P.S.R.College Of Education v. The National Council For Teacher Education

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.06.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P(MD)No.5744 of 2024 P.S.R.College of Education, Represented by its Principal, P.Velmurugan, Appayanaickenpatti, Sevalpatti (Post), Sivakasi - 626 140.

Virudhunagar District.

... Petitioner Vs.

1.The National Council for Teacher Education, Represented by its Member Secretary, Hans Bhawan Wing II, 1, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002.

2.The Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher Education, G-7, Sector - 10, Dwarka, Near Metro Station, New Delhi - 110 075.

... Respondents 1/5

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent in the proceedings of 431st Meeting of the SRC held on 10th January 2024, quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned and the Consequential Rejection Order passed by the second respondent in F.No.NCTE/SRCAPP-1908/AP/2020/144472 dated 15.02.2024 and consequently direct the respondent to grant recognition to enable the petitioner to state the M.Ed Course for the academic year 2024-2025 onwards by the petitioner within such time as may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.K.Ponraj For Respondents : Mr.SU.Srinivasan

ORDER

The petitioner seeks recognition for running M.Ed course. The petitioner's request was rejected by the impugned order. Challenging the same, the present writ petition came to be filed. 2.The respondents have filed counter affidavit. Paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:

2/5

"8.It is respectfully submitted that the decision to temporarily suspend the invitation of fresh applications under the receding regime is in line with the object of transitioning smoothly into the new regime as per the requirements of NEP 2020. The respondents submit that the decision to temporarily suspend the invitation of fresh applications is in line with and in furtherance of this object of the NEP 2020 which is a binding policy as per Section 29 and 30 of the Act. Therefore, for the reasons as stated above, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered."

The impugned order does not contains this reason at all. Now that the actual reason which led the respondents to reject the petitioner's application has come to be known, it is only just and proper that the respondents are directed to revisit the issue. 3.In this view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the file of the second respondent. The second respondent shall take a decision one way or the other within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter. 3/5

4.This writ petition is allowed on these terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

14.06.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA 4/5

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

MGA 14.06.2024 5/5