C/M Dev Education College vs State of U.P. and Others

Sanjay Misra, J.—Heard Sri P.S. Baghel, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Man Bahadur Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

The petitioner claims to be the Committee of Management, Dev Education College, Barhan, Etmadpur, Agra and has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs:

(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 1 to take decision for granting affiliation/clearance to the petitioner''s institution to run BTC course forthwith.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to send the students for BTC course 2010-11 in the petitioner''s institution forthwith after making counseling from the select list prepared by him.

(c) Issue any other, writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the present case.

(d) Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.

According to the petitioner, the Institution is duly registered under the Societies Registration Act and it does not receive any grant-in-aid from the State Government. It is running courses under the Self Finance Scheme and the provisions of U.P. State Universities Act are applicable to it. The Institution was granted recognition under the NCTE Act for running the programme of BTC course of two years duration with annual intake of 50 students. The petitioner''s Institution was inspected by SCERT (respondent No. 2) on 10.3.2010 and the inspection report has disclosed that all the required infrastructural facilities are possessed by the Institution and therefore, the respondent No. 2 made his recommendation for running BTC course in the Institution.

Sri Baghel has submitted that the matter was considered by this Court in bunch writ petitions, leading writ petition being numbered as Writ Petition No. 39124 of 2007 Dau Dayal Mahila (P.G.) College and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, State Council of Educational Research and Training, National Council for Teachers Education and State of U.P., and the Court held that once recognition was granted by the NCTE u/s 14(4) of the Act then the State is required to accept the same and take all consequential action. He submits that the aforesaid judgment was assailed by the State of U.P. in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 1081 of 2007, which has been dismissed on 31.7.2009.

Sri Baghel, therefore, submits that the State respondents were required to take all consequential action and having not done so, the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court for the reliefs claimed herein.

Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that in case the matter is pending before the respondents for granting affiliation/clearance to the petitioner''s Institution for running BTC course, there is no apparent reason given in the writ petition why the State Government would not proceed in accordance with law.

In view of the aforesaid submission, the appropriate respondents are directed to take a decision in accordance with law on the claim of the petitioner made through its representation dated 16.6.2010 as expeditiously as possible without any further delay and within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the respondents No. 1 and 2 provided there is no other legal impediment in taking a decision.

It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in this writ petition and that has to be done by the Competent Authority.

The writ petition stands disposed of as above.

No order is passed as to costs.