← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/4179/2020

Sn Stc Institute v. National Council For Teacher Education And ORS

2020-08-05Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Jayant Nath2 pages

$~A-39 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 4179/2020 SN STC INSTITUTE ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Mayank Manish and Mr.Ravi Kant, Advs.

versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ORS..... Respondents Through Ms.Arunima Dwivedi, Standing counsel for NCTE.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

O R D E R

% 05.08.2020 This hearing is conducted through Video-Conferencing. 1.

Mr.Mayank Manish, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the issue raised in the present matter is similar to the issue which arose in a batch of writ petitions, leading matter being W.P. (C) 8820/2019 titled as "Sir Chhotu Ram Jat college of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr." which was disposed of vide judgment dated 18.10.2019.

2.

Ms.Arunima Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the above fact. She however submits that in one of these connected matters, a Letter Patent Appeal has been filed being LPA No.126/2020 titled as NCTE & Anr. vs. Baba Shirdi Nath Education

College in which notice has been issued.

3.

I may note that there is no interim order passed in the above LPA. It is also a matter of fact that large number of matters have been disposed of by this court and a Coordinate Bench of this court based on the judgment of this court in W.P. (C) 8820/2019 titled as "Sir Chhotu Ram Jat college of Education v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr." 4.

In my opinion, the present writ petition is factually akin to the earlier batch of writ petitions which have already been disposed of by this court. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. The relief sought in prayer clause (a) is allowed. Directions contained in the aforesaid judgment in W.P. (C) 8820/2019 shall apply mutatis mutandis in this case as well. 5.

The petitioner will take steps to file its application which was returned back to the petitioner as per the requirement of the respondent. JAYANT NATH, J AUGUST 05, 2020 rb