Allowed

S.R. Bal Vidhya Mandir Samiti v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Oct 2021CW/1734/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NCTE-recognized D.El.Ed. institutions challenged denial of NOC, affiliation and counselling participation following sudden State inspections. The Court held the inspections unauthorized and the denial unlawful, quashed both impugned orders and directed separate counselling and student allotment. The writ petitions were allowed; connected contempt petitions were disposed of with compliance directio

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders quashed; separate counselling and student allotment directed, with compliance and inclusion in future counselling.

S.R. Bal Vidhya Mandir Samiti Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

(1) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1712/2021

¶3

B.D.M.L Shikshan Sansthan, Through Its Secretary Mr. Ravinder Kumar Son Of Shri Madan Lal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village- Sohan Ki Dhani, Post- Harsora, Bansur, Alwar (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶7

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶8

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020,elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶9

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

Connected With

¶12

(2) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9420/2019

¶13

Bhane Sahaya Kalyan Shikshak Sansthan, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Shri Babu Lal Yadav S/o Shri Harchand Yadav, Aged About 46 Years, R/o 147, Shiv Vatika, Hatoj, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶14

----Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶17

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶18

The Coordinator, Pre-D.el.ed- 2019-20, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶19

Northern Regional Committee, National Council For Teachers Education Through Its Regional Director, Jeevan

¶20

(2 of 50)

¶21

[CW-1712/2021]

¶22

Nidhi - Ii, Lic Building, Jaipur.

¶23

----Respondents

¶24

(3) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10550/2019

¶25

Siddarth College Of Education, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur, Through Its Secretary Santara Meena Wife Of Shri Mukesh Meena, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 8-254, 18-B Scheme, Gopalpura Byepass, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶26

----Petitioner

¶27

Versus

¶28

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶29

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶30

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2019, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶31

----Respondents

¶32

(4) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10554/2019

¶33

Gaurav T.t. College, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Santara Meena Wife Of Shri Mukesh Meena, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 8-254, 18-B Scheme, Gopalpura Byepass, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶34

----Petitioner

¶35

Versus

¶36

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶37

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶38

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2019, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶39

----Respondents

¶40

(5) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10555/2019

¶41

Salasar Balaji B.ed. College, Behind Circuit House, Jaipur Road Sikar, Through Its Secretary Snehlata Wife Of Ranjit Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of B-5, Todi Nagar, Sikar(Raj.).

(3 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶47

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶48

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2019, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶49

----Respondents

¶50

(6) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10558/2019

¶51

Arawali Shiksha And Anusandhan Sansthan, Jeen Mata Road, Tamakapura, Data Ramgarh, District Sikar, Through Its Secretary Sabita Wife Of Shri Suresh Kumar Aged Avbout 32 Years, Resident Of Near Badri Vihar, District Sikar(Raj.).

¶52

----Petitioner

¶53

Versus

¶54

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶55

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶56

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2019, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶57

----Respondents

¶58

(7) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 946/2020

¶59

Taj Memorial Teacher Training School, Village- Jagdishpura, PostSharund, Tehsil- Kotputli, District- Jaipur Through Its Secretary Dr. Suman Kumari Yadav Wife Of Shri Naveen Kumar Yadav, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village- Jagdishpura, Post- Sharund, Tehsil- Kotputli, District- Jaipur(Rajasthan).

¶60

----Petitioner

¶61

Versus

¶62

Smt. Arpana Arora, I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶63

(4 of 50)

¶64

[CW-1712/2021]

¶65

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶66

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶67

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶68

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶69

----Respondents

¶70

(8) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 947/2020

¶71

Tak Shiksha Niketan Girls B.s.t.c. College, Ajmer Through Secretary, Veer Singh Mahawar S/o Sh. Gabru Lal Mahawar (Mali), Aged About 84 Years, R/o Shastri Nagar, Ajmer (Rajasthan).

¶72

----Petitioner

¶73

Versus

¶74

Smt. Arpana Arora I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶75

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶76

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶77

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶78

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶79

----Respondents

¶80

(9) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 948/2020

¶81

B.d.m.l Shikshan Sansthan, Through Its Secretary Mr. Ravinder Kumar Son Of Shri Madan Lal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years,

¶82

(5 of 50)

¶83

[CW-1712/2021]

¶84

Resident Of Village- Sohan Ki Dhani, Post- Harsora, Bansur, Alwar (Rajasthan).

¶85

----Petitioner

¶86

Versus

¶87

Smt. Arpana Arora, I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶88

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶89

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶90

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶91

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶92

----Respondents

¶93

(10) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 949/2020

¶94

Regional Girls College, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu Run And Manage By Regional Sewa Samiti, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Shri Jagdish Prasad Saini Son Of Shri Chunni Lal Saini, Aged About 43 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 10, Shakambhari Road, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan)

¶95

----Petitioner

¶96

Versus

¶97

Smt. Arpana Arora I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶98

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶99

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶100

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶101

(6 of 50)

¶102

[CW-1712/2021]

¶103

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶104

----Respondents

¶105

(11) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 950/2020

¶106

Bhane Sahaya Kalyan Shikshak Sansthan, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Babu Lal Yadav S/o Harchand Yadav, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 147, Shiv Vatika, Hatoj, Jhotwara, District- Jaipur303108 (Rajasthan).

¶107

----Petitioner

¶108

Smt. Arpana Arora I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education) Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶109

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶110

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶111

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶112

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶113

----Respondents

¶114

(12) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 951/2020

¶115

Royal Shikshak Prashikshan Centre, Kacholya Road, Chomu, District- Jaipur Through Its Secretary Sundaram Son Of Shri Prabhati Lal, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Kacholya Road, Chomu, District- Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶116

----Petitioner

¶117

Versus

¶118

Smt. Arpana Arora I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶119

(7 of 50)

¶120

[CW-1712/2021]

¶121

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶122

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶123

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶124

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶125

----Respondents

¶126

(13) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 952/2020

¶127

S.r. Bal Vidhya Mandir Samiti Bhainsawa, Through Its Secretary Harphool Choudhary Son Of Shri Sawai Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Plot No. 412, Mata Ji Ki Dhani, Village- Bhainsawa, Tehsil- Phulera, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶128

----Petitioner

¶129

Versus

¶130

Smt. Arpana Arora I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶131

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶132

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶133

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶134

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶135

----Respondents

¶136

(14) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 953/2020

¶137

Deepak Diploma Elementary T.t College, Khasra No. 959, Nahar Road, Paota, Tehsil- Kotputli, District- Jaipur Rajasthan Through

¶138

(8 of 50)

¶139

[CW-1712/2021]

¶140

Its Secretary Mahesh Kumar Yadav Son Of Shri Bhoma Ram Yadav, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Khasra No. 959, Nahar Road, Paota, Tehsil- Kotputli, District - Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶141

----Petitioner

¶142

Versus

¶143

Smt. Arpana Arora I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶144

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶145

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶146

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶147

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶148

----Respondents

¶149

(15) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 954/2020

¶150

Santosh Technical And Educational Development Society, Through Its Secretary Umesh Kumar Yadav S/o Vijay Singh Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village- Fatehpura Kalan, Tehsil- Kotputli, District- Jaipur-303108(Rajasthan).

