Disposed

Jeevan Jyoti Institute of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Delhi HC9 Jan 2015W.P.(C)/145/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of writ petitions challenging rejection of B.Ed. and D.EI.Ed. recognition applications. Directing petitioners to apply afresh under newly notified regulations for academic year 2015-16, the court mandated that any deficiencies be communicated with an opportunity to cure them.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to apply afresh for academic year 2015-16 under new regulations; respondents to communicate deficiencies and allow time for cure.

Jeevan Jyoti Institute of Education Vs National… — Education and Admissions | Delhi HC (2015)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA

¶2

W7, TPI

¶3

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR Respondents Through: Mr Sanjay Sehrawat and Mr Ratish Kumar, Advocates for petitioners in all the matters

¶4

Mr I. Singhdev with Mr Manav Khera, Advocates for R.-1 & 2.

¶5

CORAM.:

¶6

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU ORDER

¶7

% . 09.01.2015

¶8

The petitioners have filed the above petitions challenging the^rejection and return of their application for recognition of B.Ed. and D.EI.Ed. courses on the ground that the State of Haryana had given a general direction to return such applications. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that a batch of similar petitions titled as^{**_'Divine Mission Societ' (Regd.)_**i'.} No.2889/2013' National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.: W.P.(C) and other connected matters were disposed of by this Court by an order dated 24.11.2014 whereby this Court had directed as under:-

¶9

"6. This Court is of the view that alter fling of an application, an institution is legally entitled to have it processed by the statutorily designated authority strictly in accordance with the statutorily prescribed procedure. ihe input of the State Government as a stake holder under the current rules is certainly relevant but it cannot be accepted as 'gospel truth' and that too, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

¶10

Keeping in view the aforesaid as well as the judgment/orders of the Madhya Pradesh and Punjab & Haryana High Courts as well as the order dated 1 0'h September, 2013 passed by Supreme Court in SLP No. 42474248/2009, present writ petitions are disposed of with a

le-

c12

direction that the petitioners shall apply afresh in accordance with new regulations if required and the same shall be considered by the NCTE/NRC for the year 2015-16 in accordance with new regulations which are to be notified in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court. If any deficiency is found, the same shall be communicated to the petitioners, who shall remove the deficiency within the given time. In case, the deficiencies are removed within the given time, the application shall be processed in accordance with Rules and Regulations. If the deficiencies are not removed, the applications shall stand rejected. With the aforesaid observations, the present batch of writ petitions is disposed of but without any order as to costs."

¶15

The learned counsel for the parties point out that the new regulations have since been notified. Consequently, the present petitions are disposed of by directing that the petitioners are at liberty to apply afresh for the academic year 2015-16 in accordance with the new regulations, if required. And, the same shall be decided in accordance with the new regulations by the respondents. In the event, any deficiency is found the same shall be conveyed to the petitioner who shall be given an opportunity to remove the same within a specified time. In case such deficiencies are removed within the specified time, the applications shall be processed in accordance with the relevant regulations. Needless to mention that if the deficiencies are not cured within the specified time the applications shall stand rejected.

¶16

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶17

JANUARY 09, 2015 MK

Jeevan Jyoti Institute of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeevan Jyoti Institute of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shree Bhagirathi Ganga Educational & Cultural Society (Regd.) Vs Delhi Development Authority

National Investors Forum Vs Golden Forests India Ltd.

Srishti Pandey Vs Idbi Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Ajay Gautam Vs Union of India & Ors.

H.C. Arora Vs Delhi Stock Exchange Limited

Sanjay Gutpa Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Vinod Gupta Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Irfan Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Srishti Pandey Vs Idbi Bank Ltd. & Ors.

M/S. Outdoor Communications P. Ltd. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation (Sdmc)

M/S D.G. Exports Vs Union of India and Ors.

Gyan Deep College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

M/S Bayer Bioscience Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Aman Institute of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.