CHAUDHARY DILIP SINGH KANYA Vs. JIWAJI UNUVERSITY GWALIOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Deepak Chandna, Advocate for petitioner. Shri Tapan Trivedi, Advocate for respondents University. Being aggrieved by the action of the University in not supplying examination forms and permitting students of the petitioner institute to appear in the B. Ed. Examination, petitioner has filed this petition seeking a direction to the respondents university to grant forms to petitioner institute.

(2.) PETITIONER claims to be a institute imparting courses of study in B. Ed. the institute is run by a society registered under the M. P. Societies Registrikaran Act namely Janta Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti, Bhind. It is stated that for starting a b. Ed. College petitioner had applied to the NCTE by letter dated 7-7-2004, the said council recognized the petitioner college and approved for intake of 100 students for the session 2004-05 subsequently the said approval and recognition was continued for the session 2005-06 vide letter dated 27-7-2006 and again for current session i. e. 2006-07 and next session 2007-08 vide Annexure P/l to P/4 respectively. It is stated that the State Government has also granted approval and noc vide order dated 09-5-2003 and 06-9-2004 vide Annexure P/5 and P/6 respectively. According to the petitioner for the academic session 2006-07 after admitting the students as per the due date, list was submitted by UPC on 28-9-2006 and by registered post and Fax on 1-10-2006, Annexure P/7 and P/8 are the aforesaid documents. Petitioner contends that despite all these formalities and deposit of requisite fee, respondents have not issued the examination forms, for the students of petitioner college, in spite of letter have issued with regard to proper admission of the students, respondent University is not allotting the examination forms and as examination forms are not being allotted, petitioner has filed this petition. Relief claimed for is that respondent University be directed to allot the examination forms and permit the students of the petitioner institute to appear in the B. Ed. Examination for the academic session in question. Shri deepak Chandna, learned counsel for petitioner submitted by placing reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Sant dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and others, 2006 (9) SCC 1 that once recognition and approval is granted by the NCTE as per NCTE Act, 1993, the University, the affiliating body which conducts the examination cannot withhold -grant of affiliation or issuance of examination forms. Inter alia contending that petitioner is granted affiliation by respondent University and after having granted affiliation, examination forms cannot be withheld, petitioner seeks interference in the matter.

(3.) ON notice being issued, respondents University has filed return and in the return it is stated that the petitioner institute is not granted recognition or approval by NCTE under section 14 of the NCTE Act. It is further pointed out that University has not affiliated the petitioner institute, only inspection has been conducted and finding various defects and deficiency provisional affiliation was recommended subject to condition that the petitioner institute obtain formal order of recognition from NCTE. By bringing on record the inspection report Annexure r/1 Shri Tapan Trivedi, learned counsel for respondents argued that in the present case the petitioner institute is not granted affiliation and therefore, relief as prayed for in this petition cannot be granted. That apart respondents have raised serious question with regard to bona fide of petitioner, it is pointed out that as per policy of the State Government followed by the University, students have to be admitted before cut of date as per admission rules and the list of candidates admitted has to be approved by the Commissioner, State Education Centre and forwarded to the University. In the present case the list of students is not properly verified by the State Education Centre. It is argued that the State Education centre while forwarding the list Annexure R/7 wherein the name of the petitioner institute is contained in serial No. 47. It is pointed out that list of students has to be verified by the Government, Education College, Gwalior. It is pointed out that the Government College of Education, Gwalior is not verifying the list of students as per rule. List sent by UPC received and registered AD are fabricated documents reliance on which cannot be placed. Shri Tapan Trivedi argued that the admission is made in an illegal manner, list submitted is not properly approved and therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly shri Tapan Trivedi, learned counsel for respondents prays for dismissal of this petition.