¶151

----Petitioner

¶152

Versus

¶153

Smt. Arpana Arora, I.a.s, Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur-302005

¶154

Mr. Sourav Swami I.a.s, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶155

Mr. Pala Ram Mewata, The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶156

Mr. T. Pritam Singh, Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶157

(9 of 50)

¶158

[CW-1712/2021]

¶159

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶160

----Respondents

¶161

(16) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 956/2020

¶162

Arawali Shiksha And Anusandhan Sansthan, Jeen Mata Road, Tamakapura, Data Ramgarh, District Sikar, Through Its Secretary Sabita Wife Of Shri Suresh Kumar Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Near Badri Vihar, District Sikar (Raj.)

¶163

----Petitioner

¶164

Versus

¶165

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶166

Mrs. Aparna Arora, Principal Secretary To Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶167

Sourabh Swami, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner. 4. Palaaram Mevata, Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶168

----Respondents

¶169

(17) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 957/2020

¶170

Siddarth College Of Education, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mahesh Singh Beniwal S/o Vijay Singh Beniwal , Age 39 Years , R/o S -57 Nri Colony Raj Angan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶171

----Petitioner

¶172

Versus

¶173

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶174

Mrs. Aparna Arora, Principal Secretary To Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶175

Sourabh Swami, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶176

Palaaram Mevata, Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-

¶177

(10 of 50)

¶178

[CW-1712/2021]

¶179

2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶180

----Respondents

¶181

(18) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 958/2020

¶182

Gaurav T.t. College, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mahesh Singh Beniwal S/o Vijay Singh Beniwal , Age 39 Years , R/o S -57 Nri Colony Raj Angan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶183

----Petitioner

¶184

Versus

¶185

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶186

Mrs. Aparna Arora, Principal Secretary To Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶187

Sourabh Swami, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner. 4. Palaaram Mevata, Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶188

----Respondents

¶189

(19) S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 959/2020

¶190

Salasar Balaji B.ed. College, Behind Circuit House, Jaipur Road, Sikar, Through Its Secretary Snehlata Wife Of Ranjit Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of B-5, Todi Nagar, Sikar (Raj.)

¶191

----Petitioner

¶192

Versus

¶193

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶194

Mrs. Aparna Arora, Principal Secretary To Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶195

Sourabh Swami, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner. 4. Palaaram Mevata, Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶196

----Respondents

¶197

(20) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12991/2020

¶198

(11 of 50)

¶199

[CW-1712/2021]

¶200

Gaurav T.t. College, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mahesh Singh Beniwal S/o Vijay Singh Beniwal , Age 39 Years , R/o S -57 Nri Colony Raj Angan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶201

----Petitioner

¶202

Versus

¶203

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶204

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶205

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶206

----Respondents

¶207

(21) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12992/2020

¶208

Siddarth College Of Education, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mahesh Singh Beniwal S/o Vijay Singh Beniwal , Age 39 Years , R/o S -57 Nri Colony Raj Angan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶209

----Petitioner

¶210

Versus

¶211

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶212

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶213

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶214

----Respondents

¶215

(22) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12993/2020

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To

¶220

(12 of 50)

¶221

[CW-1712/2021]

¶222

Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶223

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶224

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶225

----Respondents

¶226

(23) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12997/2020

¶227

Salasar Balaji B.ed. College, Behind Circuit House, Jaipur Road, Sikar, Through Its Secretary Snehlata Wife Of Ranjit Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of B-5, Todi Nagar, Sikar (Raj.)

¶228

----Petitioner

¶229

Versus

¶230

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶231

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶232

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶233

----Respondents

¶234

(24) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13040/2020

¶235

Bhane Sahaya Kalyan Shikshak Sansthan, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Babu Lal Yadav S/o Harchand Yadav, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 147, Shiv Vatika, Hatoj, Jhotwara, District- Jaipur303108 (Rajasthan).

¶236

----Petitioner

¶237

Versus

¶238

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶239

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶240

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed - 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶241

Western Regional Committee, National Council For

¶242

(13 of 50)

¶243

[CW-1712/2021]

¶244

Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶245

----Respondents

¶246

(25) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13041/2020

¶247

Deepak Diploma Elementary T.t College, Khasra No. 959, Nahar Road, Paota, Tehsil- Kotputli, District- Jaipur Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Mahesh Kumar Yadav Son Of Shri Bhoma Ram Yadav, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Khasra No. 959, Nahar Road, Paota, Tehsil- Kotputli, District - Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶248

----Petitioner

¶249

Versus

¶250

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶251

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶252

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020,elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶253

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶254

----Respondents

¶255

(26) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13043/2020

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶260

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶261

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed - 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶262

(14 of 50)

¶263

[CW-1712/2021]

¶264

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶265

----Respondents

¶266

(27) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13044/2020

¶267

B.d.m.l Shikshan Sansthan, Through Its Secretary Mr. Ravinder Kumar Son Of Shri Madan Lal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village- Sohan Ki Dhani, Post- Harsora, Bansur, Alwar (Rajasthan).

¶268

----Petitioner

¶269

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶270

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶271

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶272

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶273

----Respondents

¶274

(28) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13044/2020

¶275

----Petitioners

¶276

Versus

¶277

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶278

----Respondent

¶279

(29) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13047/2020

(15 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶286

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶287

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶288

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶289

----Respondents

¶290

(30) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13048/2020

¶291

Tak Shiksha Niketan Girls B.s.t.c. College, Ajmer Through Secretary, Veer Singh Mahawar S/o Sh. Gabru Lal Mahawar (Mali), Aged About 84 Years, R/o Shastri Nagar, Ajmer (Rajasthan).

¶292

----Petitioner

¶293

Versus

¶294

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶295

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶296

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed - 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶297

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶298

----Respondents

¶299

(31) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13054/2020

¶300

Bhanwar Kanwar Sugan Singh Shiksha Mahavidhyalaya, Run And Manage By Dhamanasekhasewa Trust Through Its Managing Trustee Vijendra Singh Son Of Shri Sugan Singh, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 194, Indrepura, Udaipurwati, DistrictJhunjhunu (Rajasthan).

(16 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶306

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶307

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶308

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶309

----Respondents

¶310

(32) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13060/2020

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶315

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶316

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶317

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶318

----Respondents

¶319

(33) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13061/2020

(17 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶326

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶327

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020,elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶328

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶329

----Respondents

¶330

(34) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13073/2020

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶335

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶336

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶337

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶338

----Respondents (35) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14997/2020

¶339

Salasar Balaji B.ed. College, Behind Circuit House, Jaipur Road, Sikar, Through Its Secretary Snehlata Wife Of Ranjit Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of B-5, Todi Nagar, Sikar (Raj)

(18 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶345

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶346

Westren Regional Committee Of The National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, LandmarkNear Metro Station, New Delhi, Through Its Regional Director.

¶347

----Respondents

¶348

(36) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 253/2021

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶353

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶354

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶355

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶356

----Respondents (37) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 306/2021

¶357

Santosh Technical And Educational Development Society, Through Its Secretary Umesh Kumar Yadav S/o Vijay Singh Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Fatehpura Kalan, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur - 303108

----Petitioner

(19 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶363

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶364

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed - 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶365

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector - 10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶366

----Respondents

¶367

(38) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 328/2021

¶368

Deepak Diploma Elementary T.t College, Khasra No. 959, Nahar Road, Paota, Tehsil - Kotputli, District - Jaipur Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Mahesh Kumar Yadav Son Of Shri Bhoma Ram Yadav, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Khasra No. 959, Nahar Road, Paota, Tehsil.

