AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal is directed against interim order dated 27.05.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the appellant-University of
Rajasthan has been directed to include Respondent No. 1-writ petitioner provisionally for the purpose of empanelment for counselling for four years
B.A.B.Ed./B.Sc.B.Ed. Integrated Course 2019-20.
Dr. Y.C. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellantUniversity of Rajasthan, citing judgment of this Court in University of Rajasthan, Jaipur Vs. Shri
Krishna Public School Shikshan Sansthan (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 826/2018 decided on 19.09.2018) and judgment of the Supreme Court in
Medical Council of India Vs. N.C. Medical College and Hospitals & Others, AIR 2018 SC 337, 4submitted that learned Single Judge ought not to
have passed interim order directing the Co-ordinator PTET2019, Dungar College, Bikaner for empanelment of Respondent No. 1-writ petitioner for
counselling. It is argued that Respondent No.1-Institution has been set up for the first time on the basis of letter of recognition granted by Respondent
No. 3-NCTE dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure-2 of the writ petition). He in particular referred to Condition No. 6 of the letter dated 29.06.2018, subclause
(i) of which states that the affiliating body/State Government shall be required to verify the authenticity of the land and building documents submitted
by the institution, with the required land and built up as well as appointment of requisite teaching and non-teaching staff as per the provisions of the
NCTE Regulations, 2014 (for short ‘the Regulations of 2014’) before grant of affiliation to the institution. Learned counsel referred to letter
dated 26.09.2018 (Annexure-4 of the writ petition) sent by the Joint Director (Private Institutions), College Education, Rajasthan, Jaipur to Respondent
No. 1-Institution pointing out certain deficiencies, such as, (1) documents belonging to land of Khasra No. 2146/1, 2146/4 have not been filed; (2) land
conversion order with regard to land of Khasra No. 4505 and 4765/8669 for permitting use of the land for educational purposes has not been
submitted; (3) land conversion order which has been submitted permits use of the land for educational purposes only for 2500 sq. metres whereas as
per the NCTE Regulations, minimum required land shall be 3000 sq. metres and (4) Since the documents pertaining to land of Khasra No. 2146/1,
2146/4 have not been produced, it is not possible to ascertain from the map of the building as to on which Khasra number it is located.
Learned counsel submitted that despite NCTE having inspected the institution, the University can again inspect the same. Even otherwise, when the
NCTE has itself entrusted the aforementioned task to the affiliating body or the State Government, learned Single Judge ought not to have straight
away directed inclusion or the empanelment of the Respondent No. 1-Institution for the purpose of counselling. He submitted that Condition No. 6(ii)
of letter of recognition dated 29.06.2018 further stipulates that the affiliating body shall ensure that the Institution is a composite institution as per
definition of a “composite institution†given in Clause 2(b) of the Regulations of 2014. If at any stage, it is found that the institution is not a
composite institution, the recognition granted shall be treated as withdrawn and the sole responsibility of the same will be of the institution. Learned
counsel submitted that the institution to be a composite institution should be running at least two courses simultaneously. Respondent No. 1-Institution
having been established for the first time in the current academic session, is offering only one course, i.e. B.A.B.Ed./B.Sc.B.Ed. Integrated Course of
the duration of four years. Therefore, it cannot be considered as composite institution.
Mr. Shantanu Sharma, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1-writ petitioner opposed the appeal and submitted that in response to letter dated
26.09.2018 of the Joint Director (Private Institutions), College Education, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Respondent No. 1-Institution sent its reply on 22.11.2018
producing original documents of land of Khasra No. 2146/1, 2146/4, land conversion order of Khasra No. 4505 and 4765/8669 and land conversion
order of two parcels of land one measuring 2500 sq. metres and another measuring 5557 sq. metres as also map of the building of Khasra No. 2146/1
and 2146/4 showing its location on all four khasra numbers, even then the State Government has till date not issued NOC. Learned counsel submitted
that Respondent No.1- Institution has already appointed requisite teaching and nonteaching staff as per the Regulations of 2014.
Learned counsel submitted that Respondent No.1- Institution has submitted certain documents, as mentioned above vide its letter dated 22.11.2018 but
the State Government has not acted upon such documents and has not issued NOC despite lapse of more than six months. Therefore, Respondent
No.1-writ petitioner was left with no option but to approach this Court. The documents submitted by Respondent No.1-Institution fully satisfies
requirement of Condition No. 6(i) of letter dated 29.06.2018. It is submitted that judgment of the Supreme Court inM aa Vaishno Devi Mahila
Mahavidhyalaya vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.-(2013) 2 SCC 61,7 especially in para 77 ad 78 of the report, held that the fields which are sought
to be covered under the provisions of Section 37 of the Universities Act, which is even relied by the appellant in the present case, are clearly common
to the aspects which are squarely covered by the specific language under the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. That being so, all
State laws in regard to affiliation in so far as they are covered by the said Act, must give away to the operation of the provisions of the Central Act.
The requirements, which have been examined and the conditions which have been imposed by NCTE shall prevail and cannot be altered, re-examined
or infringed under the garb of the State law. The affiliating/examining body and the State Government must abide by the proficiency and command of
the NCTE’s directions.
Mr. Prakhar Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Dr. Vibhuti Bhushan Sharma, learned Addition Advocate General for Respondent No. 2-
State has submitted that unless the State Government grants NOC on verification of the authenticity of the land and building documents, Respondent
No.1-writ petitioner could not have been included in the counselling.
In view of the rival submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to modify interim order dated 27.05.2019 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court
and direct as under:-
(i) that the State Government shall make verification of the land and buildings documents submitted by Respondent No. 1 within a period of seven
days from the date copy of this order is produced before it and forward its report to the appellant-University.
(ii) that the NCTE shall in the context of the recognition letter issued by it examine whether Respondent No. 1-Institution satisfies the requirement of
composite institution as per the definition given in clause 2(b) of the notification dated 28.11.2014 and sent a communication to this effect to the
appellant-University within a period of seven days from the date copy of this order is produced before it.
(iii) that Respondent No.1 shall furnish list of teaching and nonteaching staff to the appellant-University with all the documents about their eligibility
within a period of seven days from today and the University shall be entitled to verify the same.
(iv) that inclusion of Respondent No.1-Institution in the counselling shall be subject to fulfillment of the aforementioned conditions.
(v) that admission of the students by Respondent No. 1-Institution shall be at their risk and a stipulation to this effect shall be made in the admission
letter of such students and it shall also be displayed on the notice board/web site of the institution.
This order, however, shall be subject to final outcome of the writ petition.
With aforesaid modification in the impugned order, the appeal is disposed of.
Stay Application No. 9814/2019 stands disposed of.