Arul College Of Education v. National Council For Teacher
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 18.05.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.12948 of 2017 Arul College of Education, Rep. by its Chairman, P.Allimuthu, Pali, Ulundurpet, Villupuram District.
.. Petitioner Vs 1.National Council for Teacher Education, Jnanabarathy Campus Road, Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru 560 072.
2.The Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University, Gangaiyamman Koil Street, Karappakkam, Chennai-7.
.. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to re-consider the decision of 338th meeting dated 1-3 May 2017, serial No.79, with regard to the application No.SRCAPP2016 30223 for the academic year 2017-2018 in the proper manner within the time frame.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thiagarajan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.R.Kuyilan For Respondent : Mr.U.Venkatesan for R2
O R D E R
It appears that the petitioner college has applied for grant of two unit of new course for B.Sc. B.Ed.[4 years integrated course], which was assigned as application Nos.SRCAPP2016 30206 and SRCAPP2016 30223. According to the petitioner, they have complied with all the requirements including the faculty. However, the said applications have been rejected in the decision of 338th meeting of SRC-NCTE by the 1st respondent on the ground that the faculty list was not approved.
2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that an e-mail was sent on 02.05.2017 at 7.00p.m., which was delivered instantly. But, on the other hand, in the decision of 338th meeting of SRC-NCTE, it has been observed that the same was delivered only on 03.05.2017 i.e., long after mid night of 02.05.2017 and therefore, the same cannot be accepted. Therefore, the learned Senior Counsel would submit that for the reasons stated above, the claim of the petitioner cannot be rejected and hence, he sought for a direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the claim of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent on the other hand submitted that the petitioner's application would be considered afresh.
4. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent
is recorded and the 1st respondent is hereby directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in the manner known to law within a period of two weeks.
5. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. 18.05.2017 Index : Yes/No gya Note : Issue order copy on 19.05.2017 To 1.National Council for Teacher Education, Jnanabarathy Campus Road, Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru 560 072.
2.The Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University, Gangaiyamman Koil Street, Karappakkam, Chennai-7.
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
gya W.P.No.12948 of 2017 18.05.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in