¶369

----Petitioner

¶370

Versus

¶371

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶372

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶373

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed-2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶374

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education Through Its Regional Director, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark- Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi-110075.

¶375

----Respondents (39) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1717/2021

¶376

Royal Shikshak Prashikshan Centre, Kacholya Road, Chomu, District Jaipur Through Its Secretary Sundaram Son Of Shri Prabhati Lal, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Kacholya Road, Chomu, District Jaipur.

----Petitioner

(20 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶382

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶383

The Coordinator, Pre - D.el.ed -2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶384

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶385

----Respondents

¶386

(40) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1734/2021

¶387

S.r. Bal Vidhya Mandir Samiti, Bhainsawa Through Its Secretary Harphool Choudhary Son Of Shri Sawai Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Plot No. 412, Mata Ji Ki Dhani, Village- Bhainsawa, Tehsil- Phulera, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶388

----Petitioner

¶389

Versus

¶390

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶391

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶392

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020,elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶393

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶394

----Respondents

¶395

(41) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1735/2021

¶396

Bhane Sahaya Jankalyan Shikshak Sansthan, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Babu Lal Yadav S/o Harchand Yadav, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 147, Shiv Vatika, Hatoj, Jhotwara, District- Jaipur303108 (Rajasthan).

----Petitioner

(21 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005

¶402

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan)

¶403

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020, Elementary Education, Bikaner

¶404

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶405

----Respondents

¶406

(42) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1780/2021

¶407

Bhanwar Kanwar Sugan Singh Shiksha Mahavidhyalaya, Run And Manage By Dhamana Sekha Sewa Trust Through Its Managing Trustee Vijendra Singh Son Of Shri Sugan Singh, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of Plot No.194, Indrepura, Udaipurwati, District - Jhunjhunu Aipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan)

¶408

----Petitioner

¶409

Versus

¶410

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶411

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶412

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020,elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶413

Western Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher Education through its Regional Director, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark- Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi

¶414

----Respondent

¶415

(43) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1790/2021

¶416

Regional Girls College, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu Run And Manage By Regional Sewa Samiti, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Shri Jagdish Prasad Saini Son Of Shri Chunni Lal Saini Aged About 43 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 10, Shakambhari Road, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan)

(22 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

----Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary (School Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Main Building, Secretariat, R.no. 1212, 2Nd Floor, Jaipur302005.

¶422

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶423

The Coordinator, Pre- D.el.ed- 2020,elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶424

Western Regional Committee, National Council For Teacher Education, Through Its Regional Director, G- 7,sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi - 110075.

¶425

----Respondents (44) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2209/2021

¶426

Meera Keshav Mahila Shikshak Prashikshan Mahavidhalaya, Khasra No. 330,331, Madau, P.o.-Bhankrota, Tehsil- Sanganer, Dist.- Jaipur Running By Society Of Amar Bal Vidhalaya Shiksha Samiti, Khasra No. 330,331, Madau, P.o.-Bhankrota, TehsilSanganer, Dist.- Jaipur Through Its Secretary Shri Mahaveer Singh Rajawat S/o Shri Devi Singh Rajawat, Aged About 59 Years, Resident Of Village Vatika, Tehsil- Sanganer, Dist.- Jaipur (Raj.).

¶427

----Petitioner

¶428

Versus

¶429

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶430

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.)

¶431

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Exam And Registrar Department, Departmental (Education) Exams, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.).

¶432

----Respondents (45) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2211/2021

¶433

Mascot College, Village- Lalsot Road Beegawas, Post-OfficeLawan, Tehsil- Lawan, Dist.- Dausa (Raj.) Running By Society Of Mascot Shiksha And Vikas Samiti, Village- Rajgarh, , Post-OfficeRajgarh, Tehsil- Rajgarh, Dist.- Alwar (Raj.) Through Its Secretary Manoj Kumar Saini S/o Laxmi Narayan Saini Aged

¶434

(23 of 50)

¶435

[CW-1712/2021]

¶436

About 42 Years, R/o Address Village Geegawas, Tehsil Lawan, Dist.- Dausa (Raj.).

¶437

----Petitioner

¶438

Versus

¶439

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶440

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.)

¶441

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Exam And Registrar Department, Departmental (Education) Exams, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.).

¶442

----Respondents

¶443

(46) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2212/2021

¶444

Great India Teacher Training College, Village- By Pass Road Khanpur, Post Office- Khanpur, Tehsil- Khanpur, Dist. - Jhalawar Running By Society Of Mother India Educational Society, Mega Highway By Pass Road Khanpur, Post Office- Khanpur, TehsilKhanpur, Dist. - Jhalawar, Through Its Secretary Shri Azad Husain S/o Shri Samsuddin, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Saket Nagar, Dist. - Jhalawar (Raj.).

¶445

Versus

¶446

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶447

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.)

¶448

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Exam And Registrar Department, Departmental (Education) Exams, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.).

¶449

----Respondents

¶450

(47) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2213/2021

¶451

Deendayal Shikshan Prakshishan Mahavidhalaya, Running By The Deendayal Shiksha Evam Anusandhan Samiti, Bpo- Bari, Tehsil Fatehpur Shekhawati, District Sikar Through Its Secretary Deendayal S/o Shri Kishana Ram Jakhar, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Bari, Tehsil Fatehpur, District Sikar (Raj.).

----Petitioner

(24 of 50)

[CW-1712/2021]

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶457

Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.)

¶458

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Exam And Registrar Department, Departmental (Education) Exams, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.).

¶459

----Respondents

¶460

(48) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2214/2021

¶461

Rama Krishana Teacher Training College, Plot /khasra No. 557, 558/880, Village Raghunathpura, Railya, Diggi Road, P.o Sanganer, Tehsil Vsanaganer, Dist. Jaipur, (Raj) Through Its Secretary Shri K.k Sharma Son Of Shri Daya Kant Sharma , Aged About 45 Years Resident Of Plot No. 36, Milap Nagar, Jaipuria Hospital Durgapura Jaipur (Raj)

¶462

----Petitioner

¶463

Versus

¶464

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj)

¶465

Director Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj)

¶466

Coordinator, Pre D.e1 .ed Exam And Registrar Department, Departmental (Education) Exams, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj)

¶467

----Respondents

¶468

(49) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2618/2021

¶469

Gaurav T.t. College, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mahesh Singh Beniwal S/o Vijay Singh Beniwal , Age 39 Years , R/o S-57 Nri Colony Raj Angan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶470

----Petitioner

¶471

Versus

¶472

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶473

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶474

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2020, Examination

¶475

(25 of 50)

¶476

[CW-1712/2021]

¶477

And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶478

National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station, New Delhi, Through Its Member Secretary.

¶479

Westren Regional Committee Of The National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark -Near Metro Station, New Delhi,through Its Chairperson.

¶480

----Respondents

¶481

(50) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2619/2021

¶482

Siddarth College Of Education, Bilwa, Sanganer, Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mahesh Singh Beniwal S/o Vijay Singh Beniwal , Age 39 Years , R/o S -57 Nri Colony Raj Angan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶483

----Petitioner

¶484

Versus

¶485

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶486

The Director, Directorate of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶487

Coordinator, Pre D.El.Ed. Examination-2020, Examination & Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶488

National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station, New Delhi, Through Its Member Secretary.

