SHREE DEV BHOOMI INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, DISTRICT DEHRADUN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is an institution affiliated with respondent no.2. After coming into force of the National Council for the Teachers Education Act 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the appellant got recognition from respondent no.3. By rea­sons thereof, the appellant is entitled to take admission of students intending to pursue B.Ed, course. Upon completion of the course imparted by the appellant to the students, the students of the appellant are entitled to sit in the B.Ed, examina­tion conducted by respondent no.2 and upon obtaining success in such examina­tion are entitled to B.Ed, degree awarded by respondent no.2. In terms of the pro­visions contained in Section 12(e) of the Act, respondent no.3 has laid down mini­mum eligibility criteria for admission in B.Ed, courses and also the method of selection of candidates by a circular which was annexed as Annexure 5 to the writ petition. In that, it has been provided that candidates with at least 50% marks either in the Bachelor's degree and/or Master's degree or any other qualification equiva­lent thereto are eligible for admission to the Programme. Thus, the eligibility crite­ria for admission in terms of Section 12(e) of the Act was prescribed by the said cir­cular. By the said circular the method of selection of candidates was also pre­scribed and thereby the obligation io pre­scribe method of selection in terms of Section 12 (e) of the Act was also dis­charged. While prescribing the admission procedure, it was provided as follows :-

(2.) IN this State, the State Govern­ment has adopted the policy of accord­ing admission by taking entrance exami­nations and., not on the basis of marks obtained in qualifying examination. The obligation to conduct entrance examina­tions has been given to the Universities in respect of colleges affiliated to them. Re­spondent no.2 is accordingly obliged to conduct entrance examination for giving admission to students in the appellant in­stitution. Respondent no.2 while propos­ing to conduct such examination issued a circular dated 19.8.2010 and thereby pre­scribed that a candidate not obtaining 45% marks in such entrance examination shall not be entitled to be admitted in B.Ed, courses available in the institutions affiliated to the said respondent. The ap­pellant is aggrieved by the said decision. The appellant is contending that it was beyond the competence of respondent no.2 to do what it purported to do by the said circular dated 19.8.2010. The chal­lenge thus thrown in the writ petition hav­ing met with an order of dismissal the appellant is before us. It is the contention of the appellant that while eligibility has been prescribed by respondent no.3 and while the State has adopted the admission procedure through entrance examination, it was incompetent on the part of respond­ent no.2 to once again prescribe a cut off mark. The counsel for the appellant sub­mitted that having regard to fixation of such cut off mark, a candidate who has got 70% marks in graduation or post graduation level, by reasons of obtaining less than 40% marks in the entrance ex­amination, would not get admission to pursue B.Ed, course. What learned coun­sel has submitted is a possibility. However, while respondent no.2 was authorised to hold entrance examination, an authority should be deemed to have been given to respondent no.2 to state that if a candi­date has not obtained a particular mark he has failed in the examination and the real purpose of the said circular dated 19.8.2010 was to convey the same. We, accordingly, see reason to admit this ap­peal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.