F .No.89-1303/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER ... 16th meet-oct.pdf · NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans ... the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench

F .No.89-1303/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 22/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Amrit Lal Mahavidyala, Maharajganj, Uttar Pradesh dated 04/11/2009 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F-7/UP-3188/141 MEETING/2009/5598 dated 07/07/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds”1) CLU is not submitted. 2) Building plan is signed by Gram Pradhan but not approved. Also the letter of resolution of Gram Panchayat regarding approval of building plan is not submitted.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Amrit Lal Mahavidyala (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 04/11/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS The Amrit Lal Mahavidyala, Maharajganj, Uttar Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 16-08-2010, 16-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd & final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. The Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.

(S.V.S. Chaudhary) Vice- Chairperson

1. The Manager, Amrit Lal Mahavidyala, Vill- Baikunthpur Post-Lok Vidyapeeth Nagar, Thesil-Pharenda, Maharajganj - , Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

F.No.89-949/2010-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of B.C.N Rotary Vidya Samshte, Laxmeshwar, Karnataka dated 05/08/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010-2011/20065 dated 29/07/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting D.Ed course on the grounds “ 1) The institution is also running PUC course in the same building. 2) The built up area is 10584 sq. ft. sharing with PUC. It is not as per NCTE norms. 3) No. of books as on the date as per the VTR is 1000 only which is not sufficient. Every year, a D.Ed. institution is required to add at least 200 books.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, B.C.N Rotary Vidya Samshte (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 18/08/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS after submission of the appeal, the appellant through his letter dt. 13.10.2010, forwarding a copy of the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad dt. 20.8.2010 in the writ petition No. 65067 of 2010 (EDN-REG-P), informed that after conducting a re-inspection of the institution as directed by the Hon’ble High Court, the SRC in their 196th meeting held on15-16 Sept,2010 has restored the recognition to the institution and order dated 01-11-2010 was issued to the institution by the SRC. In these circumstances the appeal becomes infructuous.

(S.V.S. Chaudhary) Vice-Chairperson

1. The Principal, B.C.N Rotary Vidya Samshte, Peth Ban, Gadag, Laxmeshwar - 582116, Karnataka 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Baijnath Ramnaresh Degree College, Sadar, Uttar Pradesh dated 08/06/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-3/NRCAPP245/157 Meeting/2010/20036 dated 13/04/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the grounds “1) Registered land document is not certified. 2) CLU is not notarized. 3) The building plan submitted by the Institute is not approved by competent authority”. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Baijnath Ramnaresh Degree College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 08/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Baijnath Ramnaresh Degree College, Sadar, Uttar Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 16-08-2010, 16-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd & final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. the Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The President, Baijnath Ramnaresh Degree College, Kajipur Barhalganj, Vill- Kajipur Barhalganj, Sadar - -, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

F.No.89 - 320/2010 - Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Boston College (Radha Kishan Shiksha Prasar Evam Jankalyan Samiti), Morena, Madhya Pradesh dated 21/04/2010 is against the Order No. F.WRC/NCTE/2010/RL-66097 dated 22/03/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the grounds “Processing fee not submitted.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Boston College (Radha Kishan Shiksha Prasar Evam Jankalyan Samiti) (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 27/04/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Boston College (Radha Kishan Shiksha Prasar Evam Jankalyan Samiti), Morena, Madhya Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 13-07-2010, 16-08-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. the Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The Secretary, Boston College (Radha Kishan Shiksha Prasar Evam Jankalyan Samiti), Khasra no. 1026, Village & Post Office - Rathona, Tehsil - Ambah, District, Morena - , Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Brilliant D.Ed. College, Manjunath Nagar, Robertsonpet, KGF- 56312, Kolar, Karnataka dated 14/05/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2009-2010/17941 dated 04/03/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting D.Ed course on the grounds” 1) There is a discrepancy between the Building plan and Building Completion Certificate in terms of built up space. 2) Built-up space is inadequate, as per the records provided by the institution itself.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Brilliant D.Ed. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 24/05/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. MD. Iqbal Shariff, Secretary, Brilliant D.Ed. College, Kolar, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the building is constructed according to the building plan; the building plan and the building completion certificate are matching with each other; the institution is having 10,800 sq. ft built up area for D.Ed course only; and there is no other course or college in the campus. The appellant has not produced any original documents in support of his claim. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the figures of built-up area in the copy of the building plan and the copy of the building completion certificate dt. 10/07/2009 enclosed to the appeal do not tally. While the copy of building plan indicates 6,187sq.ft each on ground and first floors, the copy of the building completion certificate indicates an area of 25’X200’ (10 rooms). The appellant has enclosed copies of a different building plan and the building completion certificate dt. 04/09/2009 indicating ground floor area as 10,800 sq.ft to his reply dated nil and received in SRC on 19/04/2009 to the show cause notice dt. 10/08/2009. In view of the discrepancies in the figures and submission of different documents at different times showing in consistent figures of covered area, the claim of the appellant about the adequacy of built up area can neither be relied upon nor accepted. The Council therefore came to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC confirmed. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal

and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the SRC’s order dated 04-03-2010 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Brilliant D.Ed. College , Manjunatha Nagar Robertson Pet K.G.F-563 121, Kolar - -, Karnataka 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Lord College of Teacher's Education, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 18/05/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/NCTE/2010/RL-66090 dated 22/03/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.EL.ED. course on the grounds “ 1) As per online application the name of the institution is J.S. Kuhwah and manual written Lord College of Teacher Education. Land title Lord College mentioned and land is in favor of Lord College of Teacher education. 2) Manual written the name of the institution Lord College of Teacher Education is not valid. The institution did not fulfill the condition as required in clause 8(7) (i) of NCTE Regulations, 2009. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Lord College of Teacher's Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 18/05/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the Lord College of Teacher's Education, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 16-08-2010, 16-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on behalf of the institution on all the three dates before the Council. the Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The Secretary, Lord College of Teacher's Education, Mehragaon, Sirol Road, Morar, Gwalior - -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

F.No.89-962/2010-Appeal

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of Man Vidyaprasarak Mandal, Satara, Maharashtra dated 20/08/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW06417/1221897 (Appeal) (court case)/136th/2010/68759 dated 18-25/06/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed(M) course on the grounds “The land has been taken by the society on lease on 16/09/2008 from a private party that cannot be considered as valid as per the clause 8(7) of the NCTE Regulations, 2007. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Man Vidyaprasarak Mandal (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 23/08/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appeal of Man Vidyaprasarak Mandal dt. 30/04/2009 against the order of the WRC dt. 13/04/2009 rejecting the application of the institution for grant of recognition for conducting the D.Ed Course on the ground of the negative recommendation of the State Govt. of Maharashtra was rejected by the Council in their Order No.89/369/2009- Appeal/99659 dt. 07/08/2009. Aggrieved by this order the appellant filed a writ petition No. W.P. 3721 of 2010 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur and the Hon’ble High Court in their order dt. 04/05/2010 set aside the impugned order and directed reconsideration of the application on its own merit in accordance with law. Accordingly the WRC reconsidered the matter and issued an order dt. 25-06-2010 refusing recognition against which the present appeal has been preferred. Sh.Dastagir, President, Man Vidyaprasarak Mandal, Satara, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the institution is having landed property on ownership basis; and the WRC in their letter dt. 02-18/09/2008 has not raised any query about land not being on ownership basis. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that since the application was submitted on 13/06/2007, the NCTE Regulations 2007 which came into force w.e.f. 10/12/2007 were not applicable in this case and the earlier Regulations of 2005 permitted land on lease from a private party. From the copies of the documents furnished by the appellant it is seen that the appellant was in possession of 0.26 acre (2600 Sq.mts.) of land as per registered rent agreement dated 26-04-07 and further he executed a lease deed on 6th September 2008 for 16,911 Sq.ft. of built-up area only and later purchased land and got the sale deed registered on 21/12/2009. In the circumstances the Council, noting that the ground for rejection was not a valid one and the appellant has claimed availability of own land for the proposed institution,

has come to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be accepted, the order of the WRC reversed with the direction to process the application further on merit. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the WRC’s order dated 18-25/06/2010 with direction to the WRC to process the application further on merit. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Chairman, Man Vidyaprasarak Mandal, Plot No. 2519, Opposite Tahasil Office, Dahiwadi, Tal-Man, Satara - 415508, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Sadguru Istari Maharaj D.Ed College, Yavatmal, Maharashtra dated 23/06/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW06634/1221992/(court case)/132nd/2010/67136 dated 16/04/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed.(M) course on the grounds “The land has been registered on 23.02.2010. The institution did not have the land on the date of application as required in the said regulation. Hence, the institution does not fulfill the requirement of clause 8(7) of the NCTE Regulations 2007“. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Sadguru Istari Maharaj D.Ed College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 25/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the application of the institution for grant of recognition was earlier rejected by the WRC in their order dt. 25/05/2009 on the ground of negative recommendations of Maharashtra State Govt. Aggrieved by the order of the WRC, the appellant filed a writ petition No. 5270 of 2009 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Nagpur Bench, Nagpur and the Hon’ble High Court in their order dt. 04/12/2009 directed the WRC to consider the application on its own merit and in accordance with law. Accordingly the WRC reconsidered the matter and refused recognition against which this appeal has been preferred. Shri. L.H. Potraje, Chairman and Shri. R.K.Umane, Member, Shri Sadguru Istari Maharaj D.Ed College, Yavatmal, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that all the necessary valid copies of documents including copy of registered lease deed of land and appointment of staff as per NCTE norms 2009 were already forwarded to the WRC for perusal with their letter dated 27.02.2010 as per the requirement of the NCTE but the WRC did not consider the same. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant at the time of application submitted only a notarized copy of the lease agreement for 30 years and it was got registered only on 23/02/2010. As Section 17 of the Registraion Act, 1908 makes lease of immovable property for more than one year compulsorily registerable, failure to do so would not confer any right on the lessee, since transaction in violation of this provision is null and void. Therefore, the Council came to the conclusion that ground on which the recognition was refused was valid and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of WRC confirmed.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 16-04-2010 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Shri Sadguru Istari Maharaj D.Ed College, Plot No. 22,23 & 24,Khasra No. 179/1, Jarur, Yavatmal, Yavatmal - -, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Tecnia Institute of Teacher Education, Rohini, Delhi dated 26/06/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-7/DH-372/157th Meeting/2010/20879 dated 29/04/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “Permission to shift the affiliating university is not granted“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Tecnia Institute of Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 01/07/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. R.S. Gupta, Chairman and Sh. N.S. Bhati, Society Member, Tecnia Institute of Teacher Education, Rohini, Delhi presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi in their letter dt. 7.7.2008 declined to issue NOC which was required for getting affiliation from GGSIP University as the institution did not meet the requirement of land as prescribed by them. Non-grant of affiliation resulted in litigation between the institution and the University with no admissions during 2008-09 and 2009-10. The writ petition filed was withdrawn by the appellant as he wanted to pursue the matter of affiliation with another University. While pursuing the matter with the GGSIP University the appellant learning that SNDT Women’s University has a special provision to affiliate colleges throughout India and the NRC has permitted affiliation of Satyam College of Education, Noida to SNDT University, requested the NRC through a number of letters to grant permission to shift affiliation to SNDT University. He has also made a representation to GGSIP University to review its decision/amend its norms and it is learnt that the latter has already reviewed its norms pertaining to the land and is also actively considering revision of their norms so as to bring them at par with NCTE norms; while the application was pending with GGSIP university, the appellant has been granted affiliation by IGNOU for B.Ed course of 2 years; while his representation was pending with GGSIP University the NRC has withdrawn recognition without giving any opportunity as envisaged under section 17 of the NCTE Act. Since Satyam College of Education, Noida has been allowed affiliation to SNDT University, same treatment should have been given to the appellant and the NCTE should have directed/persuaded the GGSIP University to grant affiliation to the appellant instead of withdrawing recognition already granted. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the issue to be examined is whether the appellant can seek affiliation with SNDT University. The appellant in support of his claim has enclosed an extract from the Maharashtra University Act, 1994. Chapter XII

of the said Act deals with special provisions for SNDT University. Clause 105(2) reads as follows:- “(2) The territorial limits, within which the powers conferred upon the university by this Act, shall be exercised, shall compromise the State of Maharashtra. Provided that, the university may, subject to such conditions and restrictions as it and the State Govt. may think fit to impose, admit any women’s educational institution in any other territory to the privileges of the university, with the approval of the Govt concerned” A plain reading of this provision indicates that admission of any women’s educational institution in any other territory to the privileges of the University, which may include affiliation is subject to the approval of the Govt. concerned. This is apart from such other conditions and restrictions the University and the State Govt. (Govt. of Maharashtra) may impose. This would mean that the appellant has to follow the entire procedure including obtaining approval of the concerned Govt. i.e. Govt. of NCT of Delhi before hand, which has apparently not been done. From a perusal of the appeal it appears that the appellant institution has not given up its efforts to obtain affiliation from GGSIP University, Delhi. Taking a overall view of the matter the Council is of the opinion that the NRC was justified in withdrawing recognition. The only lacuna being non-issue of a show cause notice. Since this statutory requirement has not been fulfilled, the Council came to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be accepted, the order of the NRC reversed with the direction to issue a show cause notice and take further action thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse NRC’s order dated 29-04-2010 with direction to the NRC to issue a show cause notice and take further action thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Chairman, Tecnia Institute of Teacher Education, F-19, Sector - 8, , Rohini - 110085, Delhi 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Delhi, New Delhi.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Unnati College of Education for Women, Yavatmal, Maharashtra dated 28/06/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW05032/123612/133/2010/67713 dated 05/05/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “ 1) The land is in the name of individual. 2) The institution is not in possession of land on the date of application as required in the NCTE Regulations“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Unnati College of Education for Women (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 05/07/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appeal of the institution against the order of the WRC dt. 15.4.2009 rejecting the application on the ground of negative recommendations of the State Govt of Maharashtra was rejected by the Council in their order F.No.89-547/2009/Appeal/10065 dt. 7.8.2009. Aggrieved by the order of the Council, the appellant filed a writ petition No 4194/2009 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur and the Hon’ble High Court in their order dt 29.3.2010 directed the WRC to consider the application on merit and in accordance with law. Accordingly the WRC reconsidered the matter and refused grant of recognition, against which the present appeal has been preferred. AND WHEREAS Sh. Sanjay P. Shedmake, Member, Unnati College of Education for Women, Yavatmal, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the Society proposes to purchase the land in the name of the Unnati Bahuddeshiya Gramin Vikas Sanstha, as required in the NCTE Regulations and the documents will be provided at the time of hearing. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that at the time of submission of the application, the appellant had land only on lease basis and enclosed a notarized copy of the rent agreement and the lease was only in favour of an individual. Since the appellant has now submitted that the society proposes to purchase land, admittedly he was not in possession of the land on the date of application. In the circumstances the Council came to conclusion that the grounds on which

recognition was refused are valid and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the WRC confirmed. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 05-05-2010 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.

(S.V.S. Chaudhary)

Vice-Chairperson 1. The President, Unnati College of Education for Women, Nirohi Nagar, Near Sarang Society, Shraddha Nagar, Wadgaon, Yavatmal - 445001, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Anandi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal D.Ed College, Kolhapur, Maharashtra dated 21/08/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW06789/1222048/(appeal) (court case)/136th/2010/68736 dated 25/06/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed(M) course on the grounds“ The lease deed submitted is not registered“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Anandi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal D.Ed College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 24/08/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appeal of the institution against the order of the WRC dt 23.5.2009 rejecting the application on the ground of negative recommendations of the State Govt. of Maharashtra was rejected by the Council in their order F.No. 89-583/2009/Appeal-100069 dt. 7.8.2009. Aggrieved by the order of the Council the appellant filed a writ petition No. 3063 of 2010 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay and the Hon’ble High Court in their order dt. 4.5.2010 setting aside the impugned order directed that the proposal for grant of recognition be considered on its own merit and in accordance with law. Accordingly the WRC considered the matter and refused recognition, against which the present appeal has been preferred. AND WHEREAS Sh. Prashatkumar Sharad Poidar, President and Sh. Abhijeet Bhupal Pawar, Member, Anandi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal D.Ed College, Kolhapur, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the proposal is complete as per the NCTE Norms and Standards. They have complied with all the deficiencies. A visiting team inspected the institution on 22.10.2008 and the ground that the lease deed submitted was not registered has never been communicated to them. Further the appellant in his written statement of the appeal stated that at the time of hearing a registered lease deed will be submitted, whereas he did not show any registered copy of the lease deed to the appeal committee. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that at the time of submitting application, the appellant had submitted only a notarized lease deed for a period of 33 years and it has not yet been registered. As Section 17 of the Regulation Act, 1908 makes lease of immovable property for more than one year compulsorily registerable, failure to

do so would not confer any right on the lessee, since transaction in violation of this provision is null and void. In the circumstance the Council came to the conclusion that the ground on which recognition was refused was valid and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the WRC confirmed. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 25-06-10 was confirmed NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Anandi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal D.Ed College, Gat No. 364, Village at Pandali Khurd, Tal-Karveer, Kolhapur - 416010, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Gyan Bharti Institute of Management Studies, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh dated 07/06/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-3/NRCAPP98/157 Meeting/2010/20371 dated 16/04/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the ground “Submitted Land document is not certified“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Gyan Bharti Institute of Management Studies (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 08/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the Gyan Bharti Institute of Management Studies, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 16-08-2010, 17-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. The Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The Secretary, Gyan Bharti Institute of Management Studies, Vill- Jewari Post- Meerut Cantt, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur – 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.


Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi – 110 002 22/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Gyan Teaching Institute, Mahamaya Nagar, Uttar Pradesh dated 09/06/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-3/NRCAPP66/158 Meeting/2010/21637 dated 10/05/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the ground “ 1) land documents are not certified. 2) Notarized copy of CLU is not submitted. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Gyan Teaching Instittute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 09/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Gyan Teaching Institute, Mahamaya Nagar, Uttar Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 16-08-2010, 17-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. The Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The Secretary, Gyan Teaching Instittute, Plot No.562,VPO-Maharara, Tehsil-Sadabad, Mahamaya Nagar – 280076, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur – 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Hulkoti Co-Op Education Society, Gadag, Karnataka dated 12/06/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010-2011/18699 dated 04/05/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting the B.P.Ed course on the ground “The institution has not replied to the deficiency letter even after the expiry of stipulated period of 60 days. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Hulkoti Co-Op Education Society (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 16/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. Umesh Baraker, Principal, Hulkoti Co-Op Education Society, Gadag, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that they have dispatched the documents on 29.03.2010 by courier service and they have tried their best to collect all the documents from various Govt. agencies and were able to send them by 29.03.2010 except the Completion certificate from the Municipality in proper form (though such a certificate is already filed in some other format of the Municipality. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that as per the deficiency letter dt. 22.12.2009 issued by the SRC, the appellant was required to send his reply within 60 days of communication of the deficiency. The Council also noted that the institution sent their reply dt. 26.3.2010 which was received in the SRC’s office only on 31.3.2010, that is, much later than the 60 day time limit given. In the circumstances the Council came to the conclusion that the ground on which recognition was refused is valid and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of SRC confirmed. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the SRC’s order dated 04-05-2010 was confirmed NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Principal, Hulkoti Co-Op Education Society, R.S.No.208/209, Gadag-Betgeri Village, Gadag, Gadag - 582102, Karnataka 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of L.P. Shahi Institute of Teacher Education, Muzaffarpur, Bihar dated 13/07/2010 is against the Order No. ERC/7-107.4.1/2010/4067 dated 17/05/2010 of the Eastern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “1) All the staff has been appointed in February / March 2010 when the Regulations 2009 are in force. 2) The Principal is not qualified as per NCTE norms. 3) The three staff i.e. Babita Singh, Rarneshwar Thakur and Saraswati Kumar are not qualified as per NCTE Regulations 2009. 4) The Lecturer for Fine Arts appointed is not qualified as per NCTE Regulations 2009. 5) Director of Physical Education is not appointed. 6) The documents for staff have been forged as the different documents of the staff show different types of signature of the staff. 7) None of the appointed staff is qualified as per qualification as prescribed by UGC / Affiliating body. 8) Discrepancy in the land documents. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, L.P. Shahi Institute of Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 19/07/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS L.P. Shahi Institute of Teacher Education, Muzaffarpur, Bihar was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 26-08-2010, 17-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. The Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The Secretary, L.P. Shahi Institute of Teacher Education, Vill – Dighra, Ps – Town, Muzaffarpur – 842001, Bihar 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Eastern Regional Committee, 15, Neelkanth Nagar, Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar – 751 012. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Bihar, Patna.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Maa Tripura S.TC. College, Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh dated 24/07/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/WRCAPP763/Rejection/134th/2010/67872 dated 12/05/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed. course on the ground “Reply of the deficiency letter not received till date. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Maa Tripura S.TC. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 28/07/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh.Raj K. Joshi, Office Assistant and Sh. Girish Panchal, Member Society, Maa Tripura S.TC. College, Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the society had not received any deficiency letter and therefore they could not send any reply. He also submitted that they have all the relevant documents, as per rules and regulations to open a new D.Ed College in MP. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the WRC in their 134th meeting held on 5th & 6th of May, 2010 decided to reject the application as the institution had not submitted the reply to the deficiency letter of WRC. It however noted that the deficiency letter dated 10-02-2010 of WRC was returned undelivered. The Council taking into account the submission made by the appellant has come to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be accepted and the order of the WRC reversed with a direction to have the deficiency letter re-issued to the institution by registered/speed post and take further action thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the WRC’s order dated 12-05-2010 with direction to the WRC to have the deficiency letter re-issued to the institution by registered/speed post and take further action thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Chairman, Maa Tripura S.TC. College, Plot.No. 121/2,122/1,125/1,Vill -Beelidose, , Jhabua - 457661, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Pragya Mahila Kalyan Samiti College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh dated 10/07/2010 is against the Order No. WRCAPP520/REJECTION/134/2010/68156 dated 18/05/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed. course on the ground “The institution has not submitted FDRs as mentioned in the application form. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Pragya Mahila Kalyan Samiti College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 15/07/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Pragya Mahila Kalyan Samiti College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 26-08-2010, 17-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. The Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The Secretary, Pragya Mahila Kalyan Samiti College, Khasra No. 383/1, Village – Gambhiria, Tehsil-Sagar, Sagar – 470004, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal – 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

F.No.89-514/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of RYP Marathi D.Ed. College, Aurangabad, Maharashtra dated 20/05/2010 is against the Order No. No.WRC/APW06588/1221953(Minority)/127th/2009/5015 dated 23/10/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed course on the ground “Land is neither on ownership basis nor on lease basis as per the NCTE Regulations. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, RYP Marathi D.Ed. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 24/05/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS after the issue of refusal order dt. 23.10.2009, the appellant filed a writ petition No. 7705 of 2009 before the Hon’ble High court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad inter-alia praying stay of the impugned order pending hearing and disposal of the petition. Later the appellant requested the Hon’ble High Court permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail the remedy of appeal under section 18 of the NCTE Act. The Hon’ble High Court in their order dt. 20.4.2010 dismissed the petition as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty and also directed that in the event of a question of limitation arises, the authority shall take into consideration the period of pendency of the petition from 13.11.2009 till 20.4.2010. AND WHEREAS Sh. Anil Ramchandra Tambat, Clerk, RYP Marathi D.Ed. College, Aurangabad, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that in response to the show cause notice dt. 22.8.2009 issued by the WRC regarding registration of land in the name of trust, he has produced original notarized copy of lease deed dated 07.07.2009 showing land on lease for 33 years and during pendency of the writ petition, on 10.02.2010, he has purchased his own land measuring 9000 Sq. mts. in the name of the institution by way of registered sale deed. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that at the time of submission of the application on 30.12.2006, the appellant enclosed only a copy of notarized lease deed for 99 years and later on forwarded a notarized copy of another lease deed registered on 20.07.2009 and not on 07.07.2009 for a period of 33 years. As Section 17 of the Regulation Act, 1908 makes lease of immovable property for more than one year compulsorily registerable, failure to do so would not confer any right on the

lessee, since transaction in violation of this provision is null and void. The Council noting that the appellant did not have land on ownership basis or lease basis, the lease deed having been registered only in 2009, has come to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of WRC confirmed. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC’s order dated 23-10-2009 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, RYP Marathi D.ED. College, Nehru Nagar, Aurangabad - -, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of S.R. College of Education, Banda, Uttar Pradesh dated 12/11/2009 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F-7/UP-3409/141 MEETING/2009/4139 dated 10/06/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the ground “Deficiencies communicated in the deficiency letter issued by the office are not removed within stipulated time. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, S.R. College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 12/11/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS S.R. College of Education, Banda, Uttar Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 16-08-2010, 17-09-2010 and also on 19-10-2010 giving last opportunity (3rd and the final opportunity) but nobody appeared before the Committee on that day also. AND WHEREAS according to appeal rules upto three chances are to be given to an appellant before deciding the case and the appellant had been given three opportunities but nobody appeared on all the three occasions before the Council. The Council therefore decided to close the appeal file of the institution.


1. The President, S.R. College of Education, PO-Baberu,, Banda - , Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Sohagi College of Education, Distt. Rewa, Madhya Pradesh dated 10/06/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW07818/223773/131st/2010/66299 dated 25/03/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the ground “The certified copies of land record from the office of the Registrar of Public Trust/Society has not been submitted by the institution”. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Sohagi College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 14/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the institution preferred appeal earlier dated 18-09-09 which was heard on 29-10-09. The appeal of the institution dt. 18.09.2009 against the order of the WRC dt. 25.7.2009 refusing recognition on the ground that a reply has not been received within the stipulated time was accepted by the Council and in their order No. F.89-1091/2009/Appeal/A7076 dt. 26.11.2009 directed the WRC to examine the response of the institution to the deficiency letter, stated to have been sent on 18.05.2009, and take appropriate decision. Accordingly the WRC examined the matter further and refused recognition against which the present appeal has been preferred. AND WHEREAS Sh.Raghu Raj Singh, Secretary, Sohagi College of Education, Distt. Rewa, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the WRC in their letter no. 63126 dated 12.01.2010 directed the institution to submit the certified copy of land record produced by Registrar. The institution submitted land record given by Registrar and also Khasra No. of the revenue record on 25.01.2010. He has therefore submitted that the act of the WRC rejecting the application is erroneous as the reply was submitted within time with necessary documents as required/pointed out. AND WHEREAS the Council noted from the copies of the land documents filed with WRC that the land was in the name of an individual and not in the name of society/institution and it was also not a certified copy, which was also asked for, by the WRC. Since the appellant does not satisfy the basic requirement of land being in the name of society/institution at the time of application, the Council came to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of WRC confirmed.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 25-03-2010 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Chairman, Sohagi College of Education, 68/1/KH/Khatia, Sohagi/Tyothar, Post- Sohagi,, Distt. Rewa - -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

F.No.89-691/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Subhash Chandra Bose College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 10/06/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW01269/222056/131th/2010/67157 dated 17/04/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting D.Ed course on the ground “The institution has not submitted documents /reply of show cause notice issued to the institution u/s 17(1) of NCTE Act, 1993. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Subhash Chandra Bose College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 14/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. Keshavasingh, Subhash Chandra Bose College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant had submitted all the relevant documents at the time of making the application for recognition itself and the same were already on record with the WRC and after verification of the same and after satisfactory report by the visiting team recognition has been granted. He also submitted that after the inspection of the institution (on 11.11.2009) U/s 17 of the NCTE Act, the appellant has not received the show cause notice dt. 28.12.2009 stated to have been issued by the WRC. AND WHEREAS the Council taking into account the submissions of the appellant has come to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be accepted and the order of the WRC reversed with a direction to re-issue the show cause notice to the appellant by registered/speed post and take further action thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse WRC’s order dated 17-04-2010 with direction to the WRC to re-issue the show cause notice to the appellant by registered/speed post and take further action thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Subhash Chandra Bose College, B-81,83, Govindpure, Near Jiwaji University, Gwalior - 474011, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of V.V. Sangha B.P.Ed College, Bijapur, Karnataka dated 15/06/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010/19175 dated 31/05/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.P.Ed course on the grounds “1) Psychology lab & Language labs are not established. 2) Games and sports facilities are inadequate. 3) Degree Colleges (B.A., B.Com) and D.Ed. courses are run in the same building. 4) As per VT Report, at present the infrastructural and instructional facilities are not sufficient. 5) It is mentioned in the VT report, the space allocated for built-up area for D.Ed. course is 588.80 sq.mts. which is far less than the NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, V.V. Sangha B.P.Ed College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. H. Seshachala, Professor, V.V. Sangha B.P.Ed College, Bijapur, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 19-10-2010 . In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that Psychology Lab and Language Lab are established; games and sports facilities are adequate; and sufficient infrastructure and institutional facilities are available. AND WHEREAS the Council while noting that the arguments advanced in the grounds of appeal are not supported by any document and hence are unsatisfactory, observed that no show cause notice was issued before refusing recognition as required under the provisions of the NCTE Act. In the circumstances the Council came to the conclusion that the appeal deserved to be accepted and the order of the SRC reversed with a direction to the SRC to issue a show cause notice to the institution and take further action thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse SRC’s order dated 31-05-2010 with direction to the SRC to issue a show cause notice to the institution and take further action thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Chairman, V.V. Sangha B.P.Ed College, No. 267, D. Hipparagi Road, Muddebihal, Talikoti, Bijapur - -, Karnataka 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Academy of Management Studies, Dehradun, Uttaranchal dated 02/06/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-3/NRCAPP206/159 Meeting/2010/21952 dated 13/05/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “1) Registered land document is not certified. 2) The land area is not as per NCTE norms for B.Ed. 3) Submitted building plan is not approved by the competent authority. The building completion certificate from the competent authority has not been submitted. 4) CLU has not been submitted. ” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Academy of Management Studies (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 03/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Yatindra Shukla, Member and Shri. R.S. Prajapati, Accountant, Academy of Management Studies, Dehradun, Uttaranchal presented the case of the appellant institution initially on 21-07-2010. As the original title deed could not be brought by the representatives due to some unavoidable circumstances, they sought postponement of hearing to enable them to produce all the original documents. Accordingly, the hearing was postponed and the appeal was listed for hearing again on 20-10-2010. They again appeared and presented the case. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that copies of resolution passed dated 02.01.1972 and 27.04.1972 by the Special(General) Meeting of the DAV College Trust and Management Society, copy of the registration certificate issued in the name of Dayanand Shiksha Sansthan by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies, and Chits which stands renewed till October 10, 2010 and copy of the permission given by the State Government for change of name of the society were enclosed with the appeal. The total area of the land i.e. on khasra no. 1409/3 as per enclosed Lay Out Plan came to 2.09 acres, i.e. 8457.929 sq.mts which was much in excess of the minimum prescribed by the NCTE Norms .i.e. 2500 sq.mts. Thus, this deficiency also stood removed. The land was situated at a distance of several Kms from Dehradun Town. The land on which the academy existed and the buildings constructed thereon were originally not within the limits of the concerned development authority namely Mussorie-Dehradun Development Authority; the relevant application in this regard had already been moved before the SDM of the area u/s 143 of the UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, for specific permission to utilize the premises for the educational purposes and order passed on 22-06-2010 alongwith approval of building plan dated 07-08-2010 were submitted to the NCTE.

AND WHEREAS the Council noted that alongwith the application of the institution for recognition of the B.Ed. course submitted to the NRC on 28-10-2009, the institution did not submit some of the essential documents including (i) Certified copy of registered land document (ii) Building plan approved by the competent authority, and (iii) copy of CLU. The NRC issued a deficiency letter dated 26-02-2010 pointing out the deficiencies asking the institution to remove the deficiencies and furnish the missing documents within a period of sixty days. The institution, vide its reply dated 20-04-2010, forwarded some documents to the NRC and also informed that the land of the institution was very old hence registered document for the same could not be made available and since building was very old approval of the building plan by any development authority of the Government and building completion certificate from any competent Government authority could not be submitted. The Council noted that the institution did not fulfill the mandatory requirement of furnishing certified copy of registered land document, approved building plan and copy of CLU even after issue of deficiency letter dated 26-02-2010 allowing sixty days to comply with the requirement. Therefore, the Council was of the view that the recognition of the institution was refused by the NRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and NRC’s order dated 13-05-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Academy of Management Studies, Nanda Ki Chowki, Dehradun, Dehradurn - -, Uttaranchal 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttaranchal, Dehradun.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of J.S.J.V Teacher Training Institute, Cuddalore, Tamilnadu dated 17/09/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010/20030 dated 27/07/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting the D.T.Ed course on the grounds “1). The institution has not shifted from temporary accommodation to its own premises, even after the expiry of three years (i.e., on 22.12.2009). 2) The building plan is not submitted. 3) Building Completion Certificate is not submitted. 4).No evidence of any efforts towards shifting to permanent premises as per the norms”. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, J.S.J.V Teacher Training Institute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. D. Chandrasekaran, Director and Shri. R. Thazhacan, Spl. Officer, J.S.J.V Teacher Training Institute, Cuddalore, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that (1) SRC ought to have considered the case of appellant on the ground that they had submitted reply dated 29-09-2009 with all the documents through speed post to the SRC as required under the notice dated 16-09-2009, the SRC failed to consider the ownership of the appellant that the leased premises belonged to the Chairman of the appellant/Trust in his individual capacity, later it was conveyed to appellant/Trust. The documents of ownership was also submitted to the SRC vide its reply dated 29-09-2009 and 02-08-2009 and the same was not considered by the SRC, (2) the SRC failed to consider that building plan alongwith other required documents sent by the appellant through speed post and the same was delivered to the SRC, (3) the SRC failed to consider that the building completion certificate was submitted by the appellant for perusal at the first instance itself and again sent the same alongwith the representation dated 02-08-2010, and (4) the SRC erred in not hearing the appellant in person nor providing an opportunity to put forth the case of the appellant, who had time and again submitted all the required documents. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the application of the institution for recognition for the D.T.Ed. Course was received by the SRC on 02-01-2006, when the NCTE Regulations, 2002 were in force according to which private lease deed in respect of land/building was not acceptable. But it was seen that the application