¶489

Westren Regional Committee Of The National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark -Near Metro Station, New Delhi,through Its Chairperson.

¶490

----Respondents

¶491

(51) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2634/2021

----Petitioner

Versus

(26 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶496

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, School And Sanskrit Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶497

The Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education, Bikaner.

¶498

Coordinator, Pre D.el.ed. Examination-2020, Examination And Registration, Education Departmental Examination, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶499

National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark - Near Metro Station, New Delhi, Through Its Member Secretary.

¶500

Westren Regional Committee Of The National Council For Teacher Education, G-7, Sector-10, Dwarka, Landmark -Near Metro Station, New Delhi,through Its Chairperson.

¶501

----Respondents

¶502

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. MS Raghav, Adv., Mr. Vijay Poonia, Adv. with Mr. Pradeep Bacholiya, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv., Mr. Om Prakash Sharma, Adv., Mr. Vishivas Saini, Adv. & Mr. Digvijay Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Chiranji Lal Saini, AAG Mr. Shweta Pareek, Adv.

¶503

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶504

Judgment / Order

¶505

Reserved On 03/09/2021

¶506

Pronounced On 06/10/2021

¶507

All these writ petitions raise common question and therefore,

¶508

the same have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.

¶509

The petitioners-institutions are engaged in imparting teachers training education and the present cases are in relation to running of Diploma Course in Elementary Education (hereinafter referred as 'D.El.Ed. Course'). After having fulfilled all the requisite mandatory conditions required for recognition for the D.El.Ed.

¶510

(27 of 50)

¶511

[CW-1712/2021]

¶512

Course as provided for under the National Council of Teachers Education Act, 1993 (hereafter referred as 'NCTE Act) and the rules framed therein in 1997, they applied for recognition to the Northern Regional Committee of the NCTE (hereafter referred as 'NRC') in the various years and after conducting inspection by the visiting team and examining its report, a decision was taken to grant recognition to the petitioners-institutions for running D.El.Ed. Course.

¶513

The case of the petitioner-institution in SB Civil Writ Petition No.1712/2021 (B.D.M.L. Shikshan Sansthan Vs. The State of Raj. & Ors.) is that the NRC-NCTE granted recognition on 20th December, 2018 and approval for annual intake for two units (100 seats) was granted. Therefore, it approached the affiliating body namely; Director (Elementary Education), Bikaner for issuance of no objection certificate (hereinafter referred as 'NOC') as well as for granting of affiliation.

¶514

3.1 The State Government had already issued a letter of intent as per Cause 7 (13) of the NCTE (Recognition, Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2014 which is a precondition for applying for recognition. The staff approval list was duly approved by the Director, Elementary Education based upon the recommendation order issued by the NRC (NCTE) but the respondent-State did not issue the NOC.

¶515

3.2 In absence of the NOC, name of the petitioner-institution was not forwarded to the Coordinator, resultantly the students were not able to submit their option for allotment of College for the Academic Session 2019-20. The petitioner-institution again submitted representation requesting to forward name of the

¶516

(28 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶517

petitioner-institution to the Coordinator for inclusion of name of

¶518

the petitioner-institution in the list of Colleges. An interim order was passed in SB Civil Writ Petition No.9375/2019, ultimately, after filing of contempt petition, the students were allowed.

¶519

3.3 For the year 2020-21, the respondents uploaded the counselling schedule but name of the petitioner-institution was not included. An inspection had been conducted for the Academic Session 2019-20 and the petitioner-institution was found to be fulfilling all the criterias and recommendation was made for granting NOC.

¶520

3.4 In 2020-21, however, the NOC was not granted on the premise that a sudden inspection of the petitioner-institution was conducted and it was stated that a negative report was prepared by overwriting with the sole purpose to teach a lesson to the petitioner-institution as an interim order was passed by the Court directing the respondents to allow the petitioner-institution to be included in the counselling.

¶521

3.5 It was submitted by the petitioner-institution that the respondents conducted a sudden inspection without any information during the Covid period and no show cause notice was issued to point out any deficiency. It was further submitted that only 30 institutions, who had earlier approached this Court for their justified grievances, have been found to be not fulfilling the norms of the NCTE Regulations of 2014 and the inspection conducted was actuated by bias and prejudice.

¶522

3.6 The petitioner-institution submitted that the College was running the course and imparting quality education to the students. On 23/11/2020, when there was a lock-down on account

¶523

(29 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶524

of pandemic Covid-19 and the State Government had directed that

¶525

only 50% of the staff would come in College under the Disaster Management Act, while remaining staff would conduct on-line classes from home, the inspecting team demanded presence of all the staff in the College. It also demanded copies of the bank passbooks and pay-slips which were already fed in the computer.

¶526

3.7 It is stated by the petitioner-institution that the deficiencies pointed out in the inspection report were fallacious and without substance and actually there was no deficiency. Since no show cause notice was issued and reasonable opportunity of hearing was not afforded, the order passed on 04/12/2020 whereby decision was taken not to include the petitioner-institution for counselling for the Session 2020-21 was unjustified and illegal. It was further submitted that the State Government had no authority to de-recognize the petitioner-institution and cancelling the additional seat allotment order issued by the NRC (NCTE).

¶527

3.8 The petitioner-institution has also challenged the inspection report dated 23/11/2020 on following grounds:-

¶528

(A) As regards the allegation that the petitioner-institution has not maintained record of the office bearers, it has been contended that the entire record was available with the College and copies of the documents were provided to the Inspector but he did not disclose the same in his report.

¶529

(B) As regards the objection that three institutions are running in one premise which reflects that resources and other infrastructural facilities are being shared, it was contended that the objection is baseless as the institution was granted recommendation by NCTE as a composite institution. The stand-

¶530

(30 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶531

alone courses are not recognized by the NCTE. The recommendation letter issued by the NRC (NCTE) mentions about the fact of the courses being running in the same building without interference and the visiting team mentions of the institution fulfilling the NCTE norms.

¶532

(C) As regards the objection regarding audit having not been conducted, it has been pointed out that the same is baseless as the audit report upto 2019-20 had already been supplied to the inspecting team but for 2020-21 audit report could not be prepared on account of Covid-19 but the cash register was already prepared which is the basis for preparing the audit report and was made available to the inspecting team

¶533

(D) So far as the deficiency pointed out that there is no hostel available in the premise, it has been contended that D.El.Ed. counsel is not a residential course and for the students, Paying Guest facilities are already there at nearby places. The same was not a prerequisite under the NCTE Regulations of 2014.

¶534

(E) As regards the deficiency that only 50% staff was available at the time of inspection, it has been pointed out by learned counsel that as per the Disaster Management Act, since directions were issued by the State Government for Covid-19, 70% of the staff was only allowed. Since Principal of the institution was suffering from cold, he was not allowed to be present in the institution and the staff with medical certificates were only allowed.

¶535

(F) As regards the deficiency in regard to Bio-metric Machine, it has been pointed out that the same was available but record of presence under Bio-metric Machine was not available as

¶536

(31 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶537

during Covid-19, the presence through Bio-metric Machine was not being allowed and it was being taken manually through attendance register and the register of manual attendance was available.

