Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Dr. D.S. Aher College Of Education vs National Council For Teacher Education ... on 17 December, 2020

Author: Jayant Nath

Bench: Jayant Nath

$~A-53
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 10518/2020
      DR. D.S. AHER COLLEGE OF EDUCATION       ..... Petitioner
                     Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharawat, Adv.

                          versus

      NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR.
                                               ..... Respondents
                  Through: Ms. Kartika Sharma, Adv.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
                  ORDER

% 17.12.2020 This hearing is conducted through Video-Conferencing. W.P.(C) 10518/2020 & CM No. 33251/2020(stay)

1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the show- cause notice dated 29.9.2020 and also the decision taken by respondent no.2 in its meeting held on 9th to 11th November, 2020 whereby recognition of the petitioner for the B.Ed. course was withdrawn. The petitioner was granted recognition on 28th December, 2006 for the B.Ed. course for 100 seats. Thereafter, the petitioner has obtained affiliation from the affiliated University and has commenced the course in the academic session 2007-08. On 27th August, 2020, the WRC took a decision to issue show-cause notices to all institutions which were granted recognition for rented-premises and have not yet shifted to their own premises.

2. In view of the above, a show-cause notice dated 29.9.2020 was issued to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the said show-cause notice granting 30 days' time to file a reply was received by the petitioner only on 31.10.2020. This is manifest from the tracking record of speed post. The reply was filed on 19th November, 2020 by the petitioner.

3. However, without waiting for the 30 days' period from the date of receipt of the notice, the impugned order dated 9th November, 2020 has been passed by WRC withdrawing the recognition of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also taken me through the reply dated 19th November, 2020 where it is stated that the institution from the current academic year has shifted its own college to a new premises owned by the institution. Details of title whereof have been mentioned in the reply.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the present petition saying that the petitioner has alternate remedy by way of appeal.

6. The issue is short; there are two clear reasons as to why the impugned order suffers from illegality. Firstly, the show-cause notice itself stipulated a period of 30 days for giving a reply. The petitioner has received the show- cause notice on 31.10.2020 and has sent a reply on 19th November, 2020. The respondent has however without waiting for a reasonable time for the reply to the show-cause notice on 9th November, 2020 itself passed a withdrawal order without complying with the principles of natural justice.

7. That apart as pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner as per Standard Operating Procedure two show-cause notices are issued before a W.P.(C) 10518/2020 Page 2 of 3 withdrawal order is passed. In the present case no such step has been taken. Only one show-cause notice has been issued.

8. The impugned order suffers from the illegality. The same is accordingly quashed. The matter is remanded back to WRC for re- considering the same as per law.

9. The petition stands disposed of along with all pending applications in view of the above.

JAYANT NATH, J DECEMBER 17, 2020 ak W.P.(C) 10518/2020 Page 3 of 3