← Library
Madras High CourtWP/4103/2014disposed of

Sri Jayaganapathy Educational v. The National Council For

2015-03-09Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATE: 09-03-2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.4103 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 1 SRI JAYAGANAPATHY EDUCATIONAL [ PETITIONER ] TRUST REP.BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE T. RAMALINGAM PLOT NO.347/2 THIRUVALLUVAR CAMPUS 2 KURINJIPADI & TALUK CUDDALORE DIST-607 302 Vs 1 THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR [ RESPONDENTS ] TEACHER EDUCATION REP.BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY WING-II HANS BHAVAN NO.1 BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI2 2 THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDU. SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE JNANABARATHY CAMPUS ROAD OPP. TO NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL NAGARABHAVI BANGALORE 560 072 Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records in respect of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide his proceedings in F.No.

89-591/ 2013 Appeal/18th Meeting-2013- A81141 dated 10.1.2014 and quash the same and direct the 2nd respondent to complete the process of the application of the petitioner submitted through online dated 26.12.2012 for grant of recognition to the petitioner College viz. Thiruvalluvar Teachers Education College, Kurinjipadi and Taluk Cuddalore District, Tamilnadu for conducting B.Ed degree course from the academic year 2014-15 For petitioner :: Mr. R. Suresh Kumar For respondents :: Mr. K.

ORDER

Heard Mr. R. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. With consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.

Admittedly, the impugned order has been passed rejecting the petitioner's application for grant of permission for D.E.C.Ed. Course on the ground that there is no such course provided within the State of Tamil Nadu. However, it is not in dispute that the earlier application filed by the petitioner was not in line with 2014 Regulations. Therefore, the challenge has become academic and therefore, the correctness of the same need not be gone into.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has already filed a fresh application under the 2014 Regulations. If that is so, the respondents shall consider the said application in accordance with the 2014 Regulations. In case, if the petitioner has not submitted any application, he shall file fresh application for consideration under the 2014 Regulations and the same shall be considered in accordance with law. 4.

The writ petition is disposed of, with the above observations. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar glp To 1 THE MEMBER SECRETARY WING-II NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION REP.BY ITSHANS BHAVAN NO.1 BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI2 2 THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDU. SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE JNANABARATHY CAMPUS ROAD OPP. TO NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL NAGARABHAVI BANGALORE 560 072 + 1 cc to Mr.K. Ramakrishnan Reddy, Advocate Sr.13030 + 1 cc to Mr.R. Sureshkumar, Advocate Sr.13079 W.P.No.4103 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 SV(CO) Eu 16.03.15 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/