to sponsor students to the petitioner-Institution to B.Ed and D.EI. Ed courses for the academic session 2023-24.
3. In fact this lis has a chequered history. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by way of CWP No.5746 of 2022, wherein also, prayer was made by the petitioner for issuance of a direction to the respondents to allot seats to it for admission to B.Ed and D.EI.Ed. courses. Said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court in terms of order dated 28.09.2023, which is quoted hereinbelow:-
::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS"By way of this petition, the petitioner has, .
inter alia, prayed for the following relief:-
"a) Writ in the nature of mandamus may be issued and thereby directing the respondent to allot the seats to the Blooms Education Society for admission in the E.Ed and D.El.Ed Course for the current session."
2. There is a serious dispute intra the of parties, as to whether the petitioner/Institute is possessing the requisite approved faculty to undertake the courses in issue for the academic rt session 2023-24 or not.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that to put an end to the controversy, the petition be disposed of with the direction that after proper verification of the faculty, a certification to this effect be given to the University by National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter to be referred as 'NCTE') within some reasonable period and if the certification is in favour of the petitioner, then respondent University/Board be directed to allot the seats for admission to B.Ed and D.El.Ed courses.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 and 4 submits that it would be in the interest of justice in case the University is allowed to be associated with NCTE to ascertain as to whether the petitioner- College has the requite approved faculty to run the said courses. Ordered accordingly. NCTE in association with the respondent-University shall verify by 06.10.2023, whether the petitioner-Institution has requisite approved faculty or not. It goes without saying that if as per NCTE, the institution has the requisite approved faculty, then consequences to ensue in terms of the prayer made in the Writ petition.
::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS5. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel .
appearing for the intervener has drawn the attention of this Court to the judgment passed by the High Court of Delhi in LPA No.376 of 2021 & CM Appls.36044/2021 & 36046/2021, titled as National Council for Teacher Education and Anr. vs. Savita Devi Mahavidyalaya and Anr. decided on 22.11.2022 and submitted that in view of of the withdrawal order dated 14.08.2023 passed by the NCTE, in terms whereof, the recognition of the petitioner has been withdrawn for conducting B.Ed with annual rt intake of 100 students and D.El.Ed with an annual intake of 50 students on the grounds mentioned in the said withdrawal order for the academic session 2024-25, the petitioner-Institute cannot admit the students even for the current academic session, because withdrawal from the academic session 2024-25 is just to protect the children who are already undergoing courses from the said Institution.
6. To clarify the fact this Court on 26.09.2023 had passed the following order:-
"Heard for some time.
Learned counsel for respondent
No.5-NCTE has produced before the
Court withdrawal order dated
14.08.2023, in terms whereof, the Northern Regional Committee of National Council for Teacher Education has withdrawn the recognization of the petitioner for conducting B.Ed. with annual intake of hundred students and D.EI.Ed course with an annual intake of fifty students, on the grounds mentioned in the withdrawal order dated 14.08.2023 for the academic session 2024-25.
The matter is ordered to be listed on 27.09.2023, with the direction to learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5-NCTE to have instructions as to whether the petitioner- University is permitted to admit students for the academic session 2023-24 or not.::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS
Ms. Archna Dutt, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 4 submits that reply .
on behalf of the University has been filed.
Registry is directed to place the same on record, if in order.
List on 27.09.2023."
7. In response thereto, learned counsel for the NCTE has handed over instructions, which are taken on of record, which read as under:-
"As it is clearly mentioned in the withdrawal order dated 14 August 2023, the rt recognition granted to the institution has been withdrawn from the academic session 2024-25. This clearly means that it can admit students for the session 2023-24, but it can't take students from the session 2024-25.
The students enrolled in the academic session 2023-24 will complete their courses and their degree will remain valid for all purposes."
8. The above clearly demonstrates that the NCTE has clarified that the withdrawal order does not comes in the way of the petitioner Institute to admit students as far as the current academic session is concerned.
9. With the said directions and observations, the petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of."
4. Thereafter, in compliance to the order passed by this Court, Minutes were issued by respondent No.4 (Annexure P-8), i.e., Minutes of 414th Meeting of NRC held on 06th & 7th October, 2023, in which, the following discrepancies were pointed out as far as the petitioner-Institution is concerned.
