Madras High Court
Kalaiammal College Of Education vs National Council For Teacher Education on 19 July, 2021
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.P.No. 1144 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P.No. 1144 of 2021
and
W.M.P.No.1291 & 1294 of 2021
Kalaiammal College of Education,
Rep.by its Correspondent,
Mr.S.Muthusamy ..Petitioner
Vs
National Council for Teacher Education,
Rep. by its Regional Director4,
Southern Regional Committee,
G-7, Section-10, (Near Sector-10 Metro Station)
Dwaraka, New Delhi-110075. ..Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of
India for writ of certiorari, calling for the records and quash the
impugned order passed by the respondent vide F.SRC/ NCTE/
APSO9383/ TN/ M.Ed/ 2020/ 116874 dated 18.08.2020.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Kannan
For Respondent : Mr.Su.Srinivasan, NCTE
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/8
W.P.No. 1144 of 2021
ORDER
The writ petitioner has challenged the withdrawn order dated 18.05.2021 on the ground that the respondent has not provided sufficient opportunity to submit his explanation.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's college was existing B.Ed & M.Ed institute from the year 2007. After fulfilling the norms and standards prescribed by the respondent, the petitioner's college was granted recognition. Subsequently for grant of continuous recognition, the respondent without considering the reply for show causes notice and the written statement, without affording any opportunity, has passed an order withdrawing the recognition granted to the petitioner's college. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out in the final show cause notice are relating to production of the certified copy of the land documents, copy of land use certificate, notarised copy of the Non-Encumbrance Certificate, Approved Building Plan, copy of site plan and copy of building completion certificate.
http://www.judis.nic.in 2/8 W.P.No. 1144 of 2021
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the aforesaid defects pointed out by the respondents are curable defects and the petitioner can produce all the documents before the authority concerned, if the opportunity is granted to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner seeks to quash the impugned order passed by the respondent.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has submitted his written representation on 13.12.2020 and complied all the defects pointed out by the respondent. But the respondent without considering the same and without assigning any reason, has passed the impugned rejection order. Therefore, the said order is liable to be quashed.
6. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted the respondent has granted several opportunities to the petitioner by way of first show cause notice dated 16.09.2019 and the final show cause notice dated 08.10.2019, but they have not come forward to comply with the conditions as mentioned in the show cause notices, hence the impugned came to be passed, rejecting the recognition. The http://www.judis.nic.in 3/8 W.P.No. 1144 of 2021 learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent further submitted that if the petitioner really aggrieved by the impugned order, the petitioner shall prefer an apply under Section 18 of NCTE Act 1983. Without preferring appeal before the concerned authority, they have preferred the instant writ petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner's College and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the records.
8. It is seen from the documents that originally the respondent has granted conditional recognition to the petitioner's college on 26.05.2015. Subsequently, at the time of granting continuous recognition, the respondent had issued a show cause notice dated 16.09.2019, directing the petitioner's college to submit certain documents. The petitioner has also submitted the documents as required by the respondent by reply dated 05.09.2019. Again, the respondent has sent final show cause notice dated 31.12.2019 pointing out the certain defects to be rectified by petitioner's college. Subsequently, the petitioner's college has also submitted written representation dated 13.12.2020 to the respondent. Thereafter, the impuged withdrawal order was passed by the respondent, which according to the http://www.judis.nic.in 4/8 W.P.No. 1144 of 2021 petitioner is violative of principles of natural justice.
9. A reading of the impugned order would disclose the fact that the Southern Regional Committee by letter dated 14.06.2016, proposed for an inspection of the petitioner's institution and it was not conducted. Further, it is also seen from the impugned order that though the respondent have mentioned the written representation submitted by the petitioner's college, there was no discussion about the said written representation for not considering the same.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner has complied all the defects pointed out by the respondents, agreed to file an appeal before the authority concerned under Section 18 of the Act. 1983. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent informed this Court that the petitioner's institution shall make an appeal before the appellate authority concerned along with relevant documents. The appellate authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders.
11. By accepting the aforesaid statements made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties concerned, this Court is http://www.judis.nic.in 5/8 W.P.No. 1144 of 2021 inclined to issue the following directions; i. The petitioner's College shall prefer an appeal before the NCTE, Southern Regional Committee, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ii. On filing of such appeal by the petitioner's college, the respondent shall consider the same and pass orders on merits, in accordance with law, after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks thereafter. iii. It is needless to say that, it is open to the petitioner to produce all the relevant documents before the appellate authority.
iv. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition are closed.
19.07.2021 Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes ak http://www.judis.nic.in 6/8 W.P.No. 1144 of 2021 To The Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education, Southern Regional Committee, G-7, Section-10, (Near Sector-10 Metro Station) Dwaraka, New Delhi-110075.
http://www.judis.nic.in 7/8 W.P.No. 1144 of 2021 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
ak W.P.No. 1144 of 2021 and WMP.Nos. 1291 & 1294 of 2021 19.07.2021 http://www.judis.nic.in 8/8