Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Prarthna Primary Teachers Training ... on 23 September, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1062/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1062 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8357 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1062 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 2 of 2025
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1062 of 2025
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Versus
PRARTHNA PRIMARY TEACHERS TRAINING COLLEGE & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. MAITHILI MEHTA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR. SIDDHARTH DAVE, ADV. WITH KOMAL S DAVE(8152) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MS. HETAL PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 23/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) Ms. Hetal Patel, the learned advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2-National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE). It is pointed out by the learned advocate Ms. Hetal Patel appearing for the NCTE that the writ petition has been filed seeking to participate in the admission process initiated by the State authorities for admission to D.El.Ed. Course without impleading the NCTE, which was a necessary and proper party to Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 01:40:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1062/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025 undefined bring the correct and complete facts before the writ Court.
2. The writ petition, which has been allowed by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.06.2025, was filed for an innocuous relief that the name of the petitioner college be added in the list of colleges mentioned in the advertisement and available on the website of the respondent authority for allotment of the students for D.El.Ed. course for the Academic Year 2025-2026.
3. As per the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner institution was granted recognition by the NCTE on 25.07.2027 for conducting the Primary Teacher Certificate (PTC) course with an intake of 50 students. The assertion in paragraph No. 4.1 of the writ petition is that the institution has remained recognised institution since then. It is further stated in paragraph No. 4.2 of the writ petition that the NCTE had issued public notices dated 09.09.2024 and 10.12.2024 requiring the recognised institutions to submit On-line Performance Appraisal Report (PAR) for the Academic Years 2021-22 and 2022-2023. However, since the petitioner institution has not admitted any student during the relevant Academic Years, there was no occasion or requirement for submission of PAR.
4. Pertinent is to note that various writ petitions were filed in a cyclostyle manner with copy-paste assertions about the recognition granted by the NCTE and same issue raised was about the non- submission of PAR, as directed by the NCTE in the public notices dated 09.09.2024 and 10.12.2024. An impression was given to the learned single Judge that the petitioner college was being estopped from participating in the admission process by the State authorities Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 01:40:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1062/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025 undefined only on account of non-submission of PAR as directed by the NCTE. It is evident from the judgment impugned that this is the only issue considered by the learned single Judge to issue directions to the respondents to permit the petitioner college to participate in the process and decide the application dated 10.06.2025 for allotment of the students for D.El.Ed. Course for the Academic year 2025- 2026.
5. It is pointed by Ms. Maithili Mehta, the learned AGP appearing for the the State respondent that since the writ petition was decided at the admission stage, the State authorities namely the respondent before the writ court, could not get opportunity to file their response. It is further submitted that an order dated 03.01.2013 had been passed by the NCT for withdrawal of recognition of the petitioner institution namely Prarthna Primary Teachers Training College which was granted vide order dated 25.07.2007. In support thereof, an affidavit dated 08.09.2025 has been filed by the Deputy Director, Office of the Director of Primary Education, Gandhinagar, alongwith which a copy of the order dated 03.01.2013 has been placed before the Court.
6. It is demonstrated that a show cause notice under Section 17 of the ACT Act, 1993 was issued to the petitioner institution on 24.01.2012 inter alia informing about the provision of the regulations and compliance of shifting of the institution in its own premises, which was being run in the rented premises when the recognition was granted. The order records that since the institution did not submit reply in compliance of the show cause notice dated 24.01.2012, even after expiry of time limit mentioned therein, the matter was placed before the WRC (Western Regional Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 01:40:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1062/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025 undefined Committee) in its 174th meeting held on 19th - 21st November, 2012. The Committee decided to withdraw the recognition on the ground of no response to the notice dated 24.01.2012. A copy of the withdrawal order dated 03.01.2013 was also sent to the Principal of the institution concerned as is evident from the order itself.
7. It is, thus, evident that since the petitioner institution has not been able to satisfy the requirements of the recognition by the NCT and in exercise of powers vested under Section 17(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993, the recognition was withdrawn from the end of the Academic Session next following the date of the withdrawal order, meaning thereby from Academic Session 2013-2014.
8. It is pointed out by Ms. Hetal Patel, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent NCTE that the writ petitioner namely Prarthna Primary Teachers Training College had approached the Delhi High Court alongwith many other colleges to challenge the withdrawal of recognition of the petitioner institution by the Regional Committee of the NCTE. The Writ Petition (C) No. 12717 of 2025 filed by the writ petitioner herein before the Delhi High Court has been dismissed with costs vide judgment and order dated 10.09.2025. It is also pointed out that the Delhi High Court had issued notice on 22.08.2025 in the said writ petition, which fact, however, has not been brought to the notice of this Court by the learned advocate for the writ petitioner namely the respondent No.1 herein, while the order dated 04.09.2025 was passed in the present appeal.
9. It is evident that the writ petitioner not only was aware of the order of withdrawal of recognition passed in the year 2013, but Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 01:40:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1062/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025 undefined also availed the remedy to challenge the same by approaching the Delhi High Court in the year 2025. However, the challenge has been turned down on the statement of the learned advocate appearing for the NCTE therein that the withdrawal order was of dated 03.01.2013 and this fact was suppressed by the petitioner in the writ petition.
10. From the above noted facts, it is evident that when the writ petitioner approached the writ court on 24.06.2025, he was well aware of the fact that they had no recognition duly granted by the NCTE. The statement in paragraph No. 4.1 of the writ petition that the institution has remained a recognised institution since after 25.07.2007 is nothing but a misleading statement made by suppression of material fact, which has led to grant of relief in favour of the petitioner by the learned single Judge.
11. The way the petitioner has approached this Court and the Delhi High Court for different reliefs, almost at the same point of time, makes it evident that the writ petitioner is a dishonest litigant, who had indulged in 'forum shopping' and succeeded in getting a favourable order by concealment of the material fact from the writ court. For this conduct of the petitioner in filling the writ petition with misleading statement and concealment of material fact, while setting aside the judgment and order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the learned single Judge, we dismiss the writ petition with the costs of Rs. 50,000/-, which shall be deposited by the petitioner/respondent herein before the Registrar General of the High Court. The costs so deposited shall be transmitted to the account of the High Court Legal Services Committee.
Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 01:40:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1062/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025 undefined
12. The pending Civil Applications stand disposed of.
13. As we have come across many orders of the similar kind in appeal jurisdiction, where the writ petitioners made misleading statements and got favourable orders to participate in the admission process of D.El.Ed. Course without impleading the NCTE as party respondent before the writ court, we direct the Registrar General to bring this order to the notice of the writ court for information.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (D.N.RAY,J) C.M. JOSHI Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 01:40:36 IST 2025