was processed by the SRC under the NCTE Regulations, 2005, after it came into force from 13-01-2006 on the basis of documents in respect of land/building on private lease basis, which were submitted by the institution and recognition was granted to the institution for D.T.Ed. Course, vide SRC’s order dated 23-12-06. Thereafter, application of the same institution for additional intake dated 17-04-07 was also processed by the SRC under the NCTE Regulations, 2005 and recognition for additional intake in D.T.Ed.course was also granted vide SRC’s order dated 06-11-07. Thus, recognition to the institution for basic unit of D.T.Ed. course and additional intake was granted by the SRC for running in land and building taken on lease as per NCTE Regulations, 2005 and recognition was not granted to run in temporary premises for a period of 3 years, which was permissible only upto 12.01.2006 under the NCTE Regulations, 2002. Therefore, the first and fourth grounds of withdrawal of recognition that it did not shift to its own premises, even after expiry of three years and there was no evidence of any efforts taken by the institution towards shifting to permanent premises, were not in order. Further the withdrawal grounds 2&3 pertaining to non-submission of building plan and building completion certificate are also not relevant in this case. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the SRC’s order dated 27-07-2010 with direction to the SRC to examine the reply furnished by the institution and take appropriate decision thereafter. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order of the SRC dated 27.07.2010 reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, J.S.J.V Teacher Training Institute, Jayaram Nagar, Chellangappam,, Cuddalore - 607001, Tamilnadu 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Kharagpur Tribal B.Ed. Training College, Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal dated 30/07/2010 is against the Order No. ERC/7-109.4.9/2010 dated 08/07/2010 of the Eastern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “1) Experience Certificate of the Principal is not acceptable. 2) Building Completion Certificate not signed by the competent authority. 3) The land documents for Plot no. 2 have been submitted after VT. 4) The size of the library is 1000 sq. ft. hall size is less. 5) The institution issuing experience certificate from 09/07/2004 to 24/04/2007 is recognized for 2008-2009. ” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Kharagpur Tribal B.Ed. Training College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 05/08/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Mihir Kr. Pahari, Special Officer, Kharagpur Tribal B.Ed. Training College, Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that a new Principal who is M.Sc. M.Ed. Ph.D. alongwith the documents relating to the recognition of the concerned institution was enclosed with the appeal. The ERC completely over looked the fact that the constructed area was 2450 Sq.mts. and 50 Sq.mts. was under construction and completion certificate in respect of built-up area of 2040 Sq.mts. was enclosed with the letter dated 08-04-09. The ERC authority completely over looked the fact that the appellant had already clarified the aspect of land documents in its earlier letter inasmuch as, in the application for recognition. The appellant had submitted the requisite documents and not after the visiting team as has been stated in the impugned order. The ERC failed to consider that the norms was that per student 10 sq. ft. space was to be allotted per student in the classroom and library. The student strength of the appellant was 100 and both the library and the Hall were of 1100 sq. ft. each, which clearly showed that the allegation that the Hall and the library were less than 1000 sq. ft. was incorrect. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the ERC had earlier issued a show cause notice dated 30-04-2010 on two grounds namely (i) the experience certificate of principal was not submitted (missing) and (ii) the building completion certificate mentioning the plot number, khata number, total area and built-up area from competent authority were not submitted and asking the institution to make such representation as it might wish to make within 30 days before the ERC passed order of refusal of recognition. However, recognition of the institution was refused by the ERC, vide order dated 08-07-10 citing five reasons as against the two reasons cited in

the show cause notice dated 30-04-10 issued earlier. The Council also noted that question of appointment of qualified staff through duly constituted Selection Committee would arise only after Letter of Intent prior to recognition issued by the Regional Committee and LOI prior to grant of recognition was to be issued by the Regional Committee, after satisfying itself that the institution fulfilled the requirement for conducting the course with reference to infrastructural and instructional facilities subject to appointment of qualified staff. Therefore, once LOI prior to recognition is issued, it was not open to the Regional Committee to raise objection regarding infrastructure and instructional facilities. The question of appointment of qualified staff arose after Letter of Intent prior to recognition was issued. The Council also noted that the Principal earlier appointed by the institution was not having the requisite experience. But, the institution has since selected another candidate for appointment as Principal. the Council was of the view that the institution should be allowed a further period of two months from the date of this order for appointment of qualified Principal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the ERC’s order dated 08-07-2010 with direction to the ERC to allow the institution a further period of two months from the date of this order for appointment of qualified Principal and take appropriate decision thereafter. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order of the ERC dated 08.07.2010 reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Kharagpur Tribal B.Ed. Training College, PO-Matkatpur, , Paschim Medinipur - 721305, West Bengal 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Eastern Regional Committee, 15, Neelkanth Nagar, Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar - 751 012. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of West Bengal, Kolkata.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of M.A. Educational Institute, Rohini, Delhi dated 07/09/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/DH-413/162nd Meeting/2010/25846 dated 21/07/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting ETT course (Additional intake) on the grounds “1) The deficiencies communicated to the Institution through letter number NRC/NCTE/DH-413/159 meeting/2010/21491 dated 7 May 2010 still exist”. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, M.A. Educational Institute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 07/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Ms. Archana Arora, Director and Shri. Manish Arora, Manager, M.A. Educational Institute, Rohini, Delhi presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the Mount Abu Education Society had allocated 4000 sq.mt. of land for Senior Secondary School as per the CBSE Norms and 3300 sq.m. for M.A. Educational Institute vide its Resolution dated 8th May 2006. As per the norms/guidelines at the website of the NCTE, the area for ETT/D.Ed. should be 2500 sq.mt. whereas the society had already allocated more than the norms prescribed. Therefore, there was no question of using the classrooms commonly. As per the norms downloaded from the website the instructional space shall be 10 sq.ft. per student i.e. classroom should be of 500 sq.ft. for 50 students whereas classroom size of the institution was 8.50X6.10 sq.mt. which was more than the norm prescribed. Thus, the classrooms were not small in size and classroom was of the size of 518 sq.ft. each. The library was having a stock of 3913 books; as per the guidelines, the institution had added apparatus/required furniture in the lab, making it up to the mark to carry out the existing/introduced courses. It was further stated that all psychological tests and apparatus were available in the lab; the physical and infrastructural facilities of school were not being shared with the new additional intake of ETT/D.Ed. students. The ETT/D.Ed. course was having separate facilities of its own. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that in the show cause notice dated 07-05-2010 issued to the institution, the NRC had informed the institution that the institution was not fulfilling the norms and standards and other requirements and asked it to furnish written representation if any, before the NRC passed order of refusal of

recognition: 1) The classrooms and building shown to VT members were being used to run Mount Abu International School instead of MA Educational Institute; 2) Classrooms were small in size; 3) There were only 278 books added to the existing 3000 books which were not in proportion; 4) Psychology lab was ill equipped. It was not enough even for the existing course of ETT/D.Ed.; 5) The physical and infrastructural facilities of school were being shared with the existing ETT/D.Ed. students and proposed to be shared with the new additional intake. Though the institution denied that the classrooms and building as also the other physical and other facilities were being shared with the Mount Abu International School, the Council observed that the DDA had allocated the land to the Mount Abu Educational Society for construction of a building for running a Senior Secondary School. The building plan submitted by the society was also for Senior Secondary School. Regarding size of the classroom, the Council observed that the visiting team in its report dated 15-04-2010, pointed out that the size of the classroom for the proposed course ranged from 391 to 492 Sq.ft. as against the requirement of a minimum of 500 Sq.ft. as per the NCTE norms. Similarly, the VT report dated 15-04-2010 also indicated that the psychology lab was ill equipped. The library was shared with other courses and it was having 3,000 books for the existing courses and added only 278 books for the proposed course and this was not adequate as per norms. Therefore, the Council was of the view that recognition to the institution was refused by the NRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the NRC’s order dated 21-07-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Director, M.A. Educational Institute, Block - H-3, Sector - 18, , Rohini - 110085, Delhi 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Delhi, New Delhi.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Mahatma Adhyapak Vidyalaya, Satara, Maharashtra dated 20/09/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW06766/1222034 (Appeal) (Court Case)/139th/2010/70345 dated 26/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed (Marathi) (CO-Ed) course on the grounds “ The institution did not possess land at the time of application.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Mahatma Adhyapak Vidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Jadhav N.M., President and Shri. Kundalkar M.J., Member, Mahatma Adhyapak Vidyalaya, Satara, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that appellant society had removed all the discrepancies mentioned by the WRC to its utmost satisfaction. After satisfying itself, the WRC, vide its letter dated 14.09.2007, had informed the appellant that the team of the WRC would be visiting, to carry out the inspection of various infrastructural and educational requirements as per the norms and regulation of the NCTE and the inspection team visited the appellant institution on 23-10-2008. The appellant society thus had invested more than 20 lakhs to build the entire infrastructure. The entire set-up was in place to start the D.Ed. Course. The appellant institute was in possession of the land prior to making of the application as well as the building and other infrastructural facilities were complete before inspection; pursuant to the said show cause notice dated 28.04.2010, the appellant filed its written representations. Alongwith the same, the appellant also enclosed a registered lease deed of the land on 12.05.2010. The only ground mentioned in the show cause notice was that "the institution /society did not have land and building as per requirement of NCTE Regulation”. However, the refusal order was passed only on the ground that the institution did not possess land at the time of application. The WRC had never raised this objection any time earlier, the show cause notice issued on 28.04.2010 was also completely silent on this. The WRC had not at all considered that even as per notification dated 27.12.2005 for grant of permission to start D.Ed. College an institution must be in possession of the land either on ownership basis or on lease and it did not stipulate that the lease must be registered at the time of making of the application. The representatives also clarified that at the time of submission of application, the society was having lease deed which was notarized and not registered. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the institution had submitted its application to the WRC on 24.08.2007, when the NCTE Regulations, 2005 were in

vogue. Clause 8(5) of the Regulations, 2005 stipulated that no institution shall be granted recognition under the Regulations unless it is in possession of required land (2500 Sq.mts. or 26910 Sq.ft.) on the date of application. The institution itself admitted that at the time of submission of its application, the land was on lease but the lease deed was only notarized and not registered. The Council also noted that as Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 makes lease of immovable property for more than one year compulsorily registerable, failure to do so would not confer any right on the lessee, since transaction in violation of the above mentioned provision is null and void. Thus, at the time of application, the institution was not having adequate land as required under clause 8 (5) of the NCTE Regulations, 2005. Therefore, the Council was of the view that recognition to the institution was refused by the WRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 26-08-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Mahatma Adhyapak Vidyalaya, Khasra No. 1224, Pusegaon, Tal-Khatav, Satara - 415019, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of R.D.G.B. College, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh dated 22/09/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW06299/223699/138th/2010/69820 dated 03/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “The institution did not have adequate land area at the time of application as per the NCTE norms.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, R.D.G.B. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 22/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Yogesh Kumar, Treasurer, R.D.G.B. College, Bhopal, MP presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the formal application under the Act was accompanied by all the relevant documents in regards to the ownership and title of the land as stipulated in the NCTE Regulations. The land was measuring 3718.2 Sq.mt. i.e. 40,008 Sq.ft. with a constructed building measuring 17,128.8 Sq.ft. on plot no. 490A and 490B, Sarvadharm Colony, Kolar Road, Bhopal. The basic layout plan submitted along with the application very clearly showed existence of play ground, classroom and library as per the norms. The appellant society was surprised and dismayed to receive a show cause notice with the remark that "The Institution is not having land of its own". The appellant society submitted a detailed reply on 14.06.2010 stating all the facts in detail of the earlier inspections carried out by the inspecting team and on the report of which an unconditional recognition was granted on 14.03.2008 under Section 7(11) of the Act (reference to clause 7(11) of the Regulations). In the said reply, it was clearly stated that the application made initially bore the address of the society as 11, Custom Colony, Kolar Road, Bhopal. However, as regards the college, the building was constructed on plot nos. 490A and 490B Sarvadharm Colony, Kolar Road, Bhopal. There was no ambiguity or inconsistency much less any doubt about the address of the college i.e. 490A and 490B Sarvadharm Colony, Kolar Road, Bhopal. It was on this site that the WRC carried out the inspection between 12th and 18th February, 2008 and the permission was granted. WRC Bhopal had refused the permission vide order dated 03.08.2010 with the remark that "the institute does not have adequate land area at the time of application as per NCTE norms.” There was inconsistency between the reasons assigned in the show cause notice dated 15.05.2010 and the refusal order dated 03.08.2010. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the application of the institution was submitted to the WRC, Bhopal on 08-06-2007, when the NCTE Regulations, 2005 were

in force. Clause 8(5) of the Regulations, 2005 stipulated that no institution shall be granted recognition under the Regulations unless it is in possession of required land (2500 Sq.mts. or 26910 Sq.ft.) on the date of application. Clause 8(8) of the said regulations also stipulated that at the time of inspection, the building of the institution shall be complete in the form of a permanent structure on the land possessed by the institution in terms of Regulation 8(5). Thus, it is a mandatory requirement that adequate land and built-up area of the institution should be available at the same place. Alongwith the application, the institution submitted a registered lease deed dated 18-05-2007 for 30 years in respect of a piece of land measuring 10008 Sq.ft. or 930 Sq.mts. and a building thereon with a built-up area of 17128.40 Sq.ft. or 1591 Sq.mts. But, in the affidavit dated 06-06-2007 submitted, the institution claimed it was having land measuring 3718.2 Sq.mts. and built-up area of 1591.82 Sq.mts. The building plan submitted by the institution indicated the size of the plot as 10008 Sq.ft. but indicated 30,000 Sq.ft. of built-up area was also available. The WRC got an inspection of the institution conducted by a visiting team of experts on 10.02.2008. The VT report dated 10.02.08, inter-alia, indicated that the society is almost fulfilling the NCTE norms and that the play ground is little away from the institution. Thus, the land and building of the institution including the play ground to the extent of requirement as per the NCTE norms was not at the same place as required under clause 8 (5) and clause 8 (8) of the Regulations. The institution, therefore, did not fulfill the requirement as per the NCTE norms for recognition. Nevertheless, overlooking the fact that the requisite land and building was not available at the same place, recognition was granted to the institution vide WRC’s order dated 26-02-2008. Subsequently, on the basis of complaints received against a few institutions including the RDGB College, the WRC in its 132nd meeting held on 19-20th March 2010 decided to conduct an inspection of the institution under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993 which provides that where the Regional Committee is, on its own motion or on any representation received from any person, satisfied that a recognized institution has contravened any of the provisions of the Act, or the rules, regulations, orders made or issued thereunder, or any condition subject to which recognition under section 14 or permission under section 15 was granted, it may withdraw recognition of such recognized institution, for reasons to be recorded in writing. Accordingly, an inspection of the institution was conducted by a visiting team of experts on 07-04-2010. The VT report dated 07-04-2010 also indicated that available land was 10008 Sq.ft. It also indicated that playground of 40,000 Sq.ft. was available. The VT report dated 07-04-2010 also confirmed that only land measuring 10008 Sq.ft. or 930 Sq.mts. (as against the requirement of 2500 sq. mts. as per the NCTE Norms) and building with a built-up area of 17128.40 Sq.ft. or 1591.82 Sq.mts. was available at one place. Thus, the institution did not have adequate land as per the prescribed NCTE norms at the time of application, which was the ground for withdrawal of recognition of the institution by the WRC. Therefore, the Council was of the view that recognition of the institution was withdrawn by the WRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground for accepting the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC’s order dated 03-08-10 was confirmed.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, R.D.G.B. College, 11, Custom Colony, Akbar Pur, Kolar Road, Huzur, Bhopal - 462042, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Sant Baba Bhag Singh Memorial Girls College of Education, Moga, Punjab dated 06/09/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/PB-506/161st Meeting/2010/25655 dated 16/07/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting ETT course on the grounds “The deficiencies with regard to appointment of Faculty, infrastructure and instructional facilities still exist.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Sant Baba Bhag Singh Memorial Girls College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 10/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Darshan Singh, Principal, Sant Baba Bhag Singh Memorial Girls College of Education, Moga, Punjab presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that new furniture for 100 students have been purchased on 07/06/2010 and the bill no. 163 dated 07/06/2010 was entered in the stock register on page no. 37; advertisement for the selection of Lecturers of ETT Course was given in two national papers "The Tribune" dated June 26, 2010 and Ajit dated June 25th, 2010. Walk-in Interview was held in the college campus on 01/07/2010; selection was made through proper channel by selection committee under the chairmanship of Vice Chairman and Principal. appointments to the lecturers were given subject to the recognition of ETT Course. List of appointed lecturers through proper channel was enclosed with appeal, FDR's of Rs. 5,00,000/- for reserve fund was still valid upto 30/06/2012. The representative of the institution also informed that the NRC did not issue any show cause notice to the institution before refusing recognition to the institution. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the NRC had issued a Letter of Intent prior to recognition to the institution, vide NRC’s letter dated 09-08-2008 and subsequently refused recognition to the institution vide order dated 03-07-2009 on the ground that deficiencies communicated to the institution in the show cause notice had not been replied to within stipulated period. An appeal dated 20-07-2009 filed by the institution against the said order of refusal of recognition dated 03-07-2009 was accepted by the Council vide Order No.89-702/2009-Appeal dated 11-09-2009 with direction to the NRC to examine the staff profile after obtaining the same from the institution as the LOI prior to recognition was not sent to the correct address. However, the NRC got an inspection conducted by a visiting team of experts on 13-05-2010 as the institution had, in the meantime, shifted to new premises. The NRC,

after considering the VT report dated 13-05-2010 and other relevant documents in its 161st meeting held on 26th to 29th May, 2010, decided to refuse recognition to the institution on the ground that the deficiencies with regard to appointment of faculty, infrastructure and instructional facilities still exist, vide order dated 16-07-10, against which the appeal under consideration was filed by the institution. the Council also noted that the mandatory requirement of issuing a show cause notice to the institution before refusing grant of recognition, as contemplated in Section 14/15 of the NCTE Act, 1993, was not fulfilled by the NRC in this case. Therefore, the Council was of the view that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the NRC’s order dated 16-07-2010 with direction to the NRC to issue show cause notice to the institution and, thereafter, take appropriate decision as per the provisions in the NCTE Act/Rules/Regulations. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the NRC’s order dated 16-07-2010 with direction to the NRC to issue show cause notice to the institution and, thereafter, take appropriate decision as per the provisions in the NCTE Act/Rules/Regulations. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Principal, Sant Baba Bhag Singh Memorial Girls College of Education, VPO -Sukhanand, Tehsil - Bagha Purana, Moga - -, Punjab 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Punjab, Chandigarh.

