MANGAL JYOTI SANSTHAN Vs. DIRECTOR STATE COUNCIL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a registered society registered under the Societies Registration Act, which as per its object contained under the Article of Association, as well as, memorandum of Association, it provides its object, to be the establishment of professional educational institutions, to impart education as per the object contained under the bylaws of the society as well as in the Article of Association. For the said purposes of imparting of education in the field called as D.El.Ed., the process for the grant of permission/recognition for the purposes of running the institution has been contemplated under the notification as issued by the NCTE on 28/11/2014.

(2.) The petitioner's contention is that after adherence to the guidelines as provided by the NCTE and for getting the recognition to run the institution and to start the D.El.Ed. course they had moved the requisite applications before the competent authorities, who after processing the application under Regulation 7 of the Regulations called as NCTE (regulations called as NCTE) Regulations of 2009, had processed the application of the petitioner and after processing the same, rather the NCTE had granted a letter of intent in favour of the petitioner under sub-regulation 13 of the Regulation 7 of 2009. It was only after the grant of letter of intent in favour of the petitioner by the NCTE on 9/4/2015, that the Additional Director SCERT, i.e. respondent no. 1 to the writ petition, had passed the impugned order, whereby, the respondent no. 1 has declined to the grant permission to the petitioner's institution to run the aforesaid course on the ground that since in the State there are sufficient number of Government Educational institutions available, which are already imparting education in the said course and, hence, the permission cannot be granted to the petitioner to conduct D.El.Ed. course. The relevant part of the reasoning assigned in the impugned order dtd. 28/5/2015 passed by R.I. for denial to grant the permission is quoted hereunder:

(3.) The argument as extended by the learned counsel for the petitioner is to the effect that after having filed an application for the grant of recognition before the NCTE under Regulation 5 which provides for the process for granting of the recognition to the institution of the petitioner was required to be undertaken in accordance with the provisions contained under Regulation 7 of the Regulations of 2009. Sub regulation (2) of Regulation 7 provides the circumstances under which the applications thus submitted for the grant of recognition to run a particular course could be rejected summarily for the reasons, which has been assigned under sub-clause (a) and (b) of sub regulation (2) of Regulation 7.