¶538

(G) As regards the further deficiency pointed out that in the Library, the Dictionary and books relating to commercial education as well as the books published by the NCTE were not available, it has been contended that although the bills of purchase of such books were shown and placed in the representation made by the petitioners but in spite of the same, no decision was taken. It has been submitted that in spite of there being no deficiency actually, the respondents recommended for withdrawal of recognition as well as for not making available students for the year 2020-21. 4. Similarly, in other writ petitions also, the respective petitioner-institution has pointed out that the order was issued on 04/12/2020 on the basis of the inspection conducted on 23/11/2020 and same types of deficiencies have been pointed out.

¶539

In one of the cases, audit report for financial year was found to be under process but not presented to the team which was considered as sufficient ground to refuse NOC and affiliation for the Session 2020-21.

¶540

The gist of arguments of learned counsels for the respective writ petitioners in these writ petitions is that as per the Scheme of the NCTE Act, 1993 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder, it is the NCTE alone which is required to conduct inspection relating to recognition and the State Government would have no authority to de-recognize the petitioners-institutions. It is further contended that once the inspection has already been

¶541

(32 of 50)

¶542

[CW-1712/2021]

¶543

conducted and the petitioners were granted recognition, the State Government had no role to play for granting NOC and affiliation. It has been further contended that the order impugned dated 04/12/2020 has been passed without following the principles of natural justice. No show cause notice was issued and no opportunity of removing the deficiencies, if any, was provided. The State action was actuated by malice and bias which occurred on account of the petitioners-institutions having approached the Court by filing writ petitions earlier for the Session 2019-20 wherein interim order was passed in their favour which was not complied with resulting in the petitioners initiating contempt proceedings against the Director, who, on account of ill-will and vengeance, instructed for sudden inspection with specific direction to declare the petitioners-institutions having deficiencies.

¶544

5.1 Learned counsels for the petitioners-institutions further pointed out that from the original inspection report, which was called, it goes to show that in each of the report, the concerned inspecting team had recommended for issuance of NOC and did not find any deficiency and in-fact, the word 'Nahi' (No) has been added in the final recommendation letter and can be seen and reflected from the naked eyes. It has been further submitted that the inspection conducted was illegal and without authority. There is no provision for conducting sudden inspection. The inspection was conducted only of those thirty institutions who had earlier approached this Court while in other cases, no inspection was conducted.

¶545

5.2 In support of the submissions, learned counsels for the petitioners relied on the judgments rendered in State of

¶546

(33 of 50)

¶547

[CW-1712/2021]

¶548

Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikashan Shastra Mahavidyalaya & Ors.: (2006) 9 SCC 1; Chairman, Bhartia Education Society & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.: (2011) 4 SCC 527; Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Ors. Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Ors.: (2013) 3 SCC 385; Swamy Devi Dayal Hospital & Dental College Vs. Union of India & Ors.: (2014) 13 SCC 506; Central Coalfields Limited & Anr. Vs. SLL-SML (Joint Venture Consortium) & Ors. Vs. (2016) 8 SCC 622 and State of Rajasthan Vs. L.B.S. B.Ed. College & Ors.: (2016) 16 SCC 110 .

¶549

Per-contra, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent-State supported the order impugned and has taken this Court to the reply filed in the writ petition of the petitioner-Taj Memorial Teachers Training College (SBCWP253/2021). It is submitted that when the NCTE issued the recognition order, it stipulated a condition in Clause 5(ii) of the order mentioning therein that "the institution shall make admission only after it obtains affiliation from the examining body in terms of Clause 8(10) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014."

¶550

6.1 Learned AAG has further submitted that as per Clause 6 of the recognition order, it was provided as under:-

¶551

"6. Further, the recognition is subject to fulfillment of all such other requirements as may be prescribed by other regulatory bodies like UGC, affiliating University/Body, State Government etc. as applicable, and compliance of the following by the affiliating body, State Govt and also the concerned recognised institution :

¶552

(i) The affiliating body/ State Govt. shall be required to verify the authenticity of the

¶553

(34 of 50)

¶554

[CW-1712/2021]

¶555

land & building documents submitted by the Institution, with the required land & built up area as well as appointment of requisite teaching & non-teaching staff as per provisions of the NCTE Regulations, 2014 before grant of affiliation to the institution.

¶556

(ii) The affiliating body shall ensure that the Institution is a composite institution as per definition of a "composite institution" given in the NCTE Regulation, 2014. If at any stage, it is found that the institution is not a composite institution is not a composite institution, the recognition granted shall be treated as withdrawn and the sole responsibility of the same will be of the institution. However, the existing stand-alone institutions shall gradually move towards becoming composite Institutions.

¶557

(iii) The NOC of the affiliating body and staff approval thereof submitted by the institution, if found fake, at any stage, the recognitions granted shall be treated as withdrawn, and the sole responsibility of the same will be of the institution."

¶558

6.2 It has been submitted that thus the affiliating body-State Government was required to verify the authenticity of the land and building documents and also ensure that the institution is a composite institution. Therefore, it is submitted that the affiliating body as well as the State Government were entitled to have their own inspection conducted of the institution and find whether the institution was having the requisite norms as laid down under the NCTE Regulations, 2014 and also could demand audit report since Clause 7 of the recognition order provided that "the institution shall submit a Self-Appraisal Report to the Regional Committee at the end of each academic year along the statement of annual accounts duly audited by a Chartered Accountant."

¶559

(35 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶560

6.3 Learned Addl. Advocate General further submitted that direction was issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Rajasthan on 19/11/2020 to the Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan to conduct inspection of the petitionersinstitution whose petitions were pending in the Court as per order dated 11/11/2020 issued by the Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur by 25/11/2020. The order also directed that the petitioners-institutions must provide information regarding their employees/faculty and also provide their Aadhar Numbers and pay-slips as well as information about the requisite infrastructure prepared for on-line classes during Covid pandemic. The said directions were for thirty institutions alone and therefore, inspection was conducted for thirty institutions.

¶561

6.4 Learned Addl. Advocate General further submitted that in compliance of the order of this Court, a team was constituted consisting of one person from the Accounts Department for conducting inspection of the petitioners-institutions. For all thirty institutions, different teams were formed by the Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan who conducted the inspection. Learned Addl. Advocate General also submitted that the institutions were in the category of Non-Governmental Educational Institutions and were, therefore, governed by the Rajasthan NonGovernmental Educational Institutions Act, 1989 and the Rules of 1993 made thereunder. As per Rule 21 of the Rules of 1993, inspection could be done by any officer authorized for the purpose by the Director without prior notice and such sudden inspection was permissible and after conducting inspection, the inspecting

¶562

(36 of 50) [CW-1712/2021]

¶563

team submitted its opinion not to recommend for granting NOC and for giving affiliation to the petitioners-institutions.

¶564

6.5 Learned Addl. Advocate General has relied upon the judgments in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.: (2013) 2 SCC 617 in support his submissions. It is thus submitted that the petitionersinstitutions do not fulfill the requirements mentioned in the recognition order and many deficiencies have been pointed out in the inspection report and therefore, the State Government has rightly decided not to give NOC/affiliation to the petitionersinstitutions.