"That the institution has submitted faculty approval letter dated 12.09.2022 issued by Sardar Patel University, Mandi, H.P. only for seven Assistant Professors.::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS
Another faculty approval letter dated 04.10.2023 issued by Sardar Patel University, Mandi, H.P. .
for 1+5 faculty members (one Principal + five Assistant Processor) the above faculties are appointed after withdrawal of recognition for the course of B.Ed. vide order dated 14.08.2023 which is not acceptable.
The institution has submitted faculty approval letter for 13 faculty. As per NCTE Regulations, 2014 for running two units of B.Ed. course faculty of of 1+15 (one principal and 15 Assistant Professor) are required.
The institution has submitted approval letter for the D.EI.Ed. course approved by Principal, DIET, rt Mandi, H.P. the Principal, DIET, Mandi is not authorized to approve the D.EI.Ed. faculty. The affiliating body for D.EI.Ed. course is SCERT, Solan.
5. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court again by way of CWP No.8061 of 2023, titled as Blooms Education Society vs. State of H.P. & Ors., which was decided on 20.10.2023, in the following terms:-
Confronted with the question as to how the petition is maintainable in light of a statutory remedy being made available to the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail the alternative remedy.
2 Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty, as prayed for. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
6. Now, the petitioner is aggrieved by communication dated 10.11.2023 (Annexure P-17), received from the Appellate Authority, in which, certain fresh observations and shortcomings have been made/pointed out with a direction to the petitioner-
Institution to put forth its contention qua the said observations.
7. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the discrepancies, which stood pointed out in terms of 414th ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS meeting of NRC, minutes whereof are on record as Annexure P-8, .
stood duly met with by the petitioner-Institution as would be evident from Annexure P-7/A, which is a list of 16 Faculty Members duly approved by the Registrar of Sardar Patel University, Mandi, H.P. Therefore, issuance of Annexure P-17 is of nothing, but an attempt to deny students to the petitioner-
Institution in the B.Ed and D.EI.Ed. courses for the current session rt counseling for which is scheduled to be closed around 26/27th November, 2023. Learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that despite the petitioner-Institution having all the requisite infrastructure at its disposal to admit the students, this arbitrariness on the part of the respondents is resulting in great hardship to it and accordingly he has submitted that in the interregnum, as an interim measure direction be issued to the respondent to sponsor students to the said courses in the petitioner-Institution by way of counseling.
8. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 has opposed the prayer by submitting that as discrepancies still exist with the petitioner-Institution as stand pointed out as Annexure P-17, therefore, the interim, as prayed for, cannot be granted. He has further submitted that even otherwise as the appeal is still pending, therefore, also this prayer cannot be considered.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent-University has also adopted the contention of respondent No.4.
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that prima facie it appears that the ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS respondents are not treating the petitioner-Institution with an even .
hand. The Court is making this observation for the reason that once after the direction stood issued by this Court in its order passed on 28.09.2023 and in compliance thereto respondent No.4 pointed out as to what were the discrepancies existing with the of respondent-Institution. Thereafter, after the said discrepancies were made good by the petitioner-Institution, respondent No.4 rt could not have come forth with more discrepancies which earlier were not mentioned in Annexure P-8. This clearly demonstrates that respondent No.4 is not acting in a bona fide manner otherwise nothing prevented respondent No.4 from reflecting these discrepancies alongwith those mentioned in Annexure P-8.
Further as a perusal of Annexure P-7 clearly demonstrates that now the petitioner-Institution has a strength of 16 Faculty Members including a Principal, which faculty, has been approved by the Sardar Patel University, Mandi, H.P., students cannot be denied to the petitioner-Institution for the two courses at least for the present academic session and otherwise also the discrepancies which now stand reflected in Annexure P-17 are not such grave, that students cannot be sponsored to the petitioner-Institution for the present academic session.
11. In view of the said observations, in the interim, the petitioner-Institution is permitted to participate in the counseling for the purpose of admission of students in two courses i.e., B.Ed and D.EI Ed. courses and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to participate in the counseling and sponsor candidates ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS as per the choice of the students. However, the participating .
students be made aware about the pendency of the present petition and it may also be made clear that admission taken by the candidates, if any, in two courses in the petitioner-Institution shall abide by the final outcome of the Writ Petition and they shall not of claim any equity at least against the respondents.
CWP No.9031 of 2023rt Reply be filed within four weeks from today.
List on 28.12.2023.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge November 22, 2023 (Vinod) ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2023 20:33:43 :::CIS