National Teachers Training College v. National Council Of Teacher Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.598 of 2022 ====================================================== National Teachers Training College Khazanchi Road, Patna through its Secretary namely Md. Jahangir Khan, aged about 60 years, Male, son of Late Jabbar Khan, resident of Deep Ganga Complex 301(A), Near H.D.F.C. Bank Ashok Raj Path, Sampatchak, Bankipur, P.S.-Pirbahore, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

National Council of Teacher Education through its Chairperson, Hans Bhawan, New Delhi.

2.

Member Secretary, National Council of Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, New Delhi.

3.

Regional Director, N.C.T.E., E.R.C., Sector-10, Dwarika, New Delhi. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pratap Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s(NCTE) :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 24-03-2022 The case is being taken up from defect side.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to submit the original petition along with attested affidavits and also remove the defects pointed out by the Registry within two weeks from today.

The learned counsel for NCTE informs this Court that as per provision of NCTE Regulation 2014, the petitioner ought to have filed in the prescribed format along with requisite fees, however, instead of applying under the regular format along with requisite fees for increase of additional two units, the petitioner has only submitted simple representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.598 of 2022 dt.24-03-2022 2/2 petitioner is entitled for four units whereas only two units were given vide order dated 30.5.2015. He submits that subsequently vide order dated 24.12.2021 he had submitted representation to allow him for applying additional intake of four units. In the opinion of this Court there is no provision under the Act for seeking permission for application. The petitioner has to move in the current format as laid down along with details of additional infrastructure created. The Institution also has to give out the details relating to teachers who have been additionally appointed for the said purpose. However, this Court finds neither Annexure-5 nor Annexure-6 mentioning any such details. The action of the respondents, therefore, in not entertaining their representation cannot be faulted. The petitioner however, would be at liberty to move appropriate application under the relevant format.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Ravi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 30.03.2022 Transmission Date NA