Disposed

Vindhya Shiksha Evam Swasth Samiti and Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Delhi HC3 May 2018W.P.(C)/4248/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Western Regional Committee to treat the petitioner's writ petition as a representation and decide the application for recognition of a second D.El.Ed. unit within two months by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to treat the petition as a representation and decide it by a reasoned and speaking order within two months.

Vindhya Shiksha Evam Swasth Samiti and Anr. Vs… — Education and Admissions | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~20

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 4248/2018 & C.M.No.16617/2018

¶4

VINDHYA SHIKSHA EVAM SWASTH SAMITI AND ANR.

¶5

..... Petitioner

¶6

Through Mr.Amitesh Kumar with Ms.Binisa Mohanty, Advs. versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr.Karan Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

¶7

O R D E R % 03.05.2018

¶8

Vide the present writ petition, the petitioners/Institutes are seeking a direction to the Western Regional Committee/respondent no.2 to process and decide the application of the petitioner for grant of final recognition to the remaining one unit of D.El.Ed. course under Regulation 7(16) of NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulation 2014.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the petitioner had applied for recognition of two units comprising 100 seats for the D.El.Ed. course, the respondent no.2 has granted recognition for only one unit i.e. 50 seats and has till date not communicated any decision regarding the second unit comprising of 50 seats. He further submits that the respondent no.2 has till date, not pointed out any deficiency/reason for not granting recognition for the

¶10

second unit.

¶11

He further submits that though the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 07.01.2017 to the respondents, the respondents have not taken any action thereon. He, therefore, prays that the respondents be directed to treat the present writ petition as a representation and pass an appropriate order after considering the contentions raised in the present petition as also in its representation dated 07.01.2017.

¶12

In support of his aforesaid plea, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the orders passed by this Court in W.P.(C)5017/2016 titled Sant Tapasvi Narayan Das Foundation and Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education, W.P.(C) 3480/2017 titled East N West Foundation & Anr V. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr. and W.P.(C)5017/2016 titled Sant Tapasvi Narayan Das Foundation and Anr V. National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

¶13

Issue notice. Karan Sharma, Advocate, who appears on advance notice for the respondents, is unable to deny the fact that no specific order has been passed by the respondent no.2 in respect of the petitioner’s representation for the remaining one unit of 50 seats.

¶14

Keeping in view the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the orders passed by this Court, the respondents are directed to treat the present petition as a representation and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order within two months.

¶15

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, he will have

¶16

liberty to take legal recourse as per law.

¶17

The petition and pending application are disposed of in the above terms.

¶18

REKHA PALLI, J

¶19

MAY 03, 2018

¶20

Vindhya Shiksha Evam Swasth Samiti and Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vindhya Shiksha Evam Swasth Samiti and Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education and 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

Supriti Bishwas & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors.

Sarita Vs Registrar Cooperative Societie

Shashi Dua Vs Registrar Cooperative Societie

Uk Paints (Overseas) Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 20, New Delhi

Ruchir Mittal Vs Ministry of H.R.D. and Ors.

Ram Gopal Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Manmohan Sharma and Anr. Vs East Delhi Municipal Corporation through Commissioner

Ram Singh Vs D.T.C

Neelam Rani Kharb Vs Dy. Director (Education) and Ors.

Harkirat Kaur through Father Malkeet Singh Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Alan G Vs Medical Council of India and Ors.

Maruti Shiksha Evam Swasthya Samiti and Anr. Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Shree Balaji Education Society Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Rao Mukh Ram Education Society Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.