High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/620/2018

R.D. College Of Edudcation v. National Council For Teacher Education And ANR.

2018-02-23Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Rekha Palli2 pages

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 620/2018 R.D. COLLEGE OF EDUDCATION ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Sanjay Sharawat and Mr.Divyank Rana, Advs.

versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through Mr.Rohit Gandhi, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 23.02.2018 Vide the present petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent No.2 to process and finally decide the application of the petitioner for grant of recognition for D.EI.Ed course from academic year 2018-2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had submitted an application on 30.12.2012 which was initially rejected whereafter the petitioner preferred a writ petition before this court bearing No.WPC287/2015 which was disposed of vide order dated 14.01.2015 by directing the petitioner to apply afresh for the academic year 2015-2016 in accordance with the new regulations.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accordingly the petitioner had vide its application dated 04.03.2015 re-submitted its original application, with a request to grant recognition to the petitioner/institute at the earliest. He submits that since the respondents had failed to take any

action thereon, the petitioner along with other institutes had filed a contempt petition wherein the direction to the respondent to process the applications of the petitioner in terms of the NCTE Regulation of 2014 was reiterated. He submits that despite the said directions, the respondents have not decided the petitioner's application submitted on 04.03.2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of the decision taken by the respondents to consider applications of those institutes who had initially submitted applications seeking recognition before the imposition of the ban by the State of Haryana, the respondent ought to reconsider the petitioner's application initially submitted on 30.12.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the earlier decisions of this court including order dated 29.01.

2018 passed in W.P.(C) No.59/2018. The learned counsel for the respondents is unable to dispute the aforesaid contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having heard the parties, I am of the considered opinion that in view of the various decisions of this Court as also the own decision of the respondents to process similar applications, the present petition is entitled to succeed. The respondents are directed to process the pending application of the petitioner for the academic year 2018-2019 subject to the petitioner meeting other eligibility criteria preferably before 03.03.2018 by ignoring the fact that there is a ban imposed by the State. Writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.