F.No.89-1001/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shree Balsidha D.Ed College, Satara, Maharashtra dated 20/09/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW06795/1222054(APPEAL) (Court Case)/139th/2010/70352 dated 26/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed (Marathi) (CO-Ed) course on the grounds “The institution did not possess land at the time of application.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shree Balsidha D.Ed College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Shidhishwar Tukar Pustake, President and Shri. L.E. Dube, Representative, Shree Balsidha D.Ed College, Satara, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the respondent had refused to grant recognition only on the ground that "the Society did not have land on the date of making application, which was absolutely wrong. The Society did have land as well as the building, at the time of making of the application, as per the NCTE Norms. The said fact was evident from the application filed by the applicant as well as lease deed dated 20.06.2008. Therefore, the reason assigned by the respondent for rejecting the application of the appellant was absolutely wrong. The WRC had not at all considered that even as per notification dated 27.12.2005 for grant of permission to start D. Ed College an institution must be in possession of the land either on ownership basis or on lease and it does not stipulate that the lease must be registered at the time of making of the application. The appellant was in possession of the land since 01.06.2008, as could be seen from the agreement dated 20.06.2008 (notarized), the institution was fulfilling all the requirement for grant of permission to start D. Ed Course. Therefore, the impugned order was bad in law. It was also submitted that pursuant to the show cause notice dated 29-04-2010, the institution got the lease deed registered on 20-05-2010, a copy of which was enclosed with the appeal. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that alongwith the application, the institution did not submit any lease deed in respect of land and building and it only submitted an affidavit dated 13-07-2007 stating that existing building from Gat No.137 would be used for the purpose of the proposed D.Ed. course. The institution itself submitted in its appeal dated 20-09-2010 that earlier it was having only a notarized lease deed and the lease deed was got registered only on 20-05-2010. The Council also noted that Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 makes lease of immovable property for

more than one year compulsorily registerable, failure to do so would not confer any right on the lessee, since transaction in violation of the above mentioned provision is null and void. The institution was not having land at the time of submission of application as required under clause 8 (5) of the NCTE Regulations, 2005. Therefore, the Council was of the view that recognition to the institution was refused by the WRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 26-08-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Shree Balsidha D.Ed College, Sr. No. 22/6A & 6/1, AT. Post Sadgurunagar, Koregaon, Satara - 415019, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Sri Lakshmi Teacher Training Institute, Tiruvallur, Tamilnadu dated 18/09/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010/20917 dated 02/09/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting D.T.Ed course on the grounds “The Institution was served Notice on 22.07.2008 and also Final Notice dated 31.05.2010 for which the institution did not reply to both the Notices.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Sri Lakshmi Teacher Training Institute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 20/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. G. Rajendra Babu, Correspondent and Shri. P.V. Mani, Advisor, Sri Lakshmi Teacher Training Institute, Tiruvallur, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the land in which the appellant institute was situated was measuring about 1.5 acres and one third of the area was demarcated for running a Teacher Training Institute. Initially the SRC conducted inspection at this site and granted recognition to the appellant institution. Due to complaint given by the State Government, the Southern Regional Committee issued a notice to the appellant under section 17 of the NCTE Act in F.SRO/NCTE/2008-2009/3011 dated 22/07/2008 wherein the Regional Committee had intimated two deficiencies which are 1). The Teacher Training Institute is functioning in the Higher Secondary School campus and 2). Building license, stability certificate, sanitary certificate, fire protection certificate have not at all been obtained. The appellant sent a reply to the Regional Committee dated 07-08-2008 by way of courier which was acknowledged by the Regional Committee. The appellant had taken land and building on long lease owned by the correspondent itself by way of registered lease for a period of thirty years. The building in which the appellant institute was situated was having the total plinth area of more than 10,000 sq ft. The appellant in its reply by way of courier dated 15/06/2010 had informed the Regional Committee that the institution was now functioning at no. 5, Mohd Ali 2nd street, Thiruvallur. Again the appellant had sent a letter dated 27/07/2010 stating that institution now shifted to the new address which was situated adjacent to the old place and as such no deficiency would arise.

AND WHEREAS the Council noted that while the recognition of the institution was withdrawn by the SRC vide order dated 02-09-2010 on the ground that the institution had not replied to the show cause notices dated 22-07-2008 and 31-05-2010, the institution claimed that it submitted a reply to the notice dated 31-05-2010 vide its letter dated 15-06-2010, which was received by the SRC office on 24-06-2010 and in proof its receipt the institution produced a copy of an acknowledgement dated 24-06-2010 of the SRC. The institution also claimed that it sent a communication dated 07-08-2008 to SRC on 08-08-2008 informing that the institution was functioning outside the school campus at Plot No.05, Mohammed Ali, 2nd Street and produced a copy of receipt dated 08-08-2008 issued by the professional couriers as evidence. Copies of the said documents were not available on the relevant file of the Regional Committee. Therefore the Council was of the view that the appeal of the institution should be accepted and copies of acknowledgement dated 24-06-2010 and other documents should be forwarded to the SRC with direction to consider the reply furnished by the institution and, thereafter, issue appropriate speaking order, in continuation of the impunged order. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the SRC’s order dated 02-09-2010 with direction to the SRC to consider reply of the institution to the institution to the show cause notice and take appropriate decision, thereafter. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order of SRC dated 02.09.2010 reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Correspondent, Sri Lakshmi Teacher Training Institute, No. 4/5, Mohammed Ali 2nd Street, Tiruvallur Town, Tiruvallur - 602001, Tamilnadu 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai.

F.No.89-1019-2010 Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of St. Catherine Teacher Training Institute, Chennai, Tamilnadu dated 01/10/2010 is against the Order No. F.SRO/NCTE/2009/20920 dated 02/09/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting D.T.Ed course on the grounds “1) As per the Norms of NCTE, the institution should have shifted to the permanent building within three years from the date of recognition. 2) SRC had already decided in its 160th Meeting held on 31st July-1st August, 2008 that all those institutions which were given recognition in temporary buildings on condition that they shall move to permanent premises within three years period and the same decision was communicated and also put up on the NCTE website and a Press note was also issued to the above effect. 3) Now, the Management is requesting for extension of time by another one year, even after running the institution in temporary accommodation for a period of above five years, which is not permissible as per NCTE norms. (4) The institution was given recognition on 21-11-05 in temporary premises with a specific condition that the institution should move to permanent premises within a period of three years i.e. on or before 20-11-08. (5) The institution almost two years after the lapse of three year stipulated period, now on 06-07-2010 requested for relaxation of one more year as the construction work is not completed. (6) The institution’s request for extension of time by another one year extension of time in this regard cannot be granted as per the Regulation of NCTE.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, St. Catherine Teacher Training Institute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 04/10/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. A. Leprince Consal, Correspondent, St. Catherine Teacher Training Institute, Chennai, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the respondent erred in not considering the fact that the appellant had purchased the required land by way of registered sale deed dated 11.09.2008 registered as document no. 6959/2008 measuring 2.49 acres only for the purpose of constructing the building by spending a sum of Rs. 99,60,000/- and has also commenced the construction and the same was in a completion stage. The SRC seems to have rejected request for extension for one more year purely on the basis that undated letter with Demand Draft dated 30.01.2010 was received by their Office only on 06.07.2010 after a lapse of over 5

months without considering the fact that the Demand Draft was valid till 30.07.2010 and if necessary the appellant would have issued a fresh Demand Draft to substitute the old Demand Draft and moreover the demand Draft was valid for 6 months. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the institution was granted recognition for D.T.Ed. Course to be run in a rented premises from the academic session 2005-06, by the SRC vide their order dated 21-11-05. The said recognition order dated 21-11-05, inter-alia, stipulated that (i) the institution will ensure that permanent building is constructed within a period of three years, and (ii) the institution shall shift to its own premises within three years from the date of recognition. Thus, the institution was required to shift to its own permanent premises latest by 20-11-2008. The institution failed to fulfill the requirement and, even after a period of 05 and ½ years from the date of sanction, requested for relaxation of one more year as construction work was not completed. The Council noted that the recognition of the institution was withdrawn by the SRC under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993, which provides that where the Regional Committee is, on its own motion or on any representation received from any person, satisfied that a recognized institution has contravened any of the provisions of the Act, or the rules, regulations, orders made or issued thereunder, or any condition subject to which recognition under section 14 or permission under section 15 was granted, it may withdraw recognition of such recognized institution, for reasons to be recorded in writing. The recognition of the institution was withdrawn by the SRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground for accepting the appeal. The Council, however, also noted that the SRC did not issue any show cause notice to the institution before issuing the order dated 02-09-2010 withdrawing recognition of the institution, which was a mandatory requirement under Section 17 of the NCTE Act. Therefore, the Council was of the view that the appeal should be accepted and the SRC’s order dated 02-09-2010 reversed with direction to the SRC to issue show cause notice to the institution and thereafter take appropriate decision. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the SRC’s order dated 02-09-2010 with direction to the SRC to issue show cause notice to the institution and, thereafter, take appropriate decision. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order dated 02.09.2010 reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. To The Correspondent, St. Catherine Teacher Training Institute, Office 2-A, Dhanalakshmi Enclave, 38/40, North Boag Road,T. Nagar , Chennai - 600017, Tamilnadu 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai.

F.No.90-1018-2010 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Capitol Teacher Training College, Bangalore, Karnataka dated 27/09/2010 is against the Order No. F.SRO/NCTE/2010-2011/20162 dated 02/08/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “1) B.Ed. is functioning in the School building. 2) The total Built-up- area is only 5800 sq.ft. and is not sufficient to run B.Ed. course as per NCTE norms. As per NCTE norms, 16,000 sq.ft. is required. 3) No sufficient built-up-area is earmarked exclusively for running B.Ed. programme. 4) As per NCTE norms, no other programme is allowed to run along with Teacher Education programmes, in the same building.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Capitol Teacher Training College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 30/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Sadashwa K, Treasurer, Capitol Teacher Training College, Bangalore, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that B. Ed College was having separate wing with an independent entrance. The building was having two wings out of which, one wing was completely earmarked for B.Ed course. The building was having total five floors including the basement floor. Total built-up area of the building was 5400 sq.mts., out of which, 1500 sq.mts of built-up area was exclusively provided and the wing of the B.Ed college itself was different. Knowing very well about the norms of NCTE, the B.Ed College had been provided more than 16000 sq.ft. The total built-up area of 5800 sq.ft stated by the SRC itself was surprising and wrong statement. The total built-up area of the building was 5400 sq.mts., which worked out to 58125 sq.ft. One side wing of one floor itself was 5500 sq.ft., out of which there were five floors with two wings in each floor. The Left Wing of the building was exclusively earmarked and used by the B.Ed College. The institution provided very spacious classrooms, six laboratories, Library, Conference Hall with 300 seating capacity, waiting rooms, etc as per the NCTE norms SRC was repeating the same deficiencies. There was no difference between the earlier deficiency with this deficiency mentioned. The SRC was repeating the same deficiency second time in another form. When there was an exclusive building with separate wing for B.Ed course, the question of other course running in the same building did not arise. The School was running in separate wing and B.Ed College was in separate wing.

AND WHEREAS the Council noted that application of the institution for recognition for the B.Ed. course was submitted to the SRC on 31-12-2003, when the NCTE Regulations, 2002, were in vogue. As per the Regulations, 2002, running of teacher education courses in rented premises upto a period of three years pending construction of own permanent premises on the land owned by the Society/Trust/Institution was permissible. Accordingly, the institution was granted recognition for the B.Ed. course from the academic session 2004-05 to be run in a rented temporary premises, vide SRC’s order dated 29-11-04 subject to the condition that the institution shall shift to its own premises/building within three years from the date of recognition. Thus, the institution was required to construct its own building and shift to the own premises by 28-11-2007. Since the institution did not comply with the said stipulation in the recognition order even after a period of about 5 years, the SRC issued a show cause notice dated 01-09-2009 under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993, which provides that where the Regional Committee is, on its own motion or on any representation received from any person, satisfied that a recognized institution has contravened any of the provisions of the Act, or the rules, regulations, orders made or issued thereunder, or any condition subject to which recognition under section 14 or permission under section 15 was granted, it may withdraw recognition of such recognized institution, for reasons to be recorded in writing. The institution submitted its reply to the show cause notice vide its letter dated 25-11-2009 (received by the SRC on 27-11-09) alongwith which it submitted an application for shifting of the institution to its own premises alongwith the requisite fee of Rs.40,000/-. The case was considered in the 190th meeting of SRC held on 29-30th March, 20120 and, as per the decision taken, got the new premises of the institution inspected by a visiting team of experts on 03-06-2010. The VT report dated 03-06-2010, inter-alia, indicated that the institution was functioning in a school building with separate earmarked area. The VT Report also indicated that the built-up area available for the B.Ed. course was 5800 sq.ft. (excluding common area). The case was considered in the 193rd meting of the SRC held on 21-22nd June, 2010, when it was decided to withdraw the recognition of the institution on the grounds (1) B.Ed. is functioning in the school building (2) the total built-up area is only 5800 Sq.ft. and is not sufficient to run B. Ed course as per NCTE norms. As per NCTE norms, 16000 sq.ft is required, (3) No sufficient built-up area is earmarked exclusively for running B.Ed. programme and (4) As per NCTE norms, no other programme is allowed to run alongwith teacher education programmes in the same building. Accordingly, the SRC, withdrew recognition of the institution on the said grounds vide its order dated 02-08-10, against which the present appeal was filed by the institution. AND WHEREAS the Council also noted that, while the SRC decided to withdraw recognition of the institution for valid reasons, the mandatory requirement of issuing a show cause notice to the institution and considering the reply thereto before withdrawing the recognition was not followed in this case. the Council was therefore, of the view that the appeal of the institution should be accepted and the SRC’s order dated 02-08-2010 reversed with direction to the SRC to issue a show cause notice to the institution under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993 and, thereafter, take appropriate action.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse SRC’s order dated 02-08-2010 with direction to the SRC to issue a show cause notice to the institution under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993 and, thereafter, take appropriate action. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order dated 02.08.2010 reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Capitol Teacher Training College, CA-No. 1, 9th Cross, J.P. Nagar 7th Phase RBI Layout , Bangalore - 560078, Karnataka 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.



O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Jai Arihant College of Teacher Education, Nainital, Uttaranchal dated 06/09/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE.F-7/UR-223/162 Meeting/2010/25920 dated 22/07/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “Except building plan, the deficiencies communicated to the Institution through letter number NRC/ncte/up-223/159 meeting/2010/22079 dated 14 May 2010 still exist.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Jai Arihant College of Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 06/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Sanjay Jain, Jt. Secretary, Jai Arihant College of Teacher Education, Nainital, Uttaranchal presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that as per clause 7(iv), the society sponsoring the institution shall be required to transfer and vest the title of the land and building in the name of the institution within a period of six months from the date of issue of formal recognition order, under sub-regulation (11) of Regulation 2007. The appellant had purchased 1,007 titles of books having 3 to 4 copies of each title and ensuring availability of more than 3,000 books from M/s R.Lall Book Depot, Meerut by way of placing order. M/s R.Lall Book Depot had delivered these books on various dates and the same had been entered in the Accession Register. Photo Copy of (i) Bill of books issued by Bookseller (ii) Copy of Accession Register bearing signature of the Visiting Team Members, who visited the College on 25.11.2009 (1st Inspection) & 18.02.2010 (2nd Inspection) and put their signature at the end of the accession register, were enclosed with appeal. While the availability of required number of books was verified by the Visiting Team and given their endorsement in the form of their signature at the last page of the accession register, the NRC, NCTE, Jaipur had gone to the extent of not accepting the statement of its own visiting team. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that two inspections of the institution were conducted by two separate visiting team of experts on 25-11-2009 and 18-02-2010. Both the VT reports dated 25-11-2009 and 18-02-2010, were positive. The VT Report dated 25-11-09, inter-alia, indicated that the library of the institution was having more than 3000 books. The VT Report dated 18-02-2010 also indicated that number of available books in the library was 3017. After the second inspection, the case was considered by the NRC, in its 159th Meeting

held on 28th April to 1st May, 2010 and, as per the decision taken, a show cause notice dated 14-05-2010 was issued to the institution on the grounds (1) Land was not in the name of the institute, (2) submitted building plan did not indicate name of the institute, Khasra Number and not approved by the competent authority, and (3) Title of book in the library were not as per NCTE norms for B.Ed. The institution submitted its reply to the show cause notice vide letter dated 08-06-2010. After considering the reply of the institution to the show cause notice, the NRC refused recognition to the institution on the grounds that except building plan, the deficiencies communicated to the institution through letter dated 14-05-10 (show cause notice) still exist, vide its order dated 22-07-2010, against which the appeal under consideration was filed by the institution. In other words, the recognition to the institution was refused by the NRC on two grounds namely (1) land is not in the name of the institute and (2) titles of book in the library are not as per NCTE norms for B.Ed. AND WHEREAS with regard objection that land was not in the name of institute, the Council observed that the land was in the name of the society which was as per the prescribed NCTE norms. Regarding the second objection that title of book in the library were not as per the NCTE norms for B.Ed., the Council noted that both the VT reports indicated availability of adequate books in the library. Therefore, the Council was of the view that the order of refusal of recognition dated 22.07.2010 of NRC was not in order and there was adequate ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse NRC’s order dated 22-07-2010 with direction to the NRC to issue Letter of Intent prior to recognition to the institution. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order dated 22.07.2010 of the NRC reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Jai Arihant College of Teacher Education, Vill - Dumka Bangar, Bacchi, Dharma, Post - Kalduchaur, Tehsil - Lalkuan, Nainital - 263139, Uttaranchal 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttaranchal, Dehradun.

