R.JAYA, MEMBER SECRETARY, NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATIO Vs. ADARSH SHIKSHAK PRASHIKSHAN MAHAVIDAYALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS intra court appeal has been preferred against the order dated 24.5.2013 passed in S.B.Civil Contempt Petition No.144/2013.

(2.) WE have heard Ms.Shweta Pareek, learned counsel for the appellants. Shortly stated, the facts relevant for the purpose of disposing of the instant appeal are that the respondent, in its second round of litigation before this Court, had instituted S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.8236/2012 assailing the decision of the National Council for Teachers Education (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the NCTE'), of which the appellants herein are the Member Secretary and Regional Director respectively, taken in its 193rd Meeting held on 8-10.2.2012 rejecting its (respondent herein) application for starting B.Ed. Course as per the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2007. This Court by its judgment and order dated 26.9.2012 allowed the writ petition with the following operative directions:-

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellants has argued that as the NCTE had been advised by this Court to prefer an application for review of the judgment and order dated 26.9.2012, the contempt proceeding is an abuse of the process of Court and the order impugned thus, is liable to be interfered with. To say the least, we are left wholly unpersuaded by this argument. Not only a bare reading of the order dated 23.5.2013 rendered, amongst others, in D.B.Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.229/2013 does not reveal that any such advice, as represented by the appellants, had been offered by this Court to the NCTE to file a review petition, we see no justification whatsoever to interfere with the order impugned.