Shri Vinayak Mahavidyalay v. National Council For Teacher Education And ANR.

$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + SHRI VINAYAK MAHAVIDYALAY ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Mayank Manish with Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocates.

versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Shivam Singh with Mr. Jaideep Khanna, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

O R D E R

% 25.02.2020 CM APPL. 7042/2020 (Extension of time to comply with order dated 08.01.2020) 1.

This is an application filed on behalf of the original respondents i.e. respondent no. 1 & 2 in the writ petition.

2.

Issue notice to the non-applicant/petitioner. 3.

Mr.

Mayank Manish accepts notice on behalf of nonapplicant/petitioner.

4.

The limited relief that is sought in the captioned application is that the time fixed by this Court vide judgment dated 08.01.2020 passed in a batch of writ petitions, the lead writ petition being the captioned petition i.e. W.P. (C) 12307/2019 be extended as pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court

dated 15.05.2019 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 982/2019 and Interlocutory Application No. 75288/2019 in W.P. (C) 276/2012, titled Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors., the timeframe for inviting applications for recognition to TEIs for the 4 year integrated B.Ed. Programme for academic session 2020-2021 has been extended till 30.04.2020.

5.

Mr. Shivam Singh, who, appears on behalf of the respondents says that in view of the aforementioned direction of the Supreme Court, the timeframe given by this Court for processing the petitioner's application qua the subject course and qua applications filed by similarly circumstanced institutions be extended till 15.04.2020.

6.

Mr. Manish says that he would have no objection to the request made on behalf of the respondents.

7.

It is ordered accordingly. Furthermore, in order to avoid possibility of similar applications being filed in other petitions, this order will operate not only qua the petitioner but also vis-a-vis similarly circumstanced Institutions.

8.

I may also indicate herein that although the time has been extended, I am informed by Mr. Manish that pursuant to the order dated 08.01.2020, no tangible steps have been taken by the respondents. 9.

The respondents are put to notice that if they miss the new deadline, adverted to hereinabove, then, the officers who are responsible will be called upon to render an explanation as to why the deadline was not met. 10.

Mr. Singh will place the order passed today before the concerned officer(s) of the respondents.

11.

Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J FEBRUARY 25, 2020/c