¶565

6.6 Learned Addl. Advocate General, in his reply, has also submitted that since the inspection has been done by experts, the said inspection ought not be interfered with by conducting judicial review and the Court ought to follow the judicial restraint. He has also relied upon the judgments in Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. Vs. P. Laxmi Devi (Smt.); Andhra Kesari Educational Society Vs. Director of School Education & Ors.: (1989) 1 SCC 392. He has also relied upon the judgment in

¶566

State of Maharashtra Vs. Vikas Sahebrao Roundale & Ors.: (1992) 4 SCC 435 to submit that the Government is required to see that the training of the Teachers is done effectively and there may not be any slackening of the standards.

¶567

Learned counsel for the respondent-NCTE also appeared and submitted that as per the NCTE Act, it was within the exclusive domain of the NCTE to recognize and de-recognize an institution. He has invited attention of this Court to the provisions of the NCTE Act, 1993 to submit that the Regional Committee can only conduct

¶568

(37 of 50)

¶569

[CW-1712/2021]

¶570

the inspection of the institution for the purpose of recognition and after the recognition is granted, upon receiving the order from the NCTE, the State Government is bound to grant affiliation to the institution or cancel the affiliation of the institution where the recognition has been granted or refused respectively. The power to cancel recognition also lies within the domain of the NRC/NCTE alone and in such circumstances, learned counsel submitted that the NCTE would not support the order passed by the State Government dated 04/12/2020 seeking recognition of the petitioners-institutions. Learned counsel further submitted that the inspecting team could not have conducted sudden inspection as the provisions provide for inspection after giving due information to the institution.

¶571

After considering the submissions, this Court has carefully gone through the material available on record as well as the judgments cited at bar. 9. Admittedly, the petitioners-institutions are duly recognized by the NCTE to conduct D.El.Ed. Course. In a batch of 15 writ petitions, decided at Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur with lead case Marwar Shikshak Parikshan Mahavidhyalaya Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.11595/2020) and connected writ petitions, order came to be passed on 11/11/2020 wherein it was observed as under:-

¶572

"From perusal of the above decision, it is clear that role of the State Government in granting NOC and affiliation is very formal one and once the institutions are recognized by the NCTE for running any course normally the State Government cannot refuse to grant NOC untiland unless exceptional circumstance exits.

¶573

(38 of 50)

¶574

[CW-1712/2021]

¶575

Mr. Manish Vyas, learned AAG has submitted that some of the petitioner-institutions have applied for recognition and affiliation with the respondents and there applications are pending consideration and the respondents will consider and decide the same at the earliest. It is also submitted by Mr. Vyas that some of the institutions have not even applied for grant of NOC or affiliation with the respondents and if they will apply for the same, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously.

¶576

It is noticed that in the writ petitions filed by the petitioner-institutions in the year 2019, this Court while issuing notices to the respondents has already passed interim orders directing them to allow the petitioner institutions to admit students in D.El.Ed Course in the academic session 2019-20, however, in some of the writ petitions filed by the petitionerinstitutions in the year 2020, this Court has already stayed all the further proceedings pursuant to the counselling calendar issued by the respondent No.4.

¶577

In such circumstances, these writ petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioner-institutions to submit applications before the respondent – State Government for grant of NOC to them and affiliation of the petitioner-institutions with the Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner by 20.11.2020. On receiving said applications, the respondents including the Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner are directed to take decision regarding grant of NOC and affiliation to the petitioner-institutions to conduct the D.El.Ed (Diploma in Elementary Education) Course of two years by 30.11.2020 while keeping in mind the observations made by this Court in Sanskar T.T. College’s case (supra).

¶578

The institutions to which NOC and affiliation is granted be included in the list of eligible institutions and the students be allotted those institutions for admitting in D.El.Ed (Diploma in Elementary Education) Course for the academic years 2020-21.

¶579

The respondents are free to carry out the counselling process after deciding the applications of the petitioner institutions to grant them NOC and affiliation."

¶580

9.1 In all the present writ petitions, the petitioners-institutions have been recognized in the year 2018 by the NRC/NCTE and

¶581

(39 of 50)

¶582

[CW-1712/2021]

¶583

earlier they had filed writ petitions before this Court wherein interim order was passed directing for including them provisionally for the purpose of counselling in the year 2019. Since the respondents did not comply with the order, on 24/07/2019, in contempt petitions, statement was made by the counsel appearing for the State that the Colleges shall be allowed to participate in the counselling for D.El.Ed. (BSTC Course for the academic year 2019-20 whereafter students were provided to the Colleges and ultimately vide order dated 11/11/2020, the writ petitions were allowed by the Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur and directions were issued, as noticed above and the Court specifically observed that the role of the State Government in granting NOC and affiliation is very formal one and normally, the State Government cannot refuse to grant NOC until and unless exceptional circumstances exist.

¶584

9.2 In order to meet out with the said observations, it is apparent that the Principal Secretary has directed for conducting an inspection for the said thirty institutions alone by preparing a team and with a specific direction. As pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court finds that the order passed by the Principal Secretary, School Education dated 19/11/2020 (Annx. R/3) is only addressed to the Director, Elementary Education and a copy thereof has not been sent to the concerned institutions.

¶585

9.3 The order purports to have been issued as if a direction was given by this Court to conduct such an inspection although, as noted above, no such direction had been issued. The State authorities are usually found to be taking umbrage of Court's orders. In order to achieve their own ends, the observations made

¶586

(40 of 50)

¶587

[CW-1712/2021]

¶588

in the High Court's order have been interpreted to conduct inspection which was not warranted under the Rules.

¶589

9.4 Be that as it may, this Court asked the learned Addl. Advocate General to produce the original inspection report of all the institutions and in almost all the inspections reports, this Court finds that in the main part of the inspection report, there is no shortcoming noticed by the inspecting officers and the details of the staff have been attached, a separate appendix has been mentioned giving out the shortcomings. The said shortcomings/deficiencies, as noticed for petitioner no.1-B.D.M.L. Shikshan Sansthan, mentions of recommendation with the word 'Nahi' (No) by adding the same in the final recommendation.

¶590

9.5 This Court although is of the firm view that the scope of judicial review is not available in examining an inspection report and it is within the exclusive domain of the inspecting officers to conduct inspection and submit report. However, this Court finds that the inspection conducted on the directions given by the Principal Secretary, School Education was wholly unwarranted as there is no power available for conducting of inspection. It is apparent that as per Section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993, the inspection can be done by the Regional Committee formed under the NCTE Act. The State Authority, which is an examining body, has to grant affiliation to the institution after it seeks recognition letter from the NCTE. The affiliating body has to grant affiliation after the recognition and has to conduct examinations in terms of Section 16 of the NCTE Act, 1993. Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993 provides for the NRC to conduct an inspection if it receives any report or representation from any body or the provisions of the NCTE Act are not being followed by the recognized institution.

¶591

(41 of 50)

¶592

[CW-1712/2021]

¶593

Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993 also inherently provides for an opportunity of hearing.

¶594

9.6 Inspection is within the exclusive domain of the NRC/NCTE. Section 13 of the NCTE Act, 1993 lays down the procedure of inspection. As per Sub-Section (2) of Section 13 of the NCTE Act, 1993, the Council has to communicate to the institution the date on which inspection has to be conducted. Thus, there is no room for sudden inspection as conducted by the Directorate of the Elementary Education, Bikaner in the so-called garb of the order passed by this Court.

