AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anand Byrareddy, J.—These petitions are disposed of by this common order having regard to the facts and circumstances. The petitioners represent institutions. In terms of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (for short "NCTE") requires them to submit applications for grant of recognition to commence the course in Elementary (Diploma in Education) of two and half years duration. It is pursuant to such applications, that recognition may be granted by the NCTE.) Accordingly, the petitioners claim that they have been granted such recognition and they have been running the course.
For the academic year 2012-13 the respective petitioners had admitted students as per the intake permitted. The examination for I year (D.Ed.,) course was scheduled to be held in July 2013. The second respondent-Director, Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board had issued a notification mentioning the guidelines which were strictly followed by the petitioners in paying the examination fee within the due date and it was duly remitted to the second respondent well before the last date for payment of such fees. The petitioners have sought to produce the copies of challans in this regard. It is however claimed by the petitioners that there were objections raised by the first and the second respondents as regards the medium of instruction and the eligibility criteria of the students and that they could not be permitted to take examination on that ground.
It is in this background, the writ petitions were filed before this Court earlier by these petitioners in W.P. Nos. 28891-28941/13 and connected petitions. It is pursuant to interim orders issued in those petitions that the students have been enabled to take the examination even in July 2013. However their results have been withheld and there is demand for payment of late fees and other penal fees, without payment of which, the respondents are refusing to announce the results or to permit them to take supplementary examination, in the event of such students who may have failed and it is in this background the petitioners are before this Court.
The learned Government Advocate on receiving notice of the petition and on obtaining instructions would now submit that insofar as payment of late fees and the grievance of the petitioners is concerned, admittedly the students were permitted to take the examination conducted in July 2013, only on the undertaking by the respective colleges, including the present petitioners, that they would comply with furnishing the necessary eligibility criteria of the students apart from paying all such penal fees as was due. The petitioners had, at a meeting of the several institutions including the present petitioners and the officials of the Secondary Education Board undertaken to pay all dues as was arrived at. It was on that basis that the petitioners were permitted to field their students at the examination and at this point of time it was unavailable for the petitioners to contend that they are not ready to pay any fine or supply any information to enable the respondents to announce the results of the students and permitting them to take supplementary examination in the event that they have failed.
The learned Government advocate would submit that they are due in a sum of Rs. 2,26,875/- each in W.P. No. 52791/13 and 52792/13 and Rs. 1,90,575/- in W.P. No. 52790/13, respectively.: If these amounts are paid and on receipt of further particulars as to the students of each college, the respondents undertake to announce the results and permit them to take supplementary examination in case of those students who may have failed.
The learned counsel for the petitioners would seriously object to the demand made and would submit that they have already paid certain amounts to the Government and that the amounts under demand are at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per student which they are incapable of meeting as the colleges are situated in an under developed area and the students are from humble backgrounds, who are unable to make such payments.
The learned Government Advocate would submit that the amounts demanded are not from the students but from the institutions and therefore the question of penury of the students would not be material and that there could be no lenience insofar as collection of late fee is concerned. The secondary Education Board has already taken into consideration the hardship of the financial imposition and has already given rebate of 25% and no further rebate could be granted to the institutions insofar as the payment of late fee is concerned.
Accordingly, the petitions stand disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to pay the amount demanded without demanding further concessions and furnish all such particulars as regards eligibility criteria prescribed and satisfy that the institution is duly approved by the NCTE. On such satisfaction, the respondents shall take necessary steps to announce the results and permit the students to take supplementary examination, if any. The learned counsel for the petitioners would insist that there has been payment of Rs. 25,000/- made which ought to be given deduction in the demand for late fee. It is pointed out by the learned Government Advocate that the amount paid does not accrue to the Board and that there could be no such deduction regarding the payment.
The petitions stand disposed of.