AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Subrata Talukdar, J
Party/parties is/are represented in the order of their name/names as printed above in the cause title.
The matter has been mentioned before this Court on the grounds of urgency and has been therefore listed as a Mentioned Matter (Group-II).
The petitioners before this Court represented by Mr. Basu, Learned Senior Counsel, are the students in the B.Ed. Course under the Respondents/B.R. Ambedkar College, Village & P.O. Malighati, P.S.-Debra, District: Paschim Medinipur (hereinafter referred to as only the College or the said College).
Mr. Saptangshu Basu submits that as per the admission schedule of the Respondents/West Bengal University of Teachers' Training, Education Planning and Administration/ the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to the writ petition (for short only the University or the said University), the students were admitted online in June, 2019 and the last date for admissions was completed on the 29th of June, 2019. Classes commenced from the 1st of July, 2019.
Mr. Basu submits that due to the sudden non-affiliation of the College by the University following withdrawal of recognition to the College by the National Council of Teachers' Education (NCTE)/the Respondent Nos. 3,4,5 and 6 to the writ petition, the petitioners/students have been denied Admit Cards for the B.Ed. Semester Examinations which are scheduled to commence on and from 6th December, 2019.
The reasons for not granting the students Admit Cards is the failure on the part of the college to produce a Fire Safety Compliance Certificate conforming to the requirements of NCTE.
Therefore, the NCTE, in exercise of powers under its Regulations, has de-recognised the College followed by its de-affiliation by the University.
Mr. Arindam Banerjee, Learned Counsel appearing for the College, submits that the formalities connected to the provisions of the Fire Safety Compliance Certificate stand complete. However, for several inadvertent reasons, the Fire Safety Compliance Certificate could not be produced before the Appellate Authority of the NCTE within the time prescribed.
Mr. Banerjee submits that the College has now affirmed an Affidavit to demonstrate before the Hon'ble Bench in seisin of the issue that the nitty-gritties connected to the Fire Safety Compliance Certificate stand complete.
It is accordingly submitted that it is only axiomatic that the NCTE, which has de-recognised the College on the sole issue of absence of a Fire Safety Compliance Certificate, shall be persuaded to restore the recognition followed by the restoration of the affiliation by the University.
Mr. Amitava Chaudhuri, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents/University, submits that there can be no question of the University issuing Admit Cards to the students of a de-affiliated College.
Mr. Chaudhuri submits that the process of de-recognition by the NCTE and the consequent de-affiliation of the College by the University was not heeded by the present college management for long. The correct steps were not taken on time to remedy such defects. Mr. Chaudhuri also relies on several provisions of the NCTE Regulations in support of his arguments.
Appearing for the Respondents/NCTE, Mr. Sauvik Nandy, Learned Counsel, submits that the absence of a Fire Safety Compliance Certificate was the particular reason for de-recognising the College. The College has to take steps to remove the deficiency in the fire safety norms before recognition can be restored.
Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharyya, Learned Counsel appearing for the Added Respondents, claims to be the President of the Society which runs the College.
Mr. Bhattacharyya submits that irrespective of the fraternal dispute between the member groups of the Society, which however culminated in a decree in Other Suit No. 61 of 2013 filed by one Mr. Sachindra Nath Mishra representing himself to be the Secretary of the Society which runs the College. The bottom line for appearing in the examination is, according to Mr. Bhattacharya, the eligibility of the students to appear through a College which is recognised by NCTE and affiliated to the University.
Mr. Sachindra Nath Mishra, a Respondent to the writ petition and also the plaintiff in the Other Suit No. 61 of 2013, appears in- person and reiterates the position that the present college management was aware of the deficiencies connected to its building, including the absence of fire safety compliance norms. Therefore, the present college management which, according to Mr. Mishra, the decree-holder, are usurpers as well as the students cannot claim equity in their favour for appearing in the B.Ed Examination under the University.
Mr. Basu, Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, distinguishes the judgment relied upon by Mr. Bhattacharjee, Learned Counsel, as reported in AIR 1998 SC 2235 (In Re: C.B.S.E. vs. P. Sunil Kumar) on the ground that the judgment did not permit ineligible students to gain sympathy from the Court.
Having regard to the submissions made by Learned Counsel for the College based on records available with him, Learned Senior Counsel points out, that the students are in every respect eligible to appear for the B.Ed Examination to be held on and from December 6, 2019,
Having heard the parties and considering the materials placed, this Court finds as follows:
A) That the matter of acquisition of the Fire Safety Compliance Certificate by the College, having regard to the present status of the records, is procedural and in the present domain of/at the appropriate level/forum/Court to be dealt with the speed it deserves.
B) That this Court is conscious of the fact that the only factor which persuaded the NCTE to de-recognise the College is the absence of the Fire Safety Certificate which, to the considered mind of this Court, does not constitute a substantive basis for running the academic career of students who have secured admission recommended by the University and attended classes in the self-same College premises.
C) That the decree in Other Title Suit No. 61 of 2013 is inter se the parties contesting to wrest management of the College and is likely to follow its own logical course. Again, such fraternal dispute should not be interfere with the academic carriers of the students.
In the backdrop of the above discussion, this Court permits the petitioners to provisionally appear in the B.Ed Examination to be held on and from the 6th of December, 2019, provided they are found to be individually complying with all examination related formalities such as attendance, payment of fees etc. and also subject to the final result of this writ petition.
Both the University as well as the College are directed to act accordingly.
Before parting with this discussion, it is relevant to mention that Mr. Mishra, appearing in person, placed for the perusal of this Bench an order dated August 4, 2011 in WP No. 12854(W) of 2011, being a writ petition filed by the College. Mr. Mishra wanted to point out that the Hon'ble Judge of this Bench had appeared for the State Respondents in the writ petition of 2011.
However, from a reading of the order dated 4th August, 2011, it does not transpire that the State-Respondents were at all called upon to address the merits of the issue which essentially centred around two groups within the management of the society which manages the College.
Let the Affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of six weeks from date; Reply within three weeks thereafter.
Liberty to mention after the period granted to exchange Affidavits is complete strictly upon notice to the other sides.
Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.