Allowed

Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Womens College of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education

Madras HC19 Aug 2025WMP/35490/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A teachers education college sought permission for its students to write second-semester examinations despite its recognition application being pending after an appellate direction to apply afresh. Noting a similar prior order and that respondents had not filed a counter, the Court found a prima facie case and directed opening of the examination portal, subject to the writ petition's outcome.

What did the court decide?

Second respondent directed to open the portal forthwith enabling students to appear for the second-semester examinations from 23.08.2025; subject to writ petition outcome; no costs.

Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Womens College of Education Vs… — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

WMP.No.35490 of 2025 in WP NO. 1421 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-08-2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶5

WMP.No.35490 of 2025

¶6

¶7

WP NO. 1421 of 2025

¶8

Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Womens College Of Education Arani Main Road, Vellapakkam Vellore Distrct, Represented By Its Secretary Mr Al. Ravi

¶9

Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

National Council For Teacher Education Southern Regional Committee, G-7, Section -10, Dwaranka, New Delhi 110 075 and another

¶12

Respondent(s)

¶13

For Petitioner(s):

¶14

M/s.G.Sankaran, Sr.Counsel For M/s. S.Bharathi Rajan

¶15

For Respondent(s):

¶16

Mr.J.Harikrishnan For R1 Mr.D.Ravichander, S.C., For R2

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This petition has been filed seeking permission to allow the student

¶19

to appear for the arrears paper if any and permit the students to

¶20

write their 2^nd semester examinations scheduled to be held from 22.08.2025.

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the

¶23

petitioner-institution was originally established by Mahalakshmi

¶24

Educational Charitable Trust and based upon the resolution dated 25.10.2012, the administration has got merged with Bhuvaneswari Educational Trust by way of a gift deed and after that the petitioner

¶25

made an application on 20.03.2015 which was forwarded to the 2^nd respondent to accept and approve the change in the name of the Trust. The learned Senior Counsel would further submit that though the application was made only for change of name of the Trust, that was rejected by the first respondent and against which the

¶26

petitioner preferred an appeal and in the appeal, the Appellate Authority passed an order on 27.12.2024 directing the petitioner to apply afresh.

¶27

Based upon the above finding, the learned Standing Counsel

¶28

would submit that when the petitioner was directed to apply afresh, it would ultimately mean that the petitioner does not have

¶29

recognition. Therefore, the question of opening the portal permitting the petitioner to write exam does not arise. He would rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR

¶30

Medical University Vs. SVS Educational and Social Trust

¶31

reported in (2019) 12 SCC 613 and would further contend that exercising jurisdiction against the provisional admission during the

¶32

pendency of the writ petition exposes the students to the risk of

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

losing precious years in case of dismissal of the writ petition. By relying upon the above ratio, the learned Standing Counsel would

¶35

submit that if any interim order is passed, it would seriously

¶36

prejudice the petitioner. Further, having no recognition granted by

¶37

the first respondent, the question of granting interim order does not arise. Hence, prayed to dismiss this petition. It is the further

¶38

submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent that the present petition has been filed at the eleventh hour

¶39

pressurising the Court as well as all machineries of the first

¶40

respondent. Hence, prayed to dismiss the present petition.

¶41

The said contention was reiterated by the learned Standing counsel appearing for the first respondent.

¶42

I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

¶43

As rightly contended by the learned Senior Counsel, in a similar case in WMP.No.1660 of 2025, this Court, vide order dated

¶44

07.03.2025 directed the 2^nd respondent to open the portal for uploading admitted students detail by the petitioner institution to write the first semester exams for the academic year 2024-25.

¶45

Though, as rightly contended by the learned Standing Counsel, the petitioner has approached this Court at the eleventh hour, the

¶46

explanation of the learned Senior Counsel that the exam schedule was notified only on 06.08.2025 and that in the meanwhile they

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

have sent representation to the 2^nd respondent to open the portal must be viewed in favour of the petitioner. It is pertinent to mention

¶49

that they did not respond, they were constrained to file the present petition.

¶50

It is pertinent to mention here that the main contention put forth by the learned Senior Counsel is that the first respondent rejected the recognition under the misconception of facts and directed them to apply afresh. In this writ petition, the respondent is yet to file counter. Therefore, in the meanwhile, if the student of the petitioner college is not permitted to write the exams, it would prejudice their interest.

¶51

From the above submissions of the petitioner, this Court finds prima facie case in their favour. In a similar circumstances, this Court has already granted interim relief on 07.03.2025 in WMP.No.1660 of 2025.

¶52

In view of the above factual position, this Court deems it

¶53

appropriate to grant interim relief to the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent is directed to open the portal, so as to enable the students to appear for the second semester examination, which is scheduled from 23.08.2025, forthwith. It is made clear that the

¶54

permission granted by this Court is subject to the outcome of the writ petition and either, the student or the petitioner college cannot

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

claim any equity out of this order.

¶57

This Writ Miscellaneous Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.

19-08-2025

(1/2)

kmi

National Council For Teacher Education Southern Regional Committee, G-7, Section -10, Dwaranka, New Delhi 110 075

¶63

The Registrar

¶64

Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University, Gangaiamman Koil Street, Karapakkam Chennai 600 097

¶65

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Womens College of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Womens College of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education

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

Dr.Akash Narayan.T, M.S.Ortho., Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Anna Nursery and Primary School Vs the Secretary to Government

Dr.Shivakumarpawadshettar Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Dr.Mohammed Imran Khan a Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

P.Roshan Vs Selection Committee

Devarajan College of Education Vs Syndicate Sub Committee