High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 01 KL CK 0592

G. Christudas vs National Council For Teacher Education And Ors

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 27 January 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil K. Narendran, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 29047 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 428 words
1.

The petitioner, who is the Manager of 'Emmanuel College of B.Ed Training', has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P11 order dated 12.11.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent Regional Director of NCTE; and an order declaring

that Ext.P11 order is issued without giving reasonable opportunity of making representation against the proposed order, as provided in the first proviso

to sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993.

2.

On 04.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for NCTE sought time to get instructions.

3.

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, along with I.A.No.1 of 2021, the petitioner has placed on record Ext.P20 list of faculties

approved by the 3rd respondent University, on 20.01.2021.

4.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for NCTE, representing respondents 1 and 2, the learned Standing

Counsel for the University of Kerala, representing the 3rd respondent, and also the learned Government Pleader for the 4th respondent.

5.

During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner shall file a statutory appeal under Section 18

of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 before the Appellate Authority, against Ext.P11 order, producing therewith a copy of

Ext.P20 approved list of faculties and the Appellate Authority may be directed to consider and take an appropriate decision on that appeal, within a

time limit to be fixed by this Court.

6.

The learned Standing Counsel for NCTE would submit that, in case any appeal filed against Ext.P11 order, the Appellate Authority shall consider

the same and pass appropriate order thereon, within a period of one month.

7.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of by relegating the petitioner to avail

statutory remedy of appeal against Ext.P11 order by approaching the Appellate Authority, invoking the provisions under Section 18 of the National

Council for Teacher Education Act. In case such an appeal is filed within ten days, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same and pass

appropriate order thereon, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,

within a period of one month from the date of filing of that appeal.

All legal and factual contentions raised by the petitioner are left open to be raised before the Appellate Authority, at appropriate stage.