¶595

9.7 Taking into consideration that the contempt proceedings have been initiated for non-compliance initially for the year 2019 and even for the year 2020, the contempt proceedings are attached, it is apparent that the concerned Officer has been actuated by malafides and bias and has caused sudden inspection with a specific direction to the inspecting team.

¶596

9.8 This Court cannot hold noting that although there is no requirement of having a hostel, in each case, a deficiency has been pointed out that hostel facilities are not available. Similarly, in each inspection report, it is mentioned about the institution running without other courses although as per the requirement, the D.El.Ed. course can be run in combination with other Teachers' Education Programs.

¶597

9.9 The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners regarding inspection being conducted unjustifiably and without information, is also found to be supported by the fact that the inspection was conducted during Covid pandemic period when the Disaster Management Act was in force and the State Government had specifically reduced presence of the staff in the institution.

¶598

(42 of 50)

¶599

[CW-1712/2021]

¶600

The possibility of Teachers not being available on account of pandemic cannot be ruled out. The State authorities were having full knowledge about the pandemic situation and the directions issued by the State Government and on the face of the earlier directions issued by the Court allowing the institutions to be provided with students for the Session 2019-20, there was no occasion for having initiated inspection. A futile attempt has been made by the learned Addl. Advocate General to support the action by taking this Court to the conditions of the recognition order which have been noticed above. This Court finds that mentioning of affiliating body in the recognition order would not grant power to conduct inspection as the institutions are governed by the Act of 1993 which provides inspection to be conducted by the NRC/NCTE.

¶601

9.10 The submission of learned counsel for the State by taking support from the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 and the Rules of 1993 made thereunder, is also found to be misconceived. The D.El.Ed Course is a course recognized by the NCTE. The inspection which was directed to be conducted was with only purpose of affiliation and not for the purpose of grant of recognition under the Act of 1989 or the Rules made thereunder. The sudden inspection, as envisaged under Rule 22 of the Rules of 1993, therefore, would have no application to the course and affiliation as well as NOC to be granted for the said purpose.

¶602

9.11 In State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikashan Shastra Mahavidyalaya & Ors. (supra), the three Judges Bench of the Apex Court held as under:-

¶603

(43 of 50)

¶604

[CW-1712/2021]

¶605

"74. Reference was also made to "Department of Secondary and Higher Education" published by the Government of India on January 25, 2006. The compilation relates to Secondary Education, Adult Education, Technical Education, Higher Education etc. In introduction, it has been stated:

¶606

"The Secondary Education which serves as a bridge between primary and higher education is expected to prepare young persons between the age group 14-18 in the world of work and entry into higher education. The Secondary Education starts with classes 9-10 leading to higher secondary classes 11 and 12. The relevant children population at the secondary and senior secondary level, as projected in 1996-97 by NSSO has been estimated at 9.66 crores. Against this population, the enrolment figures of the 1997-98 shows that only 2.70 crores attending schools. Thus, two-third of the eligible population remains out of the school system. To accommodate the children in schools at secondary level, we have at present 1.10 lakhs institutions (1998-99). With the emphasis on universalization of elementary education and programmes like District Primary Education Programme, the enrolment is bound to increase and once this happens, we may require more than two lakhs institutions at the secondary level to accommodate them."

¶607

9.12 In Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of

¶608

Uttar Pradesh & Ors.: (2013) 2 SCC 617 (supra), the

¶609

Supreme Court held as under:-

¶610

"59. The above enunciated principles clearly show that the Council is the authority constituted under the Central Act with the responsibility of maintaining education of standards and judging upon the infrastructure and facilities available for imparting such professional education. Its opinion is of utmost importance and shall take precedence over the views of the State as well as that of the University. The concerned Department of the State and the affiliating University have a role to play but it is limited in its application. They cannot lay down any guideline or

¶611

(44 of 50)

¶612

[CW-1712/2021]

¶613

policy which would be in conflict with the Central statute or the standards laid down by the Central body. State can frame its policy for admission to such professional courses but such policy again has to be in conformity with the directives issued by the Central body. In the present cases, there is not much conflict on this issue, but it needs to be clarified that while the State grants its approval, and University its affiliation, for increased intake of seats or commencement of a new course/college, its directions should not offend and be repugnant to what has been laid down in the conditions for approval granted by the Central authority or Council. What is most important is that all these authorities have to work ad idem as they all have a common object to achieve i.e. of imparting of education properly and ensuring maintenance of proper standards of education, examination and infrastructure for betterment of educational system. Only if all these authorities work in a coordinated manner and with cooperation, will they be able to achieve the very object for which all these entities exist. 79. It is on record and the Regulations framed under the Act clearly show that upon receiving an application for recommendation, the NCTE shall send a copy of the application with its letter inviting recommendations/comments of the State Government on all aspects within a period of 30 days. To such, application, the State is expected to respond with its complete comments within a period of 60 days. In other words, the opinion of the State on all matters that may concern it in any of the specified fields are called for. This is the stage where the State and its Department should play a vital role. They must take all precautions to offer proper comments supported by due reasoning. Once these comments are sent and the State Government gives its opinion which is considered by the NCTE and examined in conjunction with the report of the experts, it may grant or refuse recognition. Once it grants recognition, then such grant attains supremacy viz-aviz the State Government as well as the affiliating body. Normally, these questions cannot be reagitated at the time of grant of affiliation. Once the University conducts inspection in terms of its Statutes or Act, without offending the provisions of the Act and conditions of recognition, then the opinion of the State Government at the second stage is a mere

¶614

(45 of 50)

¶615

[CW-1712/2021]

¶616

formality unless there was a drastic and unacceptable mistake or the entire process was vitiated by fraud or there was patently eminent danger to life of the students working in the school because of noncompliance of a substantive condition imposed by either of the bodies. In the normal circumstances, the role of the State is a very formal one and the State is not expected to obstruct the commencement of admission process and academic courses once recognition is granted and affiliation is found to be acceptable."

¶617

9.13 In Chairman, Bhartia Education Society & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. (supra), the Supreme Court

¶618

held as under:-

¶619

"24. The examining body can therefore impose its own requirements in regard to eligibility of students for admission to a course in addition to those prescribed by NCTE. The state government and the examining body may also regulate the manner of admissions. As a consequence, if there is any irregularity in admissions or violation of the eligibility criteria prescribed by the examining body or any irregularity with reference to any of the matters regulated and governed by the examining body, the examining body may cancel the affiliation irrespective of the fact that the institution continues to enjoy the recognition of the NCTE. Sub-section (6) of section 14 cannot be interpreted in a manner so as to make the process of affiliation, an automatic rubber-stamping consequent upon recognition, without any kind of discretion in the examining body to examine whether the institution deserves affiliation or not, independent of the recognition. An institution requires the recognition of NCTE as well as affiliation with the examining body, before it can offer a course or training in teacher education or admit students to such course or training. Be that as it may."

¶620

9.14 Thus, the Rule in relation to granting NOC and affiliation is minimal and once recommendation has been granted, the affiliation and NOC by the State Government can only be refused if there is any other requirement laid down by the State Government or the examining body which an institution is required to follow.

¶621

(46 of 50)

¶622

[CW-1712/2021]

¶623

9.15 Keeping in view above, therefore, if the State Government would have laid down any other requirement for granting of NOC, which the institution may not have complied with, the respondentState could have refused NOC and affiliation. However, so far as the norms of 2014 are concerned, the same stand already examined and considered by the NRC/NCTE while granting recognition. The inspection on the said aspects cannot be done by the State Government and its authorities and they do not have the power to recommend de-recognition or refuse NOC on the said grounds.