F.No.89-994/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Jain Institute, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 13/09/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/WRCAPP366/138/2010/69434 dated 28/07/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the ground “The building is not as per the NCTE norms.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Jain Institute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 16/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Manoj Jain, Secretary and Shri. Sanjay Jain, President, Jain Institute, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the appellant institution had purchased 0.366 Hect. of land by way of registered sale deed, which is situated at Survey No. 416/1, Village Piproli, Vikas Khand Ghatigaon (Barai), Gwalior. The copy of the sale deed was submitted to the Regional Director, WRC with the application No. WRCAPP 366 dated 29.10.2009. The Appellant Institution made construction on the land owned by the appellant institution and the total built-up area was 3072 Sq.mt. and was specifically available for the purpose of D.Ed. Course. The construction was made after obtaining the permission of the competent legal authorities and concerned Gram Panchayat. The construction of the building would be completed within 20 days and the copy of the completion certificate would be submitted on or before the inspection of the appellant institution in compliance of the letter dated 10.05.2010, neither any inspection was made by any visiting team nor any information was sent for any rescheduled programme of the visiting team. Therefore, the Appellant Institution on 10.06.2010 sent a letter informing the WRC regarding non-inspection and further requesting for early inspection of the Appellant Institution. That, surprisingly, without making any inspection by any visiting team and without having any ideography or verification of the documents, the WRC, on 15.06.2010 issued letter / show cause notice under Section 14 (3) (b) of the NCTE Act, 1993 proposing refusal of recognition for the D.Ed. Course. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that in the application of the institution and the building plan, land document and affidavit dated 29-10-2009 submitted, the available land indicated was 3360 Sq.mts. in Survey No.416/1, Village Piproli.

Inspection of the institution was conducted by a two-member visiting team of experts on 25-05-2010. The VT report dated 25-05-2010, indicated that the VT visited the institution at Survey No.416/1, Village Piproli and the building was under construction. The report also indicated that the person present at the site informed the team that the building was being constructed for some other courses. When the location of the plot was matched with the actual location, it was found that the plot mentioned in the map matched with the actual location alongwith the Khasra Number. Therefore, the Council was of the view that plea of the institution that the institution was not inspected, could not be taken at its face value and that recognition to the institution was refused by the WRC for valid reason and, thus, there was no ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC’s order dated 28-07-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Jain Institute, Khasra No. 416/1, Village - Piproli. Shivpuri Link Road, Post Office - Bada, Lashkar, Tehsil - Gwalior, Gwalior - 474001, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

F.No.89-993/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of K.L.E Society's College of Education, Hubli, Karnataka dated 08/09/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010-2011/20778 dated 27/08/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “Nursing College is run in the second floor of the same building where the B.Ed. course is being run. As per NCTE norms, no other programmes are allowed in the same building where teaching of educational programmes are being conducted. ” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, K.L.E Society's College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 15/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. (Smt.) Susheela Desai, Principal, K.L.E Society's College of Education, Hubli, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the K.L.E. Society's Nursing College, which was temporarily functioning in the second floor of the same building at City Survey No. 3236 had been shifted to a building at which was existing in the K.L.E. society's campus at Vidyanagar, Hubli with the City Survey No. 3107. During the presentation, the representative also informed the Council that it was a very old reputed institution and the NCTE could depute another visiting team of experts to verify whether the Nursing College had actually been shifted and only the B.Ed. college was now functioning in the building in accordance with the NCTE norms and that the institution was prepared to pay the requisite fee of Rs.40,000/- for re-inspection. AND WHEREAS in view of the submissions made by the institution, the Council was of the view that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and set aside the SRC’s order dated 27-08-2010 with direction to get the institution re-inspection on payment of the requisite fee of Rs.40,000/- to verify whether the Nursing/Pharmacy Colleges have been shifted and the B.Ed. College is now functioning in accordance with the prescribed norms and, if so, to restore the recognition of the institution. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse SRC’s order dated 27-08-2010 with direction to

the SRC for getting re-inspection of the institution to verify whether the Nursing/Pharmacy Colleges have been shifted and the institution is now functioning as per the prescribed NCTE norms, and, if so, to restore recognition of the institution. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order dated 27.08.2010 of the SRC reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Principal, K.L.E Society's College of Education, Vidyanagar, Hubli - 580021, Karnataka 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.



O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Maharishi Vedvyas Mahavidyalaya, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 12/09/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW03867/223488/139th/2010/70307 dated 25/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “1) Building is inadequate. 2) Staff not qualified as per the NCTE norms.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Maharishi Vedvyas Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 16/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Dharmendra Vyas, President, Maharishi Vedvyas Mahavidyalaya, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the appellant was required to show cause by way of written representation, within two weeks, supported by certified true copies of (i) the registered land documents and (ii) the permission of Government of Madhya Pradesh to use the land for educational purposes, (iii) the building permission of the local authority along with approved building plan, (iv) the permission of local authority to occupy the building, (v) the university approved teaching staff of Principal with seven lecturers. The appellant had submitted all the relevant documents at the time of making the application for recognition itself and the same were already on record with the WRC and after verification of the same and also after satisfactory report by the visiting team, the WRC granted the recognition. Merely because of some anonymous complaint, the copy of which was also not made available to the appellant, the fresh inspection was conducted by the WRC and the inspection report was also not made available to the appellant. Appellant had fully co-operated in the inspection process and the team making the inspection was also satisfied with the infrastructural facilities of the appellant. WRC had not considered the reply of appellant and the material brought on record by appellant and passed summary order, which was contrary to the order of the appellate authority as no speaking order point-wise discussing the reply of appellant was passed. Moreover, the order was contrary to the NCTE Act as it has been made effective retrospectively from the effect of the order dated 6.4.2010, which was set aside by the Appellate Authority. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that an inspection of the institution was got conducted by the WRC by a two-member Visiting Team of experts on 12-11-2009 under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, 1993. The VT report dated 12-11-2009 was

positive and, it inter-alia, indicated that the institution was having adequate land and built-up area as per the NCTE norms. Though the faculty appointed at the time of grant of recognition was qualified as per norms, but the university approved the faculty only for 90 days. Therefore, the Council was of the view that the objection that building was inadequate was not in order. Regarding staff, the Council was of the view that institution should be allowed a period of two months from the date of this order to select and appoint qualified staff through duly constituted selection committee as per the NCTE norms and if the institution fulfills the requirement, it may be granted recognition with prospective effect. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse WRC’s order dated 25-08-2010 with direction to the WRC for allowing the institution a period of two months to select and appoint qualified staff through duly constituted Selection Committee and to grant recognition to the institution with prospective effect if it fulfills the requirement. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Maharishi Vedvyas Mahavidyalaya, Run By - Dharam Shiksha Samiti, Jungipur,, Gwalior - 474001, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of OM BIO Sciences and Pharma College, Haridwar, Uttaranchal dated 26/05/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-3/NRCAPP344/159 Meeting/2010/21962-21963 dated 13/05/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “No reply has been received to the deficiencies communicated to the Institution vide letter F.NRC/NCTE/2010/B.Ed./DL-/15079 dated 15/01/2010.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, OM BIO Sciences and Pharma College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 28/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. M.K. Saini, President, OM BIO Sciences and Pharma College, Haridwar, Uttaranchal presented the case of the appellant institution on 20-10-2010 In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the institution had received first deficiency letter dated 15/01/2010 on 23/01/2010 (Envelope of registered post was enclosed as proof of receiving). As per the instructions of the deficiency letter, the reply was to be submitted within 60 days, and the institution submitted the reply on 10/03/2010 by courier (BlazeFlash); that the refusal order was passed on the ground that deficiencies with regard to labs, computers, library titles and building completion certificate still existed but did not specify what type of deficiency was found and thus, the Regional committee erred in issuing the refusal order that the norms as prescribed for the grant of education of B.Ed courses did not contain anything specifically- the computer numbers or facilities, but the appellant had taken precaution and purchased 10 computers which were available in computer lab in the institution; the appellant had requested to the team which visited the institution that if number of computers was found insufficient the appellant would fulfill the number of computers. It was pertinent to mention here that the appellant had purchased 10 more computers and set-up all 20 computers in the computer lab, thus there was no deficiency existed at present. The appellant purchased 3000 books as required in the prescribed norms. The lab of the institution was fully equipped. The committee which had visited the institution found that the building of institution was complete for the grant of recognition for B.Ed courses. The Building Completion Certificate was enclosed with appeal. AND WHEREAS in view of the submission made by the institution, the Council was of the view that refusal of recognition on the ground that no reply was submitted by the institution to the deficiency letter dated 15-01-2010 was not

in order. Therefore, the Council was of the view that a copy of reply to the deficiency letter furnished by the institution vide letter dated 10-03-2010 alongwith enclosures should be forwarded to the NRC for considering the reply and taking appropriate decision, thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse NRC’s order dated 13-05-2010 with direction to the NRC for considering the reply and taking appropriate decision, thereafter. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order dated 13-05-2010 of the NRC reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The President, OM BIO Sciences and Pharma College, 198,199, Vill -Panchayanpur, Tehsil-Roorkee , Haridwar - 249402, Uttaranchal 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttaranchal, Dehradun.


Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

19/11/2010

O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Sree Narayana College of Teacher Education, Kozhikode, Kerala dated 28/05/2010 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE/2010/18902 dated 17/05/2010 of the Southern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting M.Ed course on the ground “The recognition is withdrawn for M.Ed course due to shortage of built up area w.e.f. 2010-11.” AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Sree Narayana College of Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 01/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appellant had filed a writ petition against the SRC’s order withdrawing its recognition for the M. Ed course before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala Bench at Ernakulum and the Hon’ble High Court, vide its order dated 15.06.10 directed the NCTE to dispose the appeal filed by the institution within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The NCTE Hqrs received the judgment on 30.06.2010 and listed the case for hearing on 21.07.2010. AND WHEREAS Shri P.M. Raveendran, Manager and Dr. M. Devakumar, Principal, Sree Narayana College of Teacher Education, Kozhikode, Kerala presented the case of the appellant institution on 21.07.2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the SRC accorded recognition to Sree Narayana College of Teacher Education, Chelannur, Kozhikode, Kerala to conduct the M.Ed. programme from 2009-10 session and accordingly students had been admitted to the college and the course commenced in 2009-10 itself. The college had a total built-up area of 31261.5 sq. ft. (2903 sq. mts.) for conducting B.Ed and M.Ed. programmes. This included the built-up space of an old building with14459 sq.ft. (1343 sq. mt.) and new building with16802.05 sq.ft. (1560 sq.mt.); while submitting the filled up proforma in the questionnaire sent to the SRC, there happened a clerical error due to oversight in filling up the built-up area of the old building where M.Ed. course was being conducted, i.e. instead of entering 14459 sq.ft. against the column, it was mistakenly entered as 16803 sq.ft., which was actually the figure entered in the column just above in the questionnaire, for the B.Ed. course. It was on perusal of the questionnaire that the SRC withdrew the recognition of the M.Ed. course due

to shortage of built-up area, w.e.f. 2010-11. The institution did not get an opportunity to explain the error happened in this case before the recognition was withdrawn by the SRC, NCTE. AND WHEREAS after considering submissions made in the appeal and during personal presentation, since there was no clarity regarding availability of adequate built-up area with the institution for conducting the B.Ed. and M.Ed. courses as per the NCTE norms, the Council decided to depute a two member visiting team of experts to conduct an inspection of the institution vide Council’s order dated 04-08-2010. The visiting team of experts conducted the inspection of the institution on 13-09-10 and submitted the report to the Council. The Council considered the VT report dated 13-09-2010 in its meeting held on 20-10-10. the Council noted that the VT report dated 13-09-2010 was positive and it, inter-alia, indicated that adequate infrastructural, instructional and other facilities were available with the institution. The VT report indicated that the institution was having 5 acres 53 ¾ cents of land and built-up area of 16802.50 Sq.ft. or 1560 Sq.mts. for the B.Ed. course and 14459 Sq.ft. or 1343 Sq.mts. for the M. Ed course aggregating to 31261.50 Sq.ft. or 2903 Sq.mts, which is more than required as per the NCTE norms. Therefore, the Council noted that the withdrawal of recognition of the institution by the SRC on the ground of shortage of built-up area was not in order. Therefore, the Council was of the view that there was adequate ground for accepting the appeal and setting aside the SRC’s order dated 17-05-2010 with direction to the SRC to restore recognition of the institution immediately. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse SRC’s order dated 17-05-2010 with direction to the SRC to restore recognition of the institution immediately. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the order dated 17.05.2010 of the SRC reversed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.

(S.V.S. Chaudhary)

Vice-Chairperson

1. The Secretary, Sree Narayana College of Teacher Education, Chellannur Post, Kozhikode - -, Kerala 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, 1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Jalahali, Bangalore - 560 031. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram.

F.No.89/1024/2010 Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Late. Shri Durga Prasad Shiksha Prasar Samiti, Bhind, Madhya Pradesh dated is against the Order No. WRC/WRCAPP399/138/2010/69276 dated 03/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the grounds “ Building is not complete. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Late. Shri Durga Prasad Shiksha Prasar Samiti (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 05/10/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri Ram Mahesh Baghel, Secretary, Late. Shri Durga Prasad Shiksha Prasar Samiti, Bhind, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant society through registered sale deed purchased 0.40 Hect. of land at survey Nos. 1483, 1484, 1485 & 2131 in Village Jagannath Ka Pura; the same land was got diverted and after obtaining due permission from competent authority i.e. Gram Panchayat, Jhawasa, had raised construction as per sanctioned plan; the Gram Panchayat had also certified the completion of the building vide letter dated 16-06-2010. The building had been constructed as per norms and requirement of NCTE, with a total constructed area of 1500 Sq.mt. It was further submitted that in the letter dated- 10/02/2010 the WRC did not raise any objection with regard to the availability of building for running college of Teachers Education, thereafter WRC got physical inspection of the building; issued show cause notice, and appellant submitted its reply. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the WRC vide their deficiency letter dt. 10-02-10, inter-alia asked the institution to submit the building completion certificate issued by the competent Government authority. In response to this the appellant forwarded a building completion dt.27.03.10 from Gram Panchayat office stating that the building had been constructed on 0.40 Hect. of land at Kh. No. 1483,1484,1485 & 2131. WRC detailed a two member visiting team for physical verification of the infrastructural and instructional facilities. The V.T. vide their report dt 27-05-10 referring to the building plan stated that only half of the building had been constructed. The building plan submitted with the WRC indicated 751.363 Sq.mt. of built-up area at the ground floor and 751.363 Sq.mt. of built-up area at the first floor and in total it mentioned an area of 1502 Sq.mt.

So, it was obvious that the requisite built up area i.e. 1500 Sq.mt. had not been completed as on the date of inspection. WRC on the basis of this report issued a show cause notice on 25-06-10 mentioning that building was not yet completed and the appellant in response to this submitted a reply stating that at the time of inspection plastering work was remaining and that had been completed on 24-06-10 and the building has now been finally completed. AND WHEREAS the Council further noted that the Gram Panchayat inspected the institution on 24-06-10 and issued a completion certificate. It is to be noted that the Gram Panchayat office issued two building completion certificates: one on 27-03-2010 that is before the date of inspection and the other on 16-06-2010, after the date of show cause notice. The building completion certificate issued on 27-03-2010 was contrary to the ground reality, as the VT that visited the institution on 27-05-2010 reported only half of the building was constructed. Further to add to this controversy, the appellant in his show cause notice reply as well as in the appeal stated that the construction was completed on 24-06-2010 and enclosed a completion certificate dt. 16-06-10. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal as the WRC refused recognition on valid ground and hence it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report, written submission made and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC’s order dated 03-08-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Late. Shri Durga Prasad Shiksha Prasar Samiti, Plot No. 1, Jagannath Pura, Post- Murli Ka Pura, Tehsil- Ater, Bhind - 477001, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Anmol Shikshan Prasarak Mandals, Martendeshth Sonar D.Ed. College, Nashik, Maharashtra dated 01/11/2009 is against the Order No. WRC/APW04532/1221063/110/VTR/2008/54470 dated 22/04/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed (M) (Co.Ed) course on the grounds “ 1) WRC considered the case of the institution in light of letters F.No. 46-3/2008/NCTE(N&S)/84003 dt. 17 Sep,2008, F.No. 49-27/2007/NCTE(N&S) dt. 1 October, 2008 and f.no. 49-27/2007/NCTE(N&S) dt. 31 October, 2008 received from Member Secretary, NCTE, New Delhi and negative recommendation received from Maharashtra State Govt, in respect of D.Ed. Course. Keeping in view of the negative recommendation received from the Maharashtra State Government in respect of D.Ed. course and directions received from NCTE Hqrs, the WRC decided that no further processing will be done in this case and communication to this effect to be made to this institution. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Anmol Shikshan Prasarak Mandals, Martendeshth Sonar D.ED. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 06/11/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri Mahendra, Deputy Secretary and Shri Vijay Sonar, Member, Anmol Shikshan Prasarak Mandals, Martendeshth Sonar D.Ed. College, Nashik, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant submitted an application on 26-12-2006 for grant of recognition of D.Ed course; WRC issued a letter on 22-04-2008 to the appellant to remain ready for inspection and inspection of the institution was conducted on 18/10/2008 and the team recommended for the grant of recognition. WRC, instead of processing the application further, rather closed the file of the institution on the direction of the NCTE Hqrs. and negative recommendation of the State Govt .of Maharashtra. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that aggrieved by the decision of the WRC it filed an appeal before the NCTE and the same was not admitted as the appeal was not preferred within the stipulated period of 60 days. This communication of the council was sent to the institution vide NCTE Hqrs

