Disposed

Sri Annamacharya College of Education, v. National Council for Teacher Education

Telangana HC1 Aug 2017WP/22167/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order deals with a writ petition challenging the failure of authorities to include the petitioner/college in the NCTE recognized colleges list. The petition alleged illegality and arbitrariness. The court disposed of the matter by directing the second respondent to consider a pending representation from the petitioner regarding its inclusion in the NCTE website within six weeks. No costs were

What did the court decide?

Directing the second respondent to deal with the pending representation seeking display of the petitioner college's name in the NCTE website within six weeks.

Sri Annamacharya College of Education, Vs… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.22167 of 2017

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The present Writ Petition came to be filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not including the name of the petitioner/institution in the recognized colleges list of NCTE website, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner/college in the NCTE website.

¶5

The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition shows that the petitioner/institution obtained no objection certificate from the State Government on 27.12.2001 and thereafter the second respondent granted permission to the petitioner/college with an intake capacity of 100 for the academic year 2003-04 vide orders dt:17.11.2003. The Government of A.P. issued G.O.Rt.No.76 dated 12.01.2004 and thereafter the concerned University granted affiliation which was being extended from time to time. On coming to know that the name of the petitioner/college was not shown in the web-site, the petitioner/college made a representation dated 17.07.2015 to upload the name of the petitioner/college, in the permitted colleges list and also sent a reminder on 30.06.2017. Their inaction is subject matter of challenge in the present Writ Petition.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed on record the proceedings dated 27.12.2001 issued by the Commissioner and

¶7

¶8

Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad to show that the petitioner/college was granted no objection, so also G.O.Rt.No.76 dated 12.01.2004 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the gazette publication by the National Council for Teacher Education dt:17.11.2003 showing grant of recognition to the petitioner/college by invoking their power under Section 14(3)(a) of the NCTE Act. He also placed on record the affidavit given by the petitioner/college in the month of February 2015, as per the new guidelines, showing fulfillment of the revised norms relating to infrastructure, instructional facilities, enhanced amount of endowment and Reserve funds etc. The record also discloses that the petitioner/college was shown at Serial No.334 of the Gazette list indicating the intake at 120, and such status was being granted on 17.11.2003. In view of the above, it is urged that the action of the authorities in not considering the representation is illegal, improper and incorrect. He further submits that the College is closed since last two years and if no orders are passed on the representation made, the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss.

¶9

Sri K.Ramakanth Reddy, learned standing counsel for

¶10

respondents on instructions would submit that the representation made by the petitioner refers to an order dated 12.09.2006 passed in W.P.No.21604 of 2005, which has nothing to do with the petitioner/college and since the order relates to a different college,

¶11

¶12

the authorities might not have acted on the said representation. In any event he submits that if the representation is still pending consideration, the authorities will deal with the same in accordance with law.

¶13

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his representation dated 17.07.2015 made to Regional Director, SRC NCTE Bangalore and the reminder dated:30.06.2017 made to the very same authority seeking display of the name of the petitioner/college in the approved list of NCTE website are still pending consideration and hence seeks a direction to the authorities to pass appropriate orders.

¶14

Having regard to the submissions made, the Writ Petition

¶15

is disposed of directing the second respondent to deal with the representation dated:17.07.2015 made by the petitioner/college seeking display of the name of the petitioner college in the approved list of NCTE website, if the same is still pending for consideration, in accordance with law as early as possible preferably within a period of six weeks. No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶16

__________________ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

¶17

Dt: 01.08.2017 GM

Sri Annamacharya College of Education, v. National Council for Teacher Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Annamacharya College of Education, v. National Council for Teacher Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Uppalapati Ruppinamma W/o Gopala Krishna Vs The Revenue Dividional Officer

Garneni Murali Krishna Vs The Station House Officer Amaravathi Police Station

Vootukuri Hari Das Goud Vs State of Telangana

Thomas John, Vs The State of Telangana

Mir Mohd. Taqui , Baquar Hussain Vs The District Collector

Gopinath C Vs State of Telangana