Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 2451 (RAJ)

Vinod Kumar Bhati v. Kota Open University

2005-09-15

R.S.CHAUHAN

body2005
Judgment 1. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The appeal has arisen in the circumstances to be noticed now. 3. The Kota Open University had offered admissions for the course of Bachelor in Education (B. Ed.) after conducting pre-entrance test for the academic years 1997-98 and 1998-99 respectively. The intake capacity for the two relevant years has been stated to be 900 and 2000 respectively by the University. The facts which emerged from the order under appeal dated 07.08.2000 (Annexure-3) are that at the time of admission for the Sessions 1997-98 and 1998-99, the application of the Kota Open University about recognition of its B. Ed. Course from NCTE was pending consideration. It has applied for recognition of Kota Open University for imparting B. Ed. Course for the aforesaid intake capacity. However, ultimately the NCTE has approved the Kota Open University for imparting B. Ed. Course but restricted its approval by limiting number of seats for the session 1999-2000 to 500 only vide sanction letter dated 210.1999. That is to say application for recognition was decided after the session for 1999-2000 had commenced and for which the admissions had taken place prior to receipt of this letter. The University has filed an appeal against the order dated 210.1999 which was decided by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 11.07.2000 by maintaining the intake capacity of 500 students. 4. In the wake of this decision, the University decided to confine results of the two academic sessions only to 500 candidates and further decided to hold a fresh entrance test for 500 students for the Sessions 1999-2000 from amongst 2900 students only who were declared successful to be given admission in the previous entrance and accordingly, the decision was communicated to all the candidates inclusive of the petitioners, who have been considered successful in the selection held for the session 1998-99. They were also required to submit an undertaking where under it is to be stated that they shall not claim admission on the basis of their clearing selection test as laid down by NCTE and they shall also deposit the fees prescribed by the State Government of Rs. 13,220/-. The fees already deposited was to be adjusted against the New Fees Schedule. 5. 13,220/-. The fees already deposited was to be adjusted against the New Fees Schedule. 5. Aggrieved with the aforesaid decision of the University, the petitioners-appellants had filed the writ petition claiming relief that the order dated 07.08.2000 to conduct first entrance test for 500 students for session 1999-2000 again be quashed and directions may be issued to the respondents to give admission in B. Ed. Course to the petitioners without submission of undertaking in non judicial stamp. 6. As per the averments made in the writ petition, and which is not subject matter of dispute, the petitioners were given admissions for the respective academic session 1997-98/1998-99 much prior to decision of the application of the University for recognition by NCTE which was decided in the first instance on 210.1999 and appeal against which was decided later on in the year 2000 up to which the academic session was completed and as a result of later decision, their admissions were cancelled and they were required to reappear in the entrance test for the subsequent years for limited seats of 500. 7. The other circumstance which needs to be noticed here that in the first instance this Court in its decision in Shah Goverdhan Lal Kabra Colleges case had held the provisions of Section 17(4) of the National Council of Teachers Act, 1993 to be ultra vires. This decision was later on reversed by the Supreme Court vide its Judgment dated 210.2002 up to that time the petitions were filed, the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court was operative. However, at the time of hearing the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. vs. Shah Goverdhan Lal Kabras case had been pronounced on 210.2002 holding the Section 17(4) to be valid and remitted the writ petitions back to the High Court for consideration on other questions, if any. 8. It is in the wake of this Judgment , considering that the NCTE has finally recognised intake capacity of 500 candidates only, the admissions beyond 500 candidates for academic year 1997-98/1998-999 were also assumed to be invalid. In the wake of which, such invalid admissions over and above 500 intake capacity as approved by the NCTE the provision for re-appearing in entrance test was sustained by the learned Single Judge and the petition was dismissed, hence this appeal. 9. In the wake of which, such invalid admissions over and above 500 intake capacity as approved by the NCTE the provision for re-appearing in entrance test was sustained by the learned Single Judge and the petition was dismissed, hence this appeal. 9. Another development which has taken place since remand of petitions by the Supreme Court which was subject matter of appeal alongwith Shah Goverdhan Lal Kabras case referred to above, the matter has been examined by two Division Benches of this Court; one in D.B.C. Writ Petition No. 2884/1999 Ram Narain vs. State, decided on 02.04.2003 and another in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2887/1999 Ummed Ali vs. State & Ors., decided on 18.03.2004. 