letter/order dated. 18-12-2009. Aggrieved by the decision of the council for not admitting the appeal, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay and the Court vide its order dt. 16-08-2010 set aside the order dt. 08-12-2009 passed by the appellate authority under the NCTE Act and directed the appellate authority to re-consider the appeal of the petitioner afresh on its own merit, in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the order. The appellant brought the court directions to the notice of NCTE on 08-09-10 and accordingly the case was listed for hearing on 21-10-2010. AND WHEREAS the Council further noted that the appellant institution was refused recognition on the policy decision of the NCTE, taken for not granting recognition to D.Ed. programmes for the session 2009-10 in the state of Maharashtra. Hence the Council decided to accept the appeal, reverse the order of the WRC dated 22-04-2009 with the direction to the WRC to reconsider the case on merit. . AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the WRC’s order dated 22-04-2009 with direction to the WRC to reconsider the case on merit. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Principal, Anmol Shikshan Prasarak Mandals, Martendeshth Sonar D.ED. College, Plot No. 492/2/1, Konark Nagar, AADGAON,, Nashik - , Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh dated 18/01/2010 is against the Order No. F.NRC/ NCTE/F73/UP-1874/141st Meeting/2009/6008 dated 09/07/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting M.Ed. course on the grounds “ 1) The list of appointed faculty as per NCTE Norms has not been submitted till date.“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 18/02/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. Ashok Shukla, Reader, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that, in anticipation of possible recognition the appellant had advertised for the teaching posts (copy of advertisement attached), in response of which few applications were received, and those fulfilling the prescribed qualifications were called for interview before a legally constituted Selection Committee comprising subject experts in March, April 2010, (copy of composition of selection committee attached). The selection committee after interviewing the candidates recommended three names to the Executive Council and the appellant appointed them as teachers in the M.Ed. Faculty. In addition, the fourth lecturer was appointed after issuing the conditional recognition following the same process. The nature of the appointments made by the appellant was 'regular' and 'full time'. The use of the term 'Contract' by the appellant in its documents submitted to the Regional Committee, was interpreted by the Regional Committee in and entirely different context than reasonably possible. The word 'Contract' may have two meanings (a) persons may be engaged to teach in the course on contractual basis by entering in to a negotiated agreement on payment per lecture without any service conditions and disciplinary control. This is a contract for services. (b) person may be engaged in the service of the institution under its disciplinary control, salary prescribed by the institution. 'Contract' in this case being an agreement on the part of employee to abide by the conditions of service. This is control of service'. But the academic nature and quality of the course is in no way different and inferior from the grant- in- aid courses. By its very nature, the teachers appointed in such a course can

not be appointed till the age of retirement. They can only be appointed till such time the course continues to run. But this does not affect the regular nature of their appointment. Thus, the Regional Committee failed to appreciate the self-financing nature of appellant's M.Ed. course which resulted in refusal of its recognition. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant preferred an appeal against the refusal order of the NRC and the same was not admitted by the Council, owing to the delay in preferring the appeal and the decision of the Council was conveyed vide letter dt. 14-07-2010. Aggrieved by the decision of the Council, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble High Court of Jurisdiction at Allahabad at Lucknow and the Court vide their judgement dt. 01-09-2010 set aside the order dt. 14-07-2010 passed by the NCTE and the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation and approach before the said authority within a period of two weeks from the judgement and the NCTE i.e. Chairman/Member Secretary, National Council for Teachers Education, New Delhi, shall consider and decide the case of the petitioner on merit, in accordance with law. In compliance with the Court directions the appellant submitted a representation vide letter dt 15-09-2010 which was received in the office of NCTE on 21-09-2010. Accordingly the case was heard on 21-10-2010. AND WHEREAS the Council further noted that the appellant was issued conditional recognition vide letter dt. 08-08-2006 to appoint the duly selected staff with the requisite qualification as per NCTE norms on regular basis and to provide additional journals in the library. The institution vide letter dt. 25-08-2006 forwarded the copy of the advertisement, selection committee minutes and also list of journals. NRC after considering this reply asked the institution vide letter dt. 10-09-2007 to submit consolidated staff list appointed on regular basis, proceedings of the selection committee, Bio-data of the selected faculty, affidavit of Rs. 100/- stamp paper. Thereafter the NRC refused recognition on the stated ground after considering the reply submitted by the institution. The file of NRC did not contain any reply submitted by the institution, sent in response to the NRC’s letter dt. 10-09-2007 and also NRC had not issued any show cause notice before refusing recognition. The Council also perused the faculty profile submitted by the institution and noted that only three lecturers were appointed, further it had advertised on 13-09-2010 for rest of the faculty and the University has already fixed the date of selection committee meeting on 20-11-2010. The Council therefore decided to give two months time for appointing the faculty as per the NCTE norms, in the light of the council’s decision taken in its 25th meeting held on 23-03-2010 with regard to appointment of the faculty in the M.Ed programme. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the NRC’s order dated 09-07-2009 with direction to the NRC to give two months time for appointing the faculty as per the NCTE norms, in

the light of the Council’s decision taken in its 25th meeting held on 23-03-2010 with regard to appointment of the faculty in the M.Ed programme. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Registrar, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, District, Faizabad - 224001, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

F.No.89/1025/2010 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


19/11/2010

O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Dream Valley College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 01/10/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/WRCAPP401/138/2010/69974 dated 05/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the grounds “ The institution has not submitted reply of the show cause notice. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Dream Valley College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 05/10/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri Mohit Mehta, Secretary and Smt. Ruchi Gandhi, Member, Dream Valley College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the institution submitted its reply on 07-04-2010, in response to the deficiency letter of WRC; subsequent to this an inspection of the institution was conducted on 25-05-2010, thereafter it did not receive any letter/show cause notice from the WRC, the appellant after going through the website minutes of 136th meeting held on 5th -7th June 2010, which were updated on 28-07-2010, immediately vide their letter dt. 28-07-2010 submitted the reply stating that no other course was being conducted in the premises proposed for D.El.Ed programme and the entire building was meant for the proposed course. Despite this submission, the refusal of recognition by the WRC was not justified. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the WRC after considering the visiting team report dt. 25-05-2010, issued a letter dt. 19-06-2010 asking the institution to intimate the WRC, about all the courses that were being conducted by the institution in the same premises. The reply submitted in this regard was available in the WRC file. It however observed that the visiting team did not report sharing of the building with any other course. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal and the WRC was directed for considering the reply submitted by the institution and for further decision thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept

the appeal and reverse the WRC’s order dated 05-08-2010 with direction to the WRC for considering the reply submitted by the institution and for further decision thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Dream Valley College, 604, Society Owned, 604, Bhatkedi- Sitholi,, Gwalior - 475001, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Kapoori Devi Kriparam Mahavidyalaya, Etah, Uttar Pradesh dated 19/02/2010 is against the Order No.F.NRC/NCTE/F73/UP-2046/2009/6459 - dated 21-07-09 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.P.Ed course on the grounds “ The list of appointed Faculty as per NCTE Norms has not been submitted till date. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Kapoori Devi Kriparam Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 19/02/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant filed an appeal on 19-02-2010 against the refusal order of NRC dt. 21-07-09 and the same was not admitted by the Council, as it was not preferred within the stipulated period of 60 days. The decision of the council was conveyed vide letter dt. 17-06-10. The appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court of judicature at Allahabad, against the decision of the Council for not admitting the appeal and the Court vide its judgement dt. 13-08-2010 quashed the Council’s order dt. 17-06-2010, condoned the delay in filling the appeal with a direction to the appellate authority to consider and decide the appeal on merit, in accordance with law. In compliance with the directions of the Court, the case was heard on 21-10-2010. AND WHEREAS Sh.K.P. Singh, Secretary and Sh.Brijesh Kumar, Clerk, Kapoori Devi Kriparam Mahavidyalaya, Etah, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that 1) The appellant filed an application for grant of recognition of B.P.Ed programme for 50 intake; NRC caused an inspection of the institution on 22-09-06, subsequently issued conditional recognition order dt. 29-12-06 for B.Ed programme with 100 intake, instead of granting recognition for B.P.Ed programme. This was brought to the notice of NRC for making necessary correction vide letter dt. 02-03-07and on the basis of this representation, the NRC issued corrigendum on 23-04-07 mentioning the B.P.Ed course, but again in the said corrigendum the NRC wrongly mentioned the address as Bijnor in place of Etah and this was also brought to the notice of NRC and the NRC again issued a corrigendum dt. 23-04-07 rectifying the mistake. In this process of bringing out the corrections/making rectifications four months time had been lapsed. 2) The appellant advertised for the faculty on 15-07-2007 and requested the university for grant of affiliation and also for appointing

subject experts for selection of the faculty on 19-09-07, the university got conducted the inspection of institution on 28-09-2007 and on the basis of this report granted affiliation on 15-07-2008. The appellant repeatedly requested the University for subject experts and the university vide letter dt. 29-07-09 appointed the subject experts- Dr. V.K. Dabas and Dr.D.P. Sharma. When Dr. V.K. Dabas expressed his inability, then the institution again requested the university for replacement. Finally selection committee meeting was held on 08-09-2009 and on the basis of the minutes of the selection committee, they appointed Head of the Department and Lecturers and the list had been approved by the University on 02-02-2010. In the meantime, the NRC refused recognition vide their order dt. 21-07-2009. The process of appointment of faculty involving University got delayed due to time taken by the NRC in issuing proper recognition order and also in getting the affiliation and selection committee constitution. The faculty appointed is as per the NCTE norms and the affidavit of the management on Rs. 100/- stamp paper and affidavit on Rs.10/- stamp paper for each member of faculty were submitted. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the NRC rectified the mistakes with regard to name of the course, and Distt. where the institution is located and passed a corrigendum on 23-04-2007 in reference to its earlier order dt. 29-12-06. The appellant, incompliance with the conditional order was required to submit the appointed faculty details. Again NRC vide their letter dt. 03-07-07 informed the institution to submit the documents related to faculty appointment in reference to the conditional order. The NRC after two years vide order dt. 21-07-09 refused recognition on the ground that the list of appointed faculty as per NCTE norms has not been submitted till date. The institution did not submit any information/document in response to the conditional order as well as reminder thereto. The Council however noted that the NRC refused recognition without issuing any show cause notice, as required as per the provisions of the section. 14 of the NCTE Act. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal with the direction to the NRC for issuing show cause notice and for further decision thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse NRC’s order dated 21-07-2009 with direction to the NRC for issuing show cause notice and for taking appropriate decision thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Kapoori Devi Kriparam Mahavidyalaya, Dhauleshwar,, Etah - , Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.



19/11/2010

O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Mariya Adhyapak Vidyalaya (D.Ed.) {Ballarpur Seva Samiti}, Chandrapur, Maharashtra dated 23/02/2010 is against the Order No. No.WRC/APW05735/1221612(Minority)/128th/2009/62910 dated 06/01/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed (M) (Girls) course on the ground “The land is registered in the name of an individual and not in the name of the trust/institution “. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Mariya Adhyapak Vidyalaya (D.Ed.) {Ballarpur Seva Samiti} (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 26/02/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appeal filed by the appellant was heard by the Council on 20-04-10 and the Council vide order dt. 05-05-2010 rejected the appeal on the ground that the land was in the name of individual on the date of submission of application and later, on 04-03-08 the land was transferred in the name of the society and this transfer of land was done after the date of inspection as well as show cause. It also observed that as per regulations 2009, the trust/institution should have land either on ownership basis or on long term lease from government/government institution. AND WHEREAS aggrieved by the decision of the appellate authority, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High court of Judicature of Bombay Bench at Nagpur, contesting that the land was transferred in the name of the trust before the date of inspection as well as show cause notice and the appellant submitted a certified copy of the Court order obtained on 17-09-10 to the NCTE and the certified copy contained only page1 and page 3 and as per page’3’ of the order, the court has set aside the appellate order dt. 05-05-2010 and remitted the appeal back to the appellate authority for de-novo consideration in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above, expeditiously within a period of six weeks. AND WHEREAS in compliance with the court directions the appeal was re-considered and personally heard on 21-10-2010. Shri. Mahendra D. Tawade, Sr. Clerk presented the case of the institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was stated that the land was transferred in the name of the trust on 04-03-08 and this date had even been recorded in the

council’s order dt. 05-05-10. Hence, it cannot be said that the land was transferred after the date of inspection i.e. 05-07-08 and show cause notice issued thereafter. The Council noted that the appellant submitted an application to the WRC on 25-08-2007 and on the date of submission of the application the land was in the name of an individual i.e. Sh. Jainuddin Mohasinbhai Zaveri as per the gift deed executed in March 2006 and this was not acceptable as per Clause 8(5) of relevant regulation, 2005. WRC vide their letter dt. 15-09-2008 issued a notice stating that the land is not in the name of the trust, it is in the name of individual. The appellant referring to the decision of the WRC for issuing show cause notice that was available on website, forwarded vide letter dt. 09-09-2008, a certificate issued by the Tehsildar on 09-09-2008, 7/12 Form of the land document and registered land documents. The Council perused these documents and noted that the certificate issued by the Tehsildar on 09-09-2008 and also registered land documents mentioned that the land was in the name of Sh. Jainuddin Mohasinbhai Zaveri. The acquisition of the land by the trust after the date of submission of the application was not acceptable as per regulations In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and that it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 06-01-2010 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Mariya Adhyapak Vidyalaya (D.Ed.) {Ballarpur Seva Samiti}, Khasra No. 69/2, Devai Govindpur Rayatwari, Tukum, District , Chandrapur - , Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.

F.No.89- 831/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of NKBR College of Professional Studies, Meerut , Uttar Pradesh dated 08/08/2009 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F-7/UP-2976/142nd meeting/2009 dated 24/07/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting M.Ed course on the grounds “Deficiencies communicated in the deficiency letter issued by the office are not removed within stipulated period .“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, NKBR College of Professional Studies (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 10/08/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri B.L. Garg, Chairman and Shri C.P. Garg, CEO, NKBR College of Professional Studies, Meerut , Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 16-09-2009. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that no letter pointing out any deficiency was issued by the NRC but only a letter dt. 12.06.2008 was issued by the NRC asking the appellant institution to clarify which course they would like to conduct, as the appellant had submitted applications for an additional intake of the B.Ed course and also for starting M.Ed course. The appellant stated that the institution vide letter dated 23.06.2008 informed NRC that they would seek recognition for M.Ed course from the session 2008-09 and withdraw their application for additional intake in B.Ed for the session 2008-09. He has further stated after opting for M.Ed Course no letter was received from the NRC before it passed refusal order dt 24.07.2009. It was further submitted that the appellant preferred an appeal against the refusal order of the NRC and the appellant authority rejected the appeal on the ground that the land on which the existing B.Ed course is being run has been mortgaged to State Bank of India, which implied that the land is not free from all encumbrances and which is a violation of the NCTE Regulations. The appellant reiterated that it did not receive any deficiency letter from NRC communicating deficiencies to be removed by the appellant within 90 days. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appeal of the institution was rejected vide Council’s order dated 8-10-09. Aggrieved by the decision of the appellate authority the appellant filed a writ petition before Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and the Court vide judgement dt. 08-02-2010 disposed of the petition with the direction to the NCTE to take an appropriate decision on the representation dt. 14-01-2010 submitted by the petitioners before

the Member Secretary. In pursuance to the Court directions the appellant submitted a certified copy of Court Order to the NCTE, on 15-09-2010. The appellant however did not submit along with certified copy of the Court order, the representation letter dt. 14-01-2010. Further he could not also show any proof of sending this particular representation to the NCTE Hqrs earlier. On being asked by the Council they handed over a copy of the representation dt. 14-01-2010 inter-alia mentioning that the NRC vide letter dt.12-06-2008 asked the institution to submit the clarification in reference to the clause 8(2) of NCTE regulations 2007, for which the institution submitted its reply on 23-06-2008. Except this letter dt. 12-06-08 of NRC, the appellant did not receive any other deficiency letter. Hence the NRC was not justified in refusing the recognition on the ground of non-removal of the deficiencies within the stipulated period. Further appeal was rejected on the ground that society’s land on which the existing B.Ed course was being run had been mortgaged with the State Bank of India. The appellant cleared all the outstanding dues and in lieu of this, the Bank issued letter dt. 26-12-2009 declaring the land in question is free from all encumbrances. AND WHEREAS the Council further examined the case and noted that reply of the institution dt. 23-06-08 sent in response to the NRC’s letter dt. 12-06-08 was not available in file. It also appeared that the NRC has not examined the application in totality except inviting institution’s attention to the clause 8(2) of NCTE regulations. In view of the above, the Council came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal with the direction to the NRC for examination of the case on merit and the institution is directed to forward a copy of their reply dt. 23-06-08 to the NRC. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse NRC’s order dated 24-07-2009 with direction for examination of the case on merit and the institution is directed to forward a copy of their reply dated 23-06-08 to the NRC. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Chairman, NKBR College of Professional Studies, Meerut-Hapur Road, Phaphunda,, Meerut - 245206, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.