¶624

9.16 Similar view has been taken by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Ors. Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. (supra), wherein it has been held as under:-

¶625

"24. The consistent view of this Court has been that where both Parliament and State Legislature have the power to legislate, the Central Act shall take precedence in the matters which are covered by such legislation and the State enactments shall pave way for such legislations to the extent they are in conflict or repugnant. As per the established canons of law, primacy of the Central Act is undisputable which necessarily implies primacy of AICTE in the field of technical education. Statutes like the present one as well as the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993, the Medical Council of India Act, 1956, etc. fall within the ambit of this canon of law. The AICTE is the authority constituted under the Central Act with the responsibility of maintaining operational standards and judging the infrastructure and facilities available for imparting professional education. It shall take precedence over the opinion of the State as well as that of the University. The concerned department of the State and the affiliating university have a role to play, but it is limited in its application. They cannot lay down any guidelines or policies in conflict with the Central statute or the standards laid down by the Central body. The State can frame its policies, but such policy again has to be in conformity with the

¶626

(47 of 50)

¶627

[CW-1712/2021]

¶628

direction issued by the Central body. Though there is no such apparent conflict in the present case, yet it needs to be clarified that grant of approval by the State and affiliation by the University for increased intake of seats or commencement of new college should not be repugnant to the conditions of approval/recommendation granted by the AICTE. These authorities have to work in tandem as all of them have the common object to ensure maintenance of proper standards of education, examination and proper infrastructure for betterment of technical educational system."

¶629

9.17 Thus, this Court finds that the institution was not given any opportunity of hearing. The opportunity of hearing is an essential part of the decision making process. In case of Swamy Devi

¶630

Dayal Hospital & Dental College Vs. Union of India & Ors.

¶631

(supra), the Supreme Court observed as under:-

¶632

"22. We, accordingly, sum up the legal position, touching upon the issue, on the interpretation of Section 10A(4) of the Act, as below:

¶633

22.1 Section 10A applies to the cases of renewal of permission as well;

¶634

22.2 It contemplates grant of opportunity of being heard at two stages. First stage would be at the level of DCI after the scheme is submitted to DCI under Sub-section (2) of Section 10A of the Act. Once it is found by the DCI that all the parameters for granting permission are met, it recommends the grant of approval of the scheme to the Central Government. In case Scheme it is found to be deficient, Subsection (3) (a) of Section 10A of the Act casts an obligation on the part of the DCI to give a reasonable opportunity for making a written representation and also to rectify the deficiencies, if any, specified by the DCI. Second stage of adherence to the principles of natural justice is provided at the level of Central Government at the time when it has to take final decision, after the receipt of the recommendation sent by the DCI. This requirement of hearing is stipulated in proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 10A, in the event the Central Government is proposing to disapprove the scheme.

¶635

(48 of 50)

¶636

[CW-1712/2021]

¶637

22.3 The expression "opportunity of being heard" occurring in this proviso would mean that the material that goes against the applicant and is to be taken into consideration, is to be supplied to the applicant within an opportunity to make representation. For this purpose either the report of the DCI itself can be supplied or atleast the deficiencies pointed out in the report have to be communicated by the Central Government to the applicant with an opportunity to furnish its comments thereupon. At that stage while giving its reply, if the applicant claims personal hearing, such a personal hearing should also be accorded.

¶638

23. As in the present case, since no such opportunity of being heard the requirement of proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 10A of the Act was not afforded to the Petitioner, the decision dated 30th March 2013 of the Central Government warrants to be set aside on this ground alone."

¶639

9.18 On the said basis, therefore, the order impugned dated 04/12/2020 deserves to be set aside.

¶640

9.19 In a recent case of State of Rajasthan Vs. L.B.S. B.Ed. College & Ors. (supra), the Supreme Court was examining role of the State Government and observed in Para 2 as under:-

¶641

"2. The crux of the controversy is whether the State Government has any say in the matter of grant of recognition to the institutions who apply for establishing institutions to get recognition from the NCTE under the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (the Act) and the Regulations framed thereunder. The learned Single Judge had arrived at the conclusion that the State has remotely any authority or say in the matter of grant of recognition and the Division Bench has concurred with the judgment of the learned single Judge without adverting to the said aspect."

¶642

After examining the entire law on the issue, the Supreme

¶643

Court in the said case, held in Para 16 as under:-

¶644

"16. As we find from the aforesaid authorities as well as the Regulations framed by the NCTE, the State has

¶645

(49 of 50)

¶646

[CW-1712/2021]

¶647

a say, may be a limited one. We are inclined to use the word 'limited' because the State's say is not binding on the NCTE. However, the NCTE is required to take the same into consideration, for the State has a vital role to offer proper comments supported by due reasoning. It needs no special emphasis to say that final authority rests with the NCTE. It is the clear legal position."

¶648

9.20 Thus, from above, it is apparent that prior to the NCTE granting final recommendations, the State had a limited say to the extent of giving its opinion to the NCTE, otherwise, the role of the State Government is very formal one as held in State of Rajasthan Vs. L.B.S. B.Ed. College & Ors. (supra) and the State is not expected to obstruct commencement of the admission process once recommendation is granted and affiliation is found to be acceptable. However, it appears that the State authorities are not able to digest the verdict of the Supreme Court and are bent upon time and again initiating unnecessary and unwarranted litigation before this Court. The officers holding the helm of affairs of the State Government are expected to act with more caution and care.

¶649

9.21.In view thereof, the order impugned dated 04/12/2020 passed by the authorities based on the inspection conducted on the directions of the Principal Secretary, School Education dated 19/11/2020 is found to be illegal and the State could not have denied NOC/affiliation to the petitioners-institutions once they were duly recognized by the NCTE for running D.El.Ed. Course. The consequential action of not including the petitionersinstitutions for counselling on the said basis and in treating the petitioners-institutions de-recognized is also held to be bad in law and in contravention with the provisions of the NCTE Act, 1993.

¶650

(50 of 50)

¶651

[CW-1712/2021]

¶652

In view thereof, the orders impugned dated 04/12/2020 and 19/11/2020 passed by the respondents are quashed and set aside. The counselling process shall now be conducted by the respondents for the petitioners-institutions separately and the students be provided accordingly.

¶653

All these writ petitions are accordingly allowed. All pending applications stand disposed of. No costs.

¶654

In view of the order passed above, taking a pragmatic approach, the contempt petitions are disposed of with directions to the respondents to comply with the order and include the institutions in future counselling. Accordingly, the contemnors are

¶655

discharged.

¶656

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶657

Raghu/

S.R. Bal Vidhya Mandir Samiti v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.R. Bal Vidhya Mandir Samiti v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Har Prasad Gurjar S/O Jagram Vs Shri. Rajeshwar Singh

Ramu S/O Jagannath Vs Banshi (Deceased) S/O Laxman

Ramu S/O Jagannath Vs Banshi (Deceased) S/O Laxman

Taj Memorial Teacher Training School Vs the State of Rajasthan

Santosh Technical and Educational Development Society Vs the State of Rajasthan

Bhane Sahaya Jankalyan Shikshak Sansthan Vs the State of Rajasthan