Disposed¶22

Gyanodaya College of Education & Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Delhi HC10 Mar 2025W.P.(C)/2925/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court writ petition (W.P.(C)) under Article 226; mandamus; National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE); pending application dated 06.01.2025; shifting of institution premises; inspection of new premises; B.Ed. and M.Ed. courses; time-bound decision within two months; due process; no merits opinion; petitioners' recourse preserved; disposed; Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the respondents to decide the pending application dated 06.01.2025 within two months of receipt of the order, following due process including inspection of the new premises, with liberty to call for further information if needed; no opinion expressed on merits. ¶22

Gyanodaya College of Education & Anr. Vs National… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents (National Council for Teacher Education) can be directed, via a writ of mandamus under Article 226, to inspect the petitioners' new premises and to process and decide, in a time-bound manner, their pending application dated 06.01.2025 for shifting of the institution's premises for running B.Ed. and M.Ed. courses.

¶14

Court's answer

The respondents are directed to decide the petitioners' pending application dated 06.01.2025 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The respondents shall follow due process in deciding the pending application, including conducting of inspection of the new premises where the petitioners propose to shift the Institute.

¶18

Key takeaways

It is open to the respondents to call for any further information, if necessary, while deciding the petitioners' request.ratio¶19
This Court expressly recorded that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioners' claim; if the petitioners are aggrieved by any order passed by the respondents, they may seek such legal recourse as is permissible in law.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Hon'ble Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma) | W.P.(C) 2925/2025 | Gyanodaya College of Education & Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr. | Decided 10.03.2025. Petitioners, filing under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, sought a writ of mandamus directing NCTE to inspect their new premises and to process and decide, in a time-bound manner, their pending application dated 06.01.2025 for shifting of the institution's premises for running B.Ed. and M.Ed. courses. Counsel for respondents accepted notice and conceded the application remained pending. The Court directed the respondents to decide the pending application within two months of receipt of the order, following due process including conducting of inspection of the new premises, and permitted them to call for any additional information if necessary. The Court expressly stated it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the claim and that the petitioners could seek lawful recourse if aggrieved by the respondents' eventual decision. No further relief was prayed for and the writ petition was disposed of.

¶1

$~60

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2925/2025

¶4

GYANODAYA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION & ANR.

¶5

.....Petitioners Through: Mr.Amitesh Kumar, Ms.Priti Kumari and Mr.Mrinal Kishor, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR.

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Mr.Akhilesh K.Srivastava, Standing Counsel with Ms.Archana Joshi and Mr.Robin Kumar, Advocates

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 10.03.2025

¶13

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of petitioners seeking following prayer:

¶14

“a) issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction to the Respondents to inspect new premises and process & decide petitioner’s application for shifting of their premises of institution for running B.Ed. and M.Ed. Courses in a time bound manner; and/or b) pass any such other orders/directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners states that the application dated 06.01.2025 filed previously by the petitioners, which is pending before the respondents, has not been decided yet.

¶16

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 18:16:21

¶17

Issue notice. Learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice. He does not dispute the fact that the application of the petitioners is still pending for consideration.

¶18

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to decide the pending application dated 06.01.2025 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. It is further directed that the respondents shall follow due process including conducting of inspection of the new premises where the petitioners propose to shift the premises of the Institute.

¶19

It is open for the respondents to call for any information, if necessary, in deciding the request of the petitioners.

¶20

Needless to state, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners, and therefore, in case the petitioners are aggrieved by any order passed by the respondents, it will be open for the petitioners to seek legal recourse as permissible in law.

¶21

No further relief is prayed for, at this stage.

¶22

In view of the above, the present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶23

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J

¶24

MARCH 10, 2025/ Dy/na..

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 18:16:21

Gyanodaya College of Education & Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyanodaya College of Education & Anr. v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepshikha Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs Goods and Service Tax Officer Ward - 92 & Anr.

Ganesh Trading Company Vs Superintendent Range 27 Central GST Division New Delhi & Anr.

Mr. Rohit Hans and Anr. Vs Directorate General of Civil Aviation and Anr.

Smita Jindal Vs Commissioner of Cental Goods and Service Tax (Cgst), Delhi West

M/S Fone O Clock, through Its Partner, Sh. Paras Sareen Vs Commissioner of Customs-Preventive, New Custom House New Delhi & Anr.

Indianeye Security Private Limited Vs Sh Nawab Ali & Anr.

Swayam Sidha Residents Welfare Association through Its President/ General Secretary Jagdish Prasad Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

State Bank of India Vs M/S Pp Jewellers Private Limited

Airports Authority of India Vs Mumbai International Airport Limited & Anr.

Shashank Yadav Vs Gnct of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Airports Authority of India Vs Delhi International Airport Limited & Anr.

Master Anas Akhtar Vs B R Mehta Vb Anguridevi Shersingh Memorial & Ors.

MD College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Aftab Alam Vs University Grant Commission & Anr.