19/11/2010

O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Ram Raji Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh dated 11/09/2009 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F-7/UP-3458/140 Meeting/2009/3347 dated 01/06/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.P.Ed course on the grounds “ CLU is not submitted. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Ram Raji Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 11/09/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. Prem Prakash Yadav, Manager, Ram Raji Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that CLU i.e. land use certificate was filed and was available in the file with the Regional Committee; the same has escaped the attention of the Regional Committee and thus the impugned orders are erroneous. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant filed an appeal on 11-09-2009 against the refusal order of NRC dt. 01-06-2009 and the Council vide their letter dt. 04-06-2010 informed the institution for non-admittance of the appeal, owing to the delay in submission of the appeal beyond the stipulated period of 60 days. Aggrieved by the decision of the Council, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad and the Court vide order dt. 13-09-2010 allowed the appeal with a direction to the NCTE to decide the appeal on merit expeditiously. In compliance with the Court directions the case was heard on 21-10-2010 AND WHEREAS the Council further noted that the appellant alongwith their letter dt. 10-11-2009 sent in response to the deficiency letter dt. 13-02-09 of the NRC did not submit ‘CLU’ document. Hence the contention of the appellant stating that the ‘CLU’ was submitted to the NRC and was available in the NRC’s file was not correct. Further the appellant obtained a certificate from the SDM only on 04-02-10 mentioning that the land was in the name of the institution and the institution building had been constructed on this land. This certificate was obtained much after the date of refusal of recognition. And also this certificate cannot be treated as a valid `CLU’ document, as it has not been issued. U/S 143 of the land revenue Act of the U.P. State Govt. In view of the above the Council

came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and hence it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the NRC’s order dated 01-06-09 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Manager, Ram Raji Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Khasra No. 70 - 71, Village - Surai, District, Azamgarh - , Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.



19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Sainik Takali D.Ed. College, Kolhapur, Maharashtra dated 25/08/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW05643/1221569/136th/2010/68766 dated 28/06/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed(M)(Co.Ed) course on the grounds “ The land was taken by the society on lease basis that was registered on 24/09/2008. The lease deed is between the private party and the society, hence not valid as per the NCTE Regulations 2007. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Sainik Takali D.Ed. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 31/08/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. Abhijit B. Pawar, Employee, Sainik Takali D.Ed. College, Kolhapur, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant had applied to the Regional Committee under Section 14 of the NCTE Act, for D.Ed; the appellant complied with the deficiency letter of WRC and submitted reply vide letter dt. 04/04/2008; thereafter WRC asked about readiness for inspection of appellant institution. The appellant informed that they were ready for inspection, after causing an inspection of the institution the Regional committee issued show cause notice on 18/9/2008 to the appellant mentioning that land deed not registered, area for high school and D.Ed. college have not been earmarked, CLU not submitted, staff affidavit has not been submitted, principal’s teaching experience has not been specified etc. The appellant submitted required documents vide letter dt. 25-09-08 to the Regional committee in response to the show cause notice. Hence, WRC was not justified in refusing recognition on the stated grounds. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant submitted an application for grant of recognition of D.Ed. course on 05-02-2007. The WRC after causing an inspection of the institution, issued show cause notice on 18-09-2008 inter-alia mentioning that the land deed is not registered and the institution was directed to make a representation within 30 days. The institution on 25-09-2008 in response to this show cause notice forwarded the lease agreement registered on 09-09-2008 taken for 30 years from a private party. After notification of the Regulations 2007, lease from a private party was not admissible. At the time of submission of the application, Regulations 2005 were applicable and hence registered lease document from a private party was acceptable but the

institution did not submit registered lease document, it was only notarized and the notarised lease document cannot be acceptable as per relevant NCTE Regulations. The Council also noted that as Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 makes lease of immovable property for more than one year compulsorily registerable, failure to do so would not confer any right on the lessee, since transaction in violation of the above mentioned provision is null and void. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and hence it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 28-06-2010 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, Sainik Takali D.Ed. College, Plot No. C.S. NO.673,674,675, A.P. Sainik Takali, Kolhapur - -, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Baneshwar Shikshan Sanstha, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra dated 14/12/2009 is against the Order No. No.WRC/APW04791/1221147/110/VTR/2008/54461 dated 21/04/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed. (M) (Co.Ed.) course on the grounds “ 1) WRC considered the case of the institution in light of letters F.No. 46-3/2008/NCTE(N&S)/84003 dt. 17 Sep, 2008, F.No. 49-27/2007/NCTE(N&S) DT. 1 Oct, 2008 and F.No. 49-27/2007/NCTE(N&S) DT. 31 Oct, 2008 received from Member Secretary, NCTE, New Delhi and negative recommendation received from Maharashtra State Govt. in respect of D.Ed. Course. Keeping of D.Ed. course and directions received from NCTE Hqrs, the WRC decided that no further processing will be done in this case and communication to this effect to be made to this institution. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Baneshwar Shikshan Sanstha (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 14/12/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that aggrieved by the decision of the WRC, it filed an appeal before the NCTE on 14-12-09 against the refusal order dt. 21-04-09 of WRC and the same was not admitted, as the appeal was not preferred within the stipulated period of 60 days. This communication of the council for not admitting the appeal was sent to the institution vide NCTE Hqrs letter/order dt. 08-01-10. Aggrieved by the decision of the council for not admitting the appeal, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay bench at Aurangabad and the Hon’ble court vide their order dt. 15-07-10 condoned the delay, quashed and set aside the order of the appellate authority and remanded the case to the appellate authority for a decision on the appeal on merit. The appellant brought the Court directions to the notice of NCTE on 31-08-10 and accordingly the case was heard on 21-10-10. AND WHEREAS Sh. Wakchavre Balasaheb, Principal and Sh.Ajit Daware, Shri Baneshwar Shikshan Sanstha, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the refusal of recognition by the WRC was not based on any of the cause/s mentioned in Sec.14(3) (a) of the Act and as such the very order had not been passed in consonance with the provisions of the Act; the appellant institution has made ready the entire infra structure required for the D.Ed. course by investing the huge amount of money and also has

appointed the required staff, equipped the library, accommodation facility and all other allied things, as the proposal of the petitioner was under the positive consideration by the Regional Committee and even inspection was also carried out by the experts; the State of Maharashtra has not based its opposition to the new D.Ed. colleges on any scientific statistics coupled with proper reasons and as such there is no proper compliance of the directives by the state Government and so its objection taken by the State of Maharashtra was totally worthless. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant institution was refused recognition on the policy decision taken by the NCTE for not granting recognition to D.Ed. programmes for the session 2009-10 in the state of Maharashtra. Hence the Council decided to accept the appeal, reverse the order of the WRC dt. 21-04-2009 with the direction to the WRC to consider the case on merit. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the WRC’s order dated 21-04-2009 with direction to the WRC to reconsider the case on merit in the light of the court directions. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Registrar, Shri Baneshwar Shikshan Sanstha, Plot no. 10/1, Burhannagar, Tal. - Nagar, District, Ahmednagar - , Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Shivaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Hingoli, Maharashtra dated 19/01/2010 is against the Order No. No.WRC/APW05326/1221436/112th/2008/48994 dated 25/12/2008 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed (M) (Co. Ed.) course on the grounds “ The institution has not removed the deficiencies within the period of 90 days u/s 7.4 of NCTE regulations 2005.“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Shivaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 04/02/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh.Vasant Pawar, Secretary and Sh. Wankhede. S., Member, Shri Shivaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Hingoli, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that appellant preferred an appeal against the refusal order dt. 25-12-2008 of WRC and the Council vide their letter dt. 25-05-10 informed the appellant that the appeal had not been admitted as it was not preferred within stipulating period of 60 day. Aggrieved by the decision of the Council, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay bench at Aurangabad and the Court vide their judgment dt. 21-07-2010 quashed and set aside the Council’s letter/order dt.25-05-10 and remitted the matter back to the appellate authority for a decision afresh by granting an opportunity to the petitioner for filing an application explaining the reason for delay in submission of the appeal. Since this writ petition has been pending in this court, the court restricted the explanation of the petitioner to the delay which had arisen for one year 04 months and 11 days only. AND WHEREAS in pursuance to the Court directions the appellant submitted an appeal seeking condonation of delay, on 28-09-10 mentioning the reason for condonation of delay that : 1) the WRC refused recognition vide order dt. 16/25 Dec’2008 on account of non-removal of deficiency as conveyed by their letter dt. 03-02-2007. The appellant was under bonafide belief that, the proposal submitted by the applicant for grant of recognition for the D.Ed. programme was a complete one; the appellant is located in a remote place of Maharashtra and was not able to persuade further so as to comply with the deficiency letter dt. 03-02-07. 2)The institution possessed all the necessary infrastructure so as to start the D.Ed college and would also fulfill all necessary requirements contemplated under laws, if an opportunity would be given. 3) If the delay is not condoned, the appellant would suffer an irreparable loss. 4) The delay caused was unintentional and undeliberate.

AND WHEREAS in compliance with the Court directions the case was listed for hearing on 21-10-2010. the Council perused the reasons submitted earlier and in pursuance to the Court directions and noted that the appeal dt. 19-01-2010 of the appellant preferred against the refusal order dated 25-12-08, was late by 01 year 04 months 11 days. The appellant submitted reasons for condonation of delay vide his letter dt. 12-04-2010 stating that “appellant being secretary of the institution and in the regular course of working the letter was not brought to the notice of the present appellant by his subordinate staff. At the same time appellant was otherwise busy due to the illness of his mother, who ultimately died and due to all these reasons, appellant could not be able to file an appeal”, The Council examined the reasons and found them as unjustifiable for condoning such an in-ordinate delay. Accordingly decision of the Council for not admitting the appeal on account of delay was communicated to the appellant vide letter dt. 25-05-2010. The reasons now submitted for condonation of delay, subsequent to the Court directions vide appellant’s appeal / application dt. 27-09-10 received in the NCTE office on 28-9-2010 were altogether different. The appellant now stated that he has been located in a remote area and the delay was not deliberate and intentional, and if the delay was not condoned it would suffer irreparable loss. Further he has also admitted that he did not persuade the matter to submit reply to the deficiency letter, thinking that he had filed the application complete in all respects, and in the circumstances when the appellant did not file any reply to the deficiency letter, WRC was justified in refusing recognition. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal for condonation of delay. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, court order and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal for condonation of delay and hence the council reconfirms its earlier decision for not admitting the appeal.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby re-confirms its earlier decision dated 25-05-2010 for not admitting the appeal.


1. The Secretary, Shri Shivaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Kothalaj Road, District, Hingoli - , Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Tirupati Educational and Rural Development Foundation, Dhule, Maharashtra dated 08/06/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW07415/1222201/120th/DEF/2009/57056 dated 03/07/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.Ed.(M) course on the grounds “WRC considered the case of the institution in light of letters F.No. 46-3/2008/NCTE(N&S)/84003 dt. 17 Sep, 2008, F.No. 49-27/2007/NCTE(N&S) DT. 1 Oct, 2008 and F.No. 49-27/2007/NCTE(N&S) DT. 31 OCT, 2008 received from Member Secretary, NCTE, New Delhi and negative recommendation received from Maharashtra State Govt. in respect of D.Ed. Course. Keeping of D.Ed. course and directions received from NCTE Hqrs, the WRC decided that no further processing will be done in this case and communication to this effect to be made to this institution. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Tirupati Educational and Rural Development Foundation (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 08/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. V.S.Patil, President, Shri Tirupati Educational and Rural Development Foundation, Dhule, Maharashtra presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant preferred an appeal on 08-06-2010 against the refusal order dt. 03-07-2009 of WRC and the appeal was late by 11 months 04 days and hence the appellant was asked to furnish the reasons for delay vide NCTE’s letter dt. 29-07-2010. The appellant submitted the reason vide his letter dt. 07-08-10 stating that aggrieved by the decision of the WRC, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad and the Court vide order dt. 03-05-10 permitted the petitioner to withdraw the petition with liberty to file the appeal. In the event, if the appeal is filed, the NCTE shall take into consideration the time spent in prosecuting, the present petition. The NCTE shall decide the appeal within a period of three months after the decision rendered in the application for condonation of delay. With regard to the refusal grounds it was submitted that appellant provided all the required infrastructure and other facilities for conducting the D.Ed programme and it also submitted requisite FDRs and fee to the WRC; the decision of WRC not to scrutinize the application because of the negative recommendations of the State Government of Maharashtra was not justified. Further the Apex Court has passed an order in case of State of Maharashtra

versus Sant Dhyanehwar Shikhan Shastra Mahavidyalaya stating that NCTE has to decide the issue objectively on its own and the recommendation of the State Government can have no bearing on such decision making process. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant had preferred an appeal dt. 8-6-2010 against refusal order dt. 03-07-2009 with a delay of 9 months 04 days. The appellant filed a writ petition before the Court only on 26-04-10 against the WRC’s decision/order dt. 3-7-09. The petition was filed after almost nine months of issue of the refusal order and the Court disposed the case in May 2010 by permitting the petitioner to withdraw the petition and file an appeal with NCTE. In compliance to the Court directions the case was heard on 21-10-2010. As per the Court directions the appeal has to be dealt first for condonation of delay and thereafter the case has to be decided on merit, if the delay was condoned. The Council further noted that the sole reason put up by the appellant for not preferring the appeal was personal problems of Dr. V.S. Patil, Chairman of the Society i.e. medical treatment of mother and wife of younger brother and this, as a reason for condonation of delay was not a genuine ground as the institution is run by a society, comprising a group of individuals; if one member of the society has certain personal problems, then other members of the society would have taken initiate to file an appeal in time in the interest of the institution. And the other reason cited was that the appellant was in rural area and he had no knowledge of law in respect of delay for appeal, also cannot be acceptable as a valid reason because the appellant was supposed to know the rules, regulations and provision of the NCTE Act, when he had applied for grant of recognition of a teacher education programme before the NCTE. The appellant spent in prosecuting the petition from April 2010 to May 2010 only, as the court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the petition and file an appeal before NCTE vide order dt. 03-05-2010. Before April 2009, the appellant would have filed an appeal within the stipulated period of 60 days U/S 18 of the NCTE Act. In view of the above reasons the Council found that there was no justification for condonation of delay of nine months. Hence the appeal was not admitted for considering the case on merit. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, Court Order and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no justification for condonation of delay of nine months. Hence the appeal was not admitted for considering the case on merit.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby did not condone the delay and admit the appeal.


1. The Principal, Shri Tirupati Educational and Rural Development Foundation, Ramnagar, Wadibhokar Road, Deopur, Dhule - 424002, Maharashtra 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Basant Ram Nageena Mahavidyalaya, Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh dated 29/06/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/F-7/UP/2829/2009/10894 dated 29/09/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “1) Faculty has not yet been appointed through duly constituted selection committee as per NCTE norms for B.Ed. 2) Language learning facilities are still not adequate. 3) The number of titles in the library is not as per NCTE norms. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Basant Ram Nageena Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 29/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant filed an appeal on 29-06-2010 against the refusal order dt. 29-09-09 of NRC and the same was not admitted by the Council, owing to 06 months delay caused in preferring the appeal. Accordingly a letter dt. 10-08-2010 was issued to the institution for not admitting the appeal. Aggrieved by the decision of the Council, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and the Court vide their order dt. 10-08-2010 of the NCTE and remitted the matter back to the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits, if possible within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. In compliance with the Court directions the case was heard on 21-10-2010. AND WHEREAS Sh. Swami Sharn, Manager and Sh.Surender, Member, Basant Ram Nageena Mahavidyalaya, Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that as per clause 7(9) of the NCTE Regulations 2007 the appointment of qualified faculty members through duly constituted selection committee are to be made only after receiving a 7(9) letter from the Regional Committee, necessary arrangements were made for language learning by establishing language lab in a separate room; purchased more than sufficient books in library for B.Ed. students the number of books available in the B.Ed library was 5321 and the number of titles were 1245. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant had not been issued letter of intent prior to grant of recognition under clause 7(9) of the NCTE Regulation and hence refusal ground about non appointment of the faculty was not justified. The visiting team in its report dt. 15-06-09 mentioned the availability of 3170 books in the library, but the language learning lab had no proper hardware. The Council verified

the accession register of library and the bills and noted that the appellant was having more than 1000 titles as required under NCTE norms and the language learning lab had adequate hardware. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal with the direction to the NRC for issuance of letter of intent prior to grant of recognition under clause 7(9) of the NCTE Regulations. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse NRC’s order dated 29-09-2009 with direction to the NRC for issuance of Letter of Intent prior to grant of recognition under Clause 7(9) of NCTE Regulations. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Manager, Basant Ram Nageena Mahavidyalaya, VPO - Dharaon, Chandauli, Chandauli - -, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

F.No.89-991/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Ch. Suraj Singh Mahavidyalaya , Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh dated 14/09/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/UP-3167/162nd Meeting/2010/25631 dated 15/07/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting M.Ed course on the grounds “1) The deficiencies communicated to the Institution through letter number NRC/ NCTE/UP-3167/ 159 meeting/ 2010/ 21786 dated 11 May 2010 still exist. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Ch. Suraj Singh Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 14/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. Ashutosh Pachori, Principal and Sh. Raju Yadav, Member, Ch. Suraj Singh Mahavidyalaya , Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010 In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the NRC after causing an inspection of the institution on 25-03-2010, issued a show cause notice on 11-05-2010 mentioning that the standard of books available in the library was low; 19 computers were not enough for all the students of B.Ed, B.Ed(Addl), B.Sc, B.A. and M.Ed; the college website was not operative, affidavit about the faculty on stamp paper of Rs. 100 was not submitted. The appellant in response to this notice submitted a reply on 10-06-2010 stating that it was having 666 high quality text and reference books, the total no. of books were upto 9100; purchased 45 new computers in addition to the existing stock of 19 computers along with the bills and registers. It also submitted website print outs taken on 08-06-2010 and affidavit of the faculty on Rs. 100/- stamp paper. The NRC after considering this reply refused recognition for the M.Ed course stating that the deficiency communicated to the institution still existed without mentioning as to which deficiency and to what extent and this was not justifiable. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant had maintained a single accession register for teacher training programmes and general degree courses. The books mentioned in the register do not meet the requirement of M.Ed programme; for the programme at the post graduate level it should have books at research level. The appellant was having only 19 computers for B.Ed,(200 intake). B.Sc, B.A. and the proposed M.Ed course and these were grossly inadequate. The institution purchased 45 more computers subsequent to the show cause notice only, though it submitted hard copies of the website taken on 08-06-10, but it did not disclose all details of existing teacher training programmes. The fourth ground of refusal i.e. about faculty was not relevant at this stage, as the institution was not issued letter of intent prior to grant of recognition under clause 7(9) of regulations. In view of the above, the

Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and hence it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and NRC’s order dated 15-07-09 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Ch. Suraj Singh Mahavidyalaya , Plot No. 1167, VPO-Jagir, Tehsil-bhongoan,, Mainpuri - -, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

F.No.89-992/2010-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of S.S. Degree College, Agra, Uttar Pradesh dated 14/09/2010 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/UP-2783/162nd MEETING/2010/25699 dated 16/07/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “ 1) The deficiencies communicated to the Institution through letter number NRC/ NCTE/ UP-2783/ 159 meeting/ 2010/ 22251 dated 15 May 2010 still exist.“ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, S.S. Degree College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 15/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. Ramesh Chander Sharma and Sh. Umesh Kumar Sharma, S.S. Degree College, Agra, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010 . In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the Regional Committee sent a notice to the appellant on 15/05/2010 mentioning that psychology lab was ill equipped, out of available 15 computers only 7 computers are working as per VT report, proper science lab did not exist, building completion certificate was not from the competent authority, the college website was not developed properly, titles of books were not as per the NCTE norms of B.Ed. The appellant in response to this notice, submitted a reply on 14-06-2010.; the NRC without considering the facts mentioned in reply dt. 14/06/2010 rejected the application on 16/07/2010 mentioning that the deficiencies communicated to the Institution through letter number NRC/NCTE/UP-2783/159 meeting/2010/22251 dated 15th May, 2010 still existed . AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the NRC had earlier refused recognition on the ground that it was running B.A programme also,in the premises of B.Ed course and this was not permissible as per norms. The Council taking into account the submission of the appellant stating that the B.A programme had already been shifted from the B.Ed building, accepted the appeal with a direction to the NRC for causing inspection of the institution and an order to this effect was issued on 05-01-2010 by the Council. Subsequently the NRC caused the inspection of the institution on 26-03-2010. The visiting team in its report dt. 26-03-2010 mentioned that 15 computers were available, but only 7 were working, setting of the psychology lab and furniture was not according to the requirement of lab, science lab setting was not like lab, B.A course was being run on 1st floor and B.Ed course on the ground floor. The NRC issued show cause notice but without mentioning the major observation of the V.T that said building had seen used for both B.A and B.Ed programmes, though NRC earlier refused recognition on this very ground . Further more the appellant submitted in the appeal that the B.A course was shifted from the

B.Ed building, on this basis only the appeal was accepted for causing inspection so as to verify whether exclusive facilities as per the NCTE norms have been provided for the B.Ed programme. AND WHEREAS the Council perused the reply dt. 11-06-2010 submitted by the institution in response to the show cause notice and further noted that though the building completion certificate issued by competent authority i.e Block Development Officer but it did not mention the land and build up area details. The requirement of number titles of the books in the library was met by the institution, but the other deficiencies with regard to computers, psychology lab and science lab existed at the time of inspection and this was not permissible. So, the institution did not fulfill the NCTE norms to become eligible for consideration for grant of recognition. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and that it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the NRC’s order dated 16-07-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, S.S. Degree College, Vill - Gopalpura, Post - Shamsabad, Tehsil - Fatehabad, Agra - 282002, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

F.No.89-1022-2010 Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of S.S.B. College of Education, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 04/10/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/WRCAPP254/138/2010/69921 dated 04/08/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the grounds “ No building existed on the plot No./Khasra No./ Survey No. indicated in the application and land documents. 2) No Original documents were shown to the V.T. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, S.S.B. College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 04/10/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. K.K.Verma, Member and Sh. Navneet Singh , S.S.B. College of Education, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the WRC after causing inspection issued show cause notice on 15-06-2010 stating that the college building was under construction and no original documents were shown to the team except for the land. The institution vide their letter dt. 15-07-2010 submitted the reply stating that the building of the institution was under construction at the time of inspection and now it is completely constructed and the appellant was provided full co-operation and all assistance to the members of the visiting team. The WRC without considering this reply citing a variable ground that no building existed on the Sy.No.’s of the land documents and this was not justifiable. The appellant in the appeal submitted that some furnishing work like glasses was going on when the inspection team came and the same was completed during the course of the day. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that as per Regulations 2009, the construction of the building shall be complete in all respects on the land possessed by it where as the V.T that visited the institution on 28-05-2010 reported that the building was under construction and the construction work does not match with the building plan and the photographs and the letter of the institution annexed with report also clearly depicted that the building was under construction. When the construction was not completed even by the time of inspection in May 2010, it was not clear how the building completion certificate was issued earlier i.e. on 15-02-2010 by the Gram Panchayat office. However the appellant did not submit any reply with regard to the second ground of the show cause and refusal order, as to why original documents were not shown to the V.T except land documents. The WRC instead of reiterating the same show cause notice grounds in the refusal order, when the appellant himself admitted in the reply to the show cause notice that the building was under construction at the time of inspection, cited a deviant ground stating that the

building was not constructed on the Sy.No’s shown in the land document. However the fact remained that the building was under construction at the time of inspection and no original documents except land document was not shown to the V.T. The V.T was negative and it also reported non-availability of infrastructural and instructional facilities and also mentioned that another college in the name of Shri Sai Baba College had been running D.El.Ed course in just 100 feet away and further the main wall of the building is common with adjoining college building of Parmar College of Professional Studies conducting D.El.Ed course. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and that it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the WRC’s order dated 04-08-10 was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The President, S.S.B. College of Education, Plot No. 119, 120, 121, & 166, V+P. O. Baraua, Tehsil, Gwalior - , Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

F.No.89-1387/2009-Appeal


19/11/2010

O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of Shri Anar Devi Pyare Lal Educational Welfare Society (Shri Ji Goverdhan Maharaj College of Professional Studies), Mathura, Uttar Pradesh dated 16/12/2009 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F-7/UP-3544/139th Meeting/2009 dated 17.05.09 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the ground “1) Land is on thirty years lease from Private Party. 2) Approved building plan is not submitted. 3) CLU is not submitted”. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Anar Devi Pyare Lal Educational Welfare Society (Shri Ji Goverdhan Maharaj College of Professional Studies) (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 16/12/2009 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appellate authority after considering the appeal of the institution dated 16-12-2009 rejected the appeal, vide their order dated 05-03-2010 on the grounds that on the date of application i.e. 31-10-2008 the land of the institution was on 30 years lease from a private party and this was also mentioned by the institution in its reply; CLU and building plan approved by the competent authority was also not furnished by the institution. AND WHEREAS aggrieved by the decision of the Council, the institution filed a writ petition No. 15199/2010 against the said order of the Council in the High Court of Allahabad and the Hon’ble High Court vide its order dated 23.03.2010, set aside the order of the Council and directed the Council to decide the appeal afresh expeditiously, after considering the various submissions made in the appeal. Accordingly, the case was again heard on 20.05.2010. The Council rejected the appeal and re-confirmed the order of NRC on the ground that the application of the institution for recognition of the B.Ed. course was submitted to the NRC on 31.10.2008 when the NCTE Regulations, 2007, which were notified on 10.12.2007, were in vogue. Regulation 8 (7) of the NCTE Regulations 2007 stipulated that no institution shall be granted recognition under these regulations unless it is in possession of required land on the date of application. The land free from all encumbrances could be either on ownership basis or on lease from Government/Govt. institutions for a period of not less than 30 years. the Council also noted that institution alongwith its application dated 31.10.2008 submitted a lease deed from a private party which was not acceptable and, thus, the institution did not fulfill the mandatory requirement of adequate land free from all encumbrances either on ownership basis or on lease from Government/Govt. agencies as stipulated in Regulation 8(7). The Council further noted that approved building plan and CLU was not submitted alongwith the application and, therefore, the Council was of the

view that the recognition was refused to the institution by the NRC for good and sufficient reasons. Accordingly, the decision of the Council was conveyed on 10-06-2010. However, the date. 04-03-2010 mentioned on the right hand corner of the order was typographical mistake. AND WHEREAS the appellant again filed a writ petition No. 49918/2010 dt. 23-08-2010 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, contesting the decision of the Council for re-confirming the NRC’s order stating that at the time of submission of the application for grant of recognition the land was leased to the appellant’s institution from a private party; and after refusal of recognition, a sale deed for the said land was executed on 5-11-2009 thereafter filed an appeal, along with the copy of the sale deed; and it also obtained CLU and building plan was approved. The Court vide their order dt. 23-08-2010 disposed of the petition with the directions that in case the petitioner files certified copy of court order within a period of two weeks alongwith the original building plan and original order changing the land use the appellate authority may reconsider its decision and pass fresh order in accordance with law within 6 weeks thereafter. The Court further made clear that it had not expressed its opinion on the merit of the claim made by the petitioner which has to be done by the Appellate Authority. In compliance with the court direction the case was listed for hearing on 21-10-10. AND WHEREAS Sh.Bindesh Kumar Dixit, Executive Director of the institution presented the case of the institution on 21-10-2010. The appellant showed the Council CLU dt. 11-02-2010 issued by the SDM office and sale deed dt. 5-11-2009 for having land on ownership basis and approval of Gram Panchayat for construction of the building. The Council noted that copies of these documents – CLU, building plan and sale deed of the land were already submitted by the appellant in its earlier presentation on 20-05-10 before the appeal committee, on the basis of which a decision for rejecting the appeal was taken by the Council. The Council re-iterated its stand for not accepting the appeal on account of not having land on ownership basis on the date of submission of the application and the sale deed dt. 5-11-2009 cannot be acceptable as it was executed after the date of refusal of recognition. So also the CLU obtained on 11-01-2010 after the date of refusal of recognition was also not acceptable. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal and that it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and the NRC’s order dated 17-05-09 was re-confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Shri Anar Devi Pyare Lal Educational Welfare Society (Shri Ji Goverdhan Maharaj College of Professional Studies), Vishnu Vihar, Goverdhan,, Mathura - , Uttar Pradesh

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.



O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Venkatesha Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Aurangabad, Madhya Pradesh dated 25/05/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW05282/123651/2009/56043 dated 03/06/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds “ 1) WRC considered the case of the institution in light of letters F.No.49-27/2007NCTE(N&S)Part/87096 dated 21.11.2008 received from Member Secretary, NCTE, New Delhi and negative recommendation received from Maharashtra State Government in respect of B.Ed. Course. Keeping in view of the negative recommendation received from the Maharashtra State Government in respect of B.Ed. course and directions received from NCTE Hqrs, the WRC decided that no further processing will be done in this case and communication to this effect to be made to this institution. “ AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Venkatesha Shikshan Prasarak Mandal (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 25/05/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the appellant filed a writ petition No. 3934 of 2010 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature, Bench at Aurangabad against the refusal order dt. 03-06-2009 of the WRC and the Court vide order dt. 03-05-2010 permitted the petitioner to withdraw the petition with the liberty to file the appeal. In the event, if the appeal is filed, the NCTE shall take into consideration the time spent in prosecuting the present petition. The NCTE shall decide the appeal within a period of three months after the decision rendered in the application for condonation of delay. Further the Court vide Order dated 07-05-10 added a paragraph citing the decision rendered in Sant Dhyaneswar Shikhan Shastra Mahavidyalaya versus State of Maharashtra Government. AND WHEREAS pursuant to the Court directions the appellant filed an appeal on 25-05-2010. The appeal was late by nine months 23 days and the NCTE in compliance with the Court directions considered the case and asked vide NCTE's letter dt. 28-06-2010 to submit the reasons for delay. The appellant in response to this, submitted the reason for delay vide its letter dated 12-07-2010. Thereafter the Council decided to invite the appellant for personal presentation on 21-10-2010. Sh. Kiran Narayanaro Patil, Secretary presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-05-10. During the course of perusal presentation the appellant submitted that Sh. Kiran Narayanrao Patil, Secretary, Sh. Venkatesh Shikshan Prasarak Mandal,

Aurangabad, Maharashtra was suffering from Acute Limbar Dise Lesion from 29-07-2009 to 24-11-2009 and he was under treatment of Dr. Ajay B. Moholkar and Dr. Shrinivas B. Rakshale and showed the Medical Certificates issued by Dr. Ajay B. Moholkar from 29th July, 2009 to 18th September,2009 and Dr. Shrinivas B.Rakshale from 20-09-2009 from 24-11-2009. As per the provision of NCTE Act they have to prefer an appeal to the NCTE within 60 days after the issue of the order from the Regional Committee, and the 60 days had been completed, so it filed a writ petition No. 8448 on 30-11-2009 before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. The Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 23-03-2010 condoned the delay from 30-11-2009 to 23-03-10 AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant initially along with its appeal submitted the Court order dated 03-05-2010 with an addendum issued on 07-05-2010 in W.P.No. 3934 of 2010. Whereas in submitting the reasons for condonation of delay it submitted another court order dated 23-03-2010 passed in W.P. NO.8448 of 2009. In both the cases the petitioner was allowed to withdraw its petition, with the liberty to file an appeal. In order dated 23-03-2010 it condoned the delay from 30-11-2009 to 23-03-2010 and whereas in the order dated 03-05-2010, it directed the NCTE to consider the appeal for condonation of delay and if condoned it may be examined on merit. However, the Council taking into account the directions passed in the W.P. No.3934/2010 vide order dated 03-05-2010 decided to examine the case for condonation of delay first. The Council perused the reasons cited by the appellant for condonation of delay and noted that as per medical certificates the appellant was on medical treatment on `OPD’ basis. The illness of an individual member of the society cannot be accepted as a valid ground as the institution is run by a society, comprising several members. When one member of the society fell ill, other members would have initiated free to file an appeal within the stipulated period in the interest of the institution. Hence condonation of delay on this ground was not acceptable. The appellant also did not file an appeal immediately after an order had been passed on 23-03-2010, if it pertained to the appeal under reference, it submitted an appeal after almost two months of the Court judgement dt. 23-03-2010. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was no justification for condonation of delay. As the delay was not condoned, the case was not examined on merit against the refusal ground of WRC. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, court orders and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no justification for condonation of delay. As the delay was not condoned, the case was not examined on merit against the refusal ground of the WRC.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby did not condone the delay and admit the appeal. (S.V.S. Chaudhary)

Vice-Chairperson 1. The Secretary, Shri Venkatesha Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Shivneri Gad, Sainagar, CIDCO,N-6, Aurangabad, Aurangabad - -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal - 462002. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.



19/11/2010 O R D E R

WHEREAS the appeal of Swami Vivekanand Elementary Teacher Education Programmes, Hanumangarh Town , Rajasthan dated 15/04/2010 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F-7/RJ-912/153 Meeting/2009/13871-13872 dated 17/12/2009 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting STC course on the grounds “the institution had not submitted 1) CLU for the land on which the new building is constructed. 2) The Building Plan approved by competent authority indicating the Khasra number, total land area, and total constructed area. In case more courses are being run the course-wise demarcated building plan. 3) Building completion certificate from the competent authority. 4) The documents showing that the land is in the name of the Institution”.

AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Swami Vivekanand Elementary Teacher Education Programmes (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 15/04/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant aggrieved by the decision of NRC, filed a writ petition No.10983/2010 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench Jaipur and the Court vide their order dt. 01-10-10 directed the appellate authority to examine the appeal preferred against order dt. 17-12-09 and objectively decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law within 15 days of submission of certified copy of this order. The appellant submitted the certified copy of the Court order on 12-10-10 and in compliance with the Court direction the case was listed for hearing on 21-10-10.

AND WHEREAS Dr. Suman Pawa Principal and Sh.Parveen Singla Secretary, Swami Vivekanand Elementary Teacher Education Programmes, Hanumangarh Town, Rajasthan presented the case of the appellant institution on 21-10-2010. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the NRC had erred in closing the file and refusing to grant the recognition. It enclosed with the appeal the building completion certificate, building plan and also stated that land documents and these documents were also submitted to the regional committee.

AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant filed an application form for shifting of the premises on 28-04-2009; NRC in its 141st meeting held on 22-24 May 2009 decided to ask the institution to submit the documents pertaining to land, building plan, building completion certificate and CLU, along with the consent of the institution for inspection. It appeared that the institution after referring to this decision available on website, submitted reply vide their letter dt. 30-05-2009 giving their consent for inspection and furnished the details of instructional &infrastructural facilities. It however noted that NRC had not issued any letter asking for the stated documents in the refusal order dt. 17-12-09, it simply closed the file of the institution

by referring to a letter dt. 30-05-09 of the institution; the refusal order did not reveal anything about the earlier transactions done in this case. In view of the above the Council came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal with the direction to the NRC for causing inspection of new premises and for further decision thereafter. The institution is directed to submit the sought documents as stated in the refusal order to the NRC immediately.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the NRC’s order dated 17-12-2009 with direction to the NRC for causing inspection of new premises and for further decision thereafter. The institution is directed to submit the sought documents as stated in the refusal order to the NRC immediately.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against.


1. The Secretary, Swami Vivekanand Elementary Teacher Education Programmes, Ward No. 20, Ambedkar Colony, Rawatsar Road Hanumangarh Town, , Hanumangarh Town - -, Rajasthan 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

Documents

F .No.89-1303/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER ... 16th meet-oct.pdf · NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans ... the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench