JUDGMENT Hon’ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Post Graduate College, Ghazipur is a college affiliated to Veer Bahadur Singh Poorvanchal University, Jaunpur and is governed by the provisions of U.P. Universities Act, 1973 and the first statute of Poorvanchal University framed thereunder. 3. By an order of the Registrar, Poorvanchal University, Jaunpur affiliation was accorded to the college for running a "Post Graduate Diploma in Physical Education” for the academic session 1995-96 which was extended for the academic sessions 1996 to 1998 the petitioner college admitted students for undergoing a one year post graduate diploma course in physical education during each of the aforesaid extension periods. The students so enrolled and passed the examination held by the University, at the end of the course have been awarded Post Graduate Diploma in physical education by it. The provisions of National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as NCTE) were enforced w.e.f. 1-7-1995. Section 14 of the 1993 Act which envisaged permission/approval from NCTE with regard to each course which were required to be approved including new courses introduced pertaining to teachers education. The college was to applying before the NCTE within a period of 6 months from the date of enforcement of the Act with entitlement to continue the teachers training course till such point of time as final orders were passed by NCTE on the application submitted by the college. 4. The period of 6 months specified for this purpose under Section 14 stood extended on 2 separate occasions by the National Council for Teachers Education itself firstly till August 1997 and thereafter till March. Reliance in this regard has been placed by the petitioners upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ekta Shukla v. State of U.P. and others, 2006(1) ESC 53, in support of his case. 5. On 11-9-2006 the President promulgated the National Council for Teachers Education (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2006. 6. By means of said Amendment a new chapter namely Chapter IVA comprising Section 18A to 18G were inserted in 1993 Act for a period of six months from the specified date. The newly added provisions envisaged grant of ex post facto approval/recognition by NCTE with regard to course/training conducted by colleges in the past. 6. By means of said Amendment a new chapter namely Chapter IVA comprising Section 18A to 18G were inserted in 1993 Act for a period of six months from the specified date. The newly added provisions envisaged grant of ex post facto approval/recognition by NCTE with regard to course/training conducted by colleges in the past. For giving effect to the provisions of the aforesaid amendment the Central Government framed a set of rules known as National Council for Teachers Education (Procedure for Recognition of Certain Categories of Institutions) Rules, 2006. For availing benefit of the said amended provisions the petitioner college applied before the National Council for Teachers Education for grant of recognition as envisaged therein with regard to the post graduate diploma in physical education conducted by the petitioner college during its affiliation with Veer Bahadur Singh Poorvanchal University in the academic sessions 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98. The application so filed was rejected by the Regional Level Committee by order dated 16-4-2007. 7. Aggrieved by the said order of Regional Committee the petitioners filed an appeal before the NCTE, New Delhi which was also rejected vide order dated 7-9-2007 by the appellate authority. 8. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that even though in the order of Regional Level Committee some reasons were given to not allowing the application of the petitioners but such reasons/objections stood nullified under the order of National Council for Teachers Education, New Delhi dated 7-9-2007. The Appellate Authority, however, proceeded to decide the controversy against the petitioners on the sole ground that the application of the petitioner was not accompanied by a “No Objection Certificate” from the State Government in the format specified in Appendix I to the Act. It is this order of the National Council for Teachers Education, New Delhi which is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition on the following grounds. 9. It is urged that the Post Graduate Diploma in physical education was a course run by the petitioner college only in three academic sessions i.e. 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 and thereafter the said course is not being run by the petitioner college nor is the petitioner college seeking any approval for running such course in future. 9. It is urged that the Post Graduate Diploma in physical education was a course run by the petitioner college only in three academic sessions i.e. 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 and thereafter the said course is not being run by the petitioner college nor is the petitioner college seeking any approval for running such course in future. It is submitted that in view of the fact that the time limit specified under Section 14 of 1993 Act stood extended from time to time and that the petitioner college has run such course the post graduate diploma in physical education awarded by respondent University only within such extended period alone to the student who have passed out the said course during the aforesaid 3 academic sessions is to be treated as valid in terms of the provisions of NCTE and no objection against its validity on account of absence of approval from NCTE cannot be taken. 10. It is urged on the alternative that the application submitted by a college which may be running an on going course in terms of Section 14 does not require a “No Objection Certificate” to be submitted for obtaining permission under regulations framed by the Central Government. Regulation 5 in this regard has been the subject matter of consideration. He has placed reliance upon judgment reported in 2007(6) ADJ 680 , Alka Tripathi v. State of U.P. 11. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has also relied AIR 1963 SC 1417 , Banarsi Das v. Cane Commissioner and Megna Mills Co. v. Ashok Marketing Company, AIR 1971 SC 166 : 1970(3) SCC 168 , in support of his submission. 12. Sri Rizwan Ali Akhtar on behalf of the respondents submits that the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 is an Act of Parliament and received assent of the President of India on 29th December, 1993. It came into force on 1st July, 1995 as appointed by the Central Government by Notification in the official Gazette. The Council to be called the National Council for Teacher Education was established under Section 31(1) of the Act on 17-8-1995, hence the NCTE Act, 1993 has an over-riding effect on all other provisions made in this connection. The subject matter is exclusively covered by Entry 66 of List I of Schedule VII of the Constitution. 13. The Council to be called the National Council for Teacher Education was established under Section 31(1) of the Act on 17-8-1995, hence the NCTE Act, 1993 has an over-riding effect on all other provisions made in this connection. The subject matter is exclusively covered by Entry 66 of List I of Schedule VII of the Constitution. 13. He further submits that the State Government or the University/Examining Body has no role to play in the matter of granting/refusing recognition/permission to the institution under Section 14 or Section 15 of the NCTE Act as well as withdrawal of such recognition/permission under Section 17 of the Act. Section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993 reads as under : “14. Recognition of Institutions offering course or training in teacher education.—(1) Every institution offering or intending to offer a course or training in teacher education on or after the appointed day, may, for grant of recognition under this Act, make an application to the Regional Committee concerned in such form and in such manner as may be determined by regulations : Provided that an institution offering a course or training in teacher education immediately before the appointed day, shall be entitled to continue such course or training for a period of six months, if it has made an application for recognition within the said period and until the disposal of the application by the Regional Committee." 14. He also submits that the National Council for Teacher Education (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2006 came to amend the NCTE Act, 1993 to provide for validation of qualifications in teacher education obtained from certain institutions and to prescribe penalty for running unrecognized institutions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. 15. By means of the Ordinance, 2006 the following Chapter IV-A was inserted after Section 18 of NCTE Act, 1993. Chapter IV-A 18-A........ 18-B. (1) Where an institution offering a course or training in teacher education before the specified date, failed to make an application under sub-section (1) of Section 14, but an examining body granted affiliation to and held examination for a course or training in teacher education conducted by, such institution or such examination was due, before the specified date, the provisions of this Chapter shall apply in respect of such institution. (2) An institution falling under sub-section (1) may make an application to the Regional Committee concerned in such form and within such period and alongwith such fee, as may be prescribed. (3) An application under sub-section (2) shall be dealt with in such manner as may be prescribed. (4) .............................. 18-C ........................... 18-D ........................... 18-E ........................... 18-F ........................... 18-G ........................... (5) In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 31 of NCTE Act, 1993, as amended by the NCTE (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2006, the Central Government made NCTE (Procedure for Recognition of Certain Categories of Institutions) Rules, 2006 which is quoted as under : 1. ................................ 2. ................................ 3. Applicability.—These rules shall be applicable to all matters relating to validation of qualifications in teacher education obtained through certain institutions offering a course or training in teacher education referred to in Section 18-B and for holding examination for a course or training in teacher education which may be conducted by the applicant institution and who apply to the Regional Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education under sub-section (2) of Section 18-B. 4. Submission of application and fee.—(1) Every application for recognition under Section 18-B shall be made in Form A. (2) ........................................................ (3) Every institution desirous of getting recognition under Section 18-B shall submit its application in duplicate alongwith the documents mentioned in the application form and accompanied by a non-refundable fee of thirty thousand rupees. FORM-A 1 to 18........ 19. List of documents attached. 1. A certificate from the State Government with regard to approval to the institution as prescribed.......................... (Appendix-I) 2. A certificate from the University.......(Appendix-II) 3. A certificate from the Institution.......(Appendix-III) APPENDIX-I CERTIFICATE (Certificate to be issued by the State Government concerned for the institution applying under Section 18-B of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993). (i) The State Government of ...........................has issued the permission letter No. .....................dated........................to the............. Institution (name of the institution) for conducting the............... course from the academic sessions...................... (ii) The State Government of..........has never withdrawn the permission from the abovementioned institution during the academic sessions for which institution has sought validation for qualification obtained from the institution, (iii) The institution has complied with all the rules and regulations prevalent from time to time. (iv) The State Government recommends institution for grant of recognition under Chapter IV-A of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. (iv) The State Government recommends institution for grant of recognition under Chapter IV-A of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. (Authorized Signatory of the State Government) ................................ 6. The petitioner’s institution comes within the aforementioned category because it failed to make an application under sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993. (It is also the petitioner’s own case as narrated in paras 16 and 17 of the writ petition). As such it is clear that the certificate from the State Government (Appendix-I) is a statutory requirement of Rules 2006 framed in exercise of powers conferred by the NCTE Act, 1993 as amended by the NCTE (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2006." 16. Therefore, the appeal of the petitioners was rightly rejected on the sole remaining objection (after conceding on two objections in appeal) that the Certificate from the State Government required as Appendix-I was not submitted by the petitioners. 17. The purpose of “No Objection Certificate” from the State Government under National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 has been the subject matter of consideration by Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of St. Johns Teachers Training Institute v. Regional Director, National Council for Teachers Education and another, 2003(2) AWC 1076. In para 16 of the aforesaid case norms have been specified on the basis of which No Objection Certificate’ is to be obtained. Paragraph 16 is as under : “16. The contention that there are no guidelines for the. State Governments regarding grant of an N.O.C. and consequently, the State Governments may refuse to grant an N.O.C. on wholly irrelevant considerations is without substance. It is averred in para 7 of the counter-affidavit filed by the Council that it has issued certain guidelines to the State Governments on February 2, 1996 for issuance of an N.O.C. and a copy whereof has also been annexed. The relevant part of the guidelines is being reproduced below : “(i) The establishment of teacher training institutions by Government, private managements or any other agencies should largely be determined by assessed need for trained teachers. This need should take into consideration the supply of trained teachers from existing institutions, the requirement of such teachers in relation to enrolment projections at various stages, the attrition rates among trained teachers due to superannuation, change of occupation, death etc. This need should take into consideration the supply of trained teachers from existing institutions, the requirement of such teachers in relation to enrolment projections at various stages, the attrition rates among trained teachers due to superannuation, change of occupation, death etc. and the number of trained teachers, on the live register of the employment exchanges seeking employment and the possibility of their deployment. The States having more than the required number of trained teachers may not encourage opening of new institutions for teacher education or to increase the intake. (i) States having shortage of trained teachers may encourage establishment of new institutions for teacher education and to increase intake capacity for various levels keeping in view the requirements of teachers estimated for the next 10-15 years. (ii) Preference might be given to institutions which tend to emphasize the preparation of teachers for subjects (such as Science, Mathematics, English, etc.) for which trained teachers have been in short supply in relation to requirement of schools. (iii) Apart from the usual courses for teacher preparation, institutions which propose to concern themselves with new emerging specialities (e.g. computer education, use of electronic media, guidance and Counselling etc.) should receive priority. Provisions for these should, however, be made only after ensuring that requisite manpower, equipment and infrastructure are available. These considerations will also be kept in view by the institution intending to provide for optional subjects to be chosen by students such as guidance and Counselling special education etc. (iv) With a view to ensuring supply of qualified and trained teachers for such specialities education of the disabled non-formal education, education of adults, pre-school education, vocational education etc. special efforts and incentives may be provided to motivate private managements/voluntary organizations for establishment of institutions, which may emphasise on these areas. (v) With a view to promoting professional commitment among prospective teachers, institutions which can ensure adequate residential facilities for the Principal and staff of the Institutions as well as hostel facilities for substantial proportion of its enrolment should be encourage. (vi) Considering that certain areas (tribal, hilly regions etc.) have found it difficult to attain qualified and trained teachers. It would be desirable to encourage establishment of training institutions in those areas. (vi) Considering that certain areas (tribal, hilly regions etc.) have found it difficult to attain qualified and trained teachers. It would be desirable to encourage establishment of training institutions in those areas. (vii) Institutions should be allowed to come into existence only if the sponsors are able to ensure that they have adequate material and manpower resources in terms, for instance, of qualified teachers and other staff, adequate buildings and other infrastructure (laboratory, library, etc.) a reserve fund and opening funds to meet the day-to-day requirement of the institution, including payment of salaries, provision of equipment etc. Laboratories, teaching science methodologies and practicals should have adequate gas plants, proper fittings and regular supply of water, electricity etc. They should also have adequate arrangements. Capabilities of the institution for filling norms prepared by N.C.T.E. may be kept in view. (viii) In the establishment of an institution preference need to be given to locations which have large catchment area in terms of schools of different levels where student teachers can be exposed to demonstration lessons and undertake practice teaching. A training institution which has a demonstration school where innovative and experimental approaches can be demonstrated could be given.” 18. A bare perusal of the aforesaid demonstrates that those provisions are relevant only for the purpose of establishing a new college for imparting a course in teachers training and none of the norms considered by the Supreme Court have any co-relation with the ex post facto validation of a course which has been conducted for 3 years in the past almost 10 years back and with regard to which there does not exist any intent on the part of the petitioners either to re-start the course or to conduct such course in future. 19. Even otherwise the absence of a ‘No Objection Certificate’/refusal of State Government to grant No Objection Certificate remains within the power of the National Council for Teachers Education for consideration in terms of observation of Supreme Court in paragraph 19 of the judgment in Sant Johns Teachers Training Institute v. Regional Director. The appellate order fails to accord any consideration in terms of paragraph 19 of the judgment wherein it has been held that : “19. The appellate order fails to accord any consideration in terms of paragraph 19 of the judgment wherein it has been held that : “19. Regulation 6(ii) of these regulations provides that the endorsement of the State Government/Union Territory Administration in regard to issue of N.O.C. will be considered by the Regional Committee while taking a decision on the application for recognition. This provision shows that even if the N.O.C. is not granted by the concerned State Government or Union Territory and the same is refused, the entire matter will be examined by the Regional Committee while taking a decision on the application for recognition. Therefore, the grant or refusal of an N.O.C. by the State Government or Union Territory is not conclusive or binding and the views expressed by the State Government will be considered by the Regional Committee while taking the decision on the application for grant of recognition. In view of these new regulations, the challenge raised to the validity of Regulations 5 (e) and (f) has been further whittled down. The role of the State Government is certainly important for supplying the requisite data which is essential for formation of opinion by the Regional Committee while taking a decision under sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act. Therefore, no exception can be taken to such a course of action.” 20. While submitting an application every requirement cannot be treated to be mandatory so as to nullify the application itself in the absence of strict compliance with each such requirement. Several factors required to be enumerated in application or amongst the documents required to be filed are purely directory. The application of the petitioners was in substantial compliance with the regulations and could not be thrown out as has been done by the National Council for Teachers Education, New Delhi. 21. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned orders are quashed. No order as to costs. ————