ST STEPHENS TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE VALEYUTHA NAGAR KOLLAMCODE POST KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT Vs. DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS COLLEGE ROAD CHENNAI 6

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for both sides agree that at this stage the writ appeal and the civil miscellaneous petition be disposed of by a common judgment on merits.

(2.) IN order to dispose of the question raised i. e. , whether in view of section 14 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act 1993, herein after called the'act', a deemed recognition would not confer a right on the petitioner to continue with the institution and make it incumbent for the respondents to permit those students to take examination. It does not debar the respondents holding the Examination with respect to above referred institution.

(3.) CONCEDINGLY the application was made within the stipulated period and has not been decided. It is categorically discernible from reading of section 14, that it provided for a deemed recognition i. e. ,. , in case of the institution which were already recognised before the coming into force of the Act, it would continue as such for six months, during which one is required to apply for recognition till the disposal of the application by the regional Committee if applied with the period provided by the Act. Thus it provides a statutorily deemed recognition of the institution during the pendency of the application before the Regional Committee. It is the recognised principle of interpretation of statutes that provisions of legislation are to be read in consonance with each other so that they may be operative in their respective field and will not render any statutory provision as obsolete. Deemed recognition has to be given its logical meaning. Consequently in our view the only interpretation which is comprehensible is, that for the purposes of section 16 the deemed recognition provided by section 14 shall have to be taken as recognised institution till it is either refused or any other order passed by the Regional Committee. In case interpretatively held that during the pendency of application, it would be deemed to be'refused'it would run contrary to the express provisions of section 14, protection provided for six months or till the date of the decision of the application by the Regional committee by the proviso to section 14 would be rendered as obsolete. The students having already studied in a recognised school would be let high and dry, and this time spent in studies would go waste which cannot be said to be either the object of the Act or could be the intention of legislation. In ordinary course legislature does not denude a person of what on has already acquired, which is not the object of the act. The institution as well as recognition is meant for the students. It cannot be said that the institution may go on gathering benefits like aid etc. , and the students for whose benefit such benefits are conferred by the state on the institution would not be there, to reap its fruits. It is uncomprehensible. In view of the observations made above the respondents are directed to permit the students to take the examination and would continue treating the petitioner institution as recognised till this application for recognition is finally disposed of by the Regional Committee.