High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a writ petition challenging denial of admission counseling. The Court directed issuance of NOC and allowed participation based on precedent, noting state cannot deny rights solely on discrepancies.
Issue of NOC to petitioner and permission to participate in counseling pending.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17959/2021
Shreenath Bstc School, Parental Body Samudayik Siksha Prasar Samiti, Udaipur, 17- 18 Madhav Colony, Ganesh Nagar, Udaipur Through Its Chairman Pankaj Choudhary S/o Sh. Basanti Lal Choudhary, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of 1718 Machav Colony, Ganesh Nagar, Udaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. Pankaj Choudhary, petitioner in person |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : | Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG Mr. Deepak Chandak |
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
21/12/2021
(2 of 3)
[CW-17959/2021]
Bstc College Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors, where this Court has held thus:-
“12. In view of what has been noticed above and following the reasoning given in the judgment of even date in a batch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2359/2021 (Surender Kaur Memorial College of Higher Education Vs. State & Ors.), the present writ petitions are allowed.
13. The respondent state/Director, Education is directed to permit the petitioners institutions to take part in the counseling to be conducted for the admission of the students in D.El. Ed. Course for academic year 2021-22 and onwards.
14. The stay applications also stand disposed of accordingly.
15. At this stage, Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that there are many irregularities or deficiencies in the institutions and thus some check should be allowed to be kept by the state.
16. In the opinion of this Court, even if the state has found certain deficiencies or lack of facilities, it is required of the state government to intimate the NCTE in this regard. This Court is sure that the NCTE will take appropriate action against such institution in accordance with law. But, on the pretext of the discrepancies, the state, at its own, cannot deny the petitioners their right to carry on the courses.”
(3 of 3)
[CW-17959/2021]
(supra) and the competent authority of the State is directed to issue ‘NOC’ to the petitioner, in accordance with law by tomorrow.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
8-pooja/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner institution is permitted to participate in D.El.Ed. course counseling.
Whether the State can deny NOC to an institution due to deficiencies without NCTE intimation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dhapubai Bstc College Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Followed¶15
SBCWP No.13291/2020, Dhapubai Bstc College Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Surender Kaur Memorial College of Higher Education Vs. State & Ors.Followed¶12
SBCWP No.2359/2021 (Surender Kaur Memorial College of Higher Education Vs. State & Ors.)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shreenath Bstc School, Parental Body Samudayik Siksha Prasar Samiti
State Of Rajasthan
The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan
National Council For Teachers Education
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