10. The Division Bench of this Court after considering the scheme of the Act of 1993, which was brought into force from July, 1995 opined that the scheme unfolded under Sections 14 to 17 of the Act of 1993 clearly reveals that until the matter of recognition is under consideration and the order of refusal is communicated to the concerned Institute, it is authorised to offer a course or training in the teacher education as a recognised institution and it does not get obliterated subsequently on non recognition of the institution on the application which was pending during that period before the NCTE. Considering Sub-section (5) of Section 14 of the Act of 1993, the Court opined that it provides the date from which the refusal of recognition becomes operative. It reads that every institution, in respect of which recognition has been refused shall discontinue the course or training in teacher education from the end of the academic session next following the date of receipt of the order refusing recognition passed under Clause (b) of Sub-section (3). Apparently, the ongoing courses at the time of disposal of the application for recognition are not slated to be closed abruptly to the undergoing training in that Institute but the ongoing academic sessions continues as a result, as if under Section 14(1) of the Act, 1993 such course is permitted to offer the examination acting thereon and its recognition ceases to be in force only w.e.f. the end of the current academic session. The degrees granted up to the continuance of such recognition cannot be pailed out. The degrees granted up to the continuance of such recognition cannot be pailed out. The Court also noticed the scheme of second proviso to Section 17(1) of the Act of 1993 which reads as under:- “Provided further that the order withdrawing or refusing recognition passed by the Regional Committee shall come into force only with effect from the end of the academic session next following the date of communication of such order.” Similarly, Sub-section (3) of Section 17 of the Act of 1993 also provided that: “Once the recognition of a recognised institution is withdrawn under Sub-section (1), such institution shall discontinue the course or training in teacher education and the concerned University or the examining body shall cancel affiliation of the institution in accordance with the order passed under Sub-section (1), with effect from the end of the academic session next following the date of communication of the said order.” 11. In view of these cases, there is no escape from the conclusion that in the present case also during the pendency of application for recognition by NCTE, the intake capacity for 1997-98/1998-99 was for 2900 students and the admission were granted in pursuance of the selection test held for such admission while the application for such recognition of the course for such intake capacity was pending. Subsequent order, after the petitioners had undergone the training and taken examinations limiting the intake capacity while recognising it an institution for the purpose of imparting training in B. Ed. Course, could not affect the admission already granted and course already perused in mid session. 12. By this later decision, the restriction of intake capacity of 500 would obviously come into force w.e.f the academic course commencing following the decision of the NCTE communicated to the University i.e., to say w.e.f. Academic Session 2001-02. 13. The aforesaid conclusion is without prejudice to the contention of the University, that University established under statute did not require any recognition of courses offerred by it, by any other Institution. Since, the facts of the present case are governed by two Division Bench decisions of this Court, even assuming that such recognition is necessary, we do not need further scrutiny to go into that question in this appeal. 14. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The Judgment under appeal is set-aside. Since, the facts of the present case are governed by two Division Bench decisions of this Court, even assuming that such recognition is necessary, we do not need further scrutiny to go into that question in this appeal. 14. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The Judgment under appeal is set-aside. The petition is allowed and the termination of admission given to the petitioners for academic sessions 1997-98/1998-99 are quashed and the respondents are directed to conduct the examinations after permitting the students to complete the courses for which they were admitted in 1997-98 and 1998-99, if the same were not completed earlier due to later order of NCTE. We further direct that within a period of one month from the date of completion of the course, the University shall conduct the examinations for such candidates and the University shall inform the candidates by giving 15 days clear notice for re-attending the courses. In case, some students have subsequently got admissions and passed the test, they need not be subjected to training and test once again and in case any student after receipt of notice, does not join the course, his right to continue in the course subsequently, on the basis of earlier admission, shall stand closed. 15. No costs.