JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral). Petitioner was granted recognition to run B.Ed. Courses vide order dated 31.7.2012 by the Northern Regional Committee of National Council for Teachers Education under Section 14 (3) of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993. Sub-section (6) of Section 14 of the Act provides that the University shall grant affiliation to the institution, where recognition has been granted. Further provides that the University shall cancel the affiliation of the University, where recognition has been refused. 2. Section 17 of the Act provides that the Regional Committee, on noticing certain irregularities, illegalities and shortcomings in the faculty, after making due enquiry may cancel the recognition so granted. Undisputedly, vide order dated 10.10.2013, Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition, affiliation was granted by the Kumaon University to the petitioner institution along with other institutions for the academic session 2012-13. However, vide order dated 26.11.2013, affiliations were granted to other institutions for the academic session of 2013-14, too, however, the name of the petitioner institution does not figure in the list of affiliation dated 26.11.2013, Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition. Consequently, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the University to grant affiliation to the petitioner institution for academic session 2013-14, too, and for further academic sessions. 3. This Court in the case of Om Bio Medical Science & Pharma College v. State of Uttarakhand and others, Writ Petition No. 2950 of 2013 (M/S), and other connected matters, decided on 30.4.2014, placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of U.P. reported in (2013) 2 SCC 617 , has held that the Examining Body (University) can impose conditions in relation to its own requirement for eligibility of students for admission; conduct of examinations; the manner in which the prescribed courses should be completed and to see that the conditions imposed by NCTE are complied with. It has further been held that recognition so granted by the Regional Committee of NCTE under Section 14 (3) of the Act can only be revoked/cancelled by NCTE under Section 17 of the Act. It has further been held that recognition so granted by the Regional Committee of NCTE under Section 14 (3) of the Act can only be revoked/cancelled by NCTE under Section 17 of the Act. It was further held that if the State Government or the University finds certain shortcoming in the faculty of the institution or finds that institution is violating the provisions of the NCTE Act or conditions of the recognition, State Government or University may make complaint to NCTE, whereupon appropriate decision can only be taken by NCTE for cancelling/withdrawing of recognition under Section 17 of the Act. However, the State Government cannot issue any direction for non-grant of the affiliation or for cancellation of the recognition. 4. Mr. B.D. Upadhyay, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 University submits that a surprise inspection of the petitioner institution was done by the Vice-Chancellor of the University and he has observed certain shortcomings and irregularities in the institution, therefore, the Vice-Chancellor has decided not to grant affiliation for the next academic session i.e. 2013-14. He further contends that that every institution has to apply for the affiliation afresh for every academic session; Since, the petitioner institution has not applied for the next academic session i.e. 2013-14, therefore affiliation has not been granted to the petitioner institution. Mr. B.D. Upadhyay, learned Senior Counsel, further contends that even if application is moved, perhaps affiliation may not be possible to be granted in favour of the petitioner institution, in view of the shortcomings/irregularities noticed by the Vice-Chancellor. 5. On being asked, Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no. 4 submits that if any complaint is received by NCTE against the petitioner pointing out shortcomings and irregularities or violation of any condition of the recognition, NCTE shall proceed in accordance with law; if the allegations made in the complaint are found to be correct, NCTE may take appropriate steps against the institution under Section 17 of the Act. He, however, submits that till revocation/cancellation is done by the Regional Committee of the NCTE, ordinarily, University/Examining Body should not refuse the affiliation. 6. Now, question comes as to whether University may ask the institution to seek affiliation for every academic session or affiliation once granted shall continue till recognition is cancelled/revoked by the NCTE under Section 17 of the Act. 7. 6. Now, question comes as to whether University may ask the institution to seek affiliation for every academic session or affiliation once granted shall continue till recognition is cancelled/revoked by the NCTE under Section 17 of the Act. 7. In sub-section (6) of Section 14 of the Act, word “shall” is used and it mandates that if recognition is granted by the NCTE, the Examining Body (University) shall grant affiliation and affiliation so granted shall be cancelled only when recognition is cancelled/revoked by the NCTE. 8. Language of sub-section (6) of Section 14 of the Act has no ambiguity, therefore, the only interpretation of sub-section (6) of Section 14 would be that if recognition is granted by the Regional Committee of NCTE, the University is bound to grant affiliation and affiliation so granted can only be cancelled when recognition is cancelled/revoked by the NCTE under Section 17 of the Act. However, in view of dictum of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi (supra) University shall be at liberty to see/check as to whether Institution is following the standard/procedure provided by the University pertaining to requirement of eligibility of students for admission; or conduct of examination; or the manner in which the prescribed courses should be completed. 9. The NCTE Act nowhere provides that every year fresh application has to be made for grant of affiliation for the next academic session. Not only this, affiliation was granted by the University for the academic session of 2012-13 only on 10.10.2013, Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition, however, surprisingly within few days i.e. fifty days, the University decided not to grant affiliation to the petitioner institution for next academic session i.e. 2013-14. 10. In view of the above and for the reasons mentioned in the judgment dated 30.4.2014 passed in Writ Petition No. 2950 of 2013 (M/S), Om Bio Medical Science & Pharma College v. State of Uttarakhand and others, present writ petition deserves to be allowed. 11. Consequently, present petition is allowed. Respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3 are commanded to accord affiliation to the petitioner institution for B.Ed. courses for academic session 2013-14 without any undue delay, in any case, within fifteen days from today. Affiliation so granted shall continue for all the academic sessions to come till recognition is withdrawn/revoked/cancelled by the Regional Committee of NCTE. Respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3 are commanded to accord affiliation to the petitioner institution for B.Ed. courses for academic session 2013-14 without any undue delay, in any case, within fifteen days from today. Affiliation so granted shall continue for all the academic sessions to come till recognition is withdrawn/revoked/cancelled by the Regional Committee of NCTE. It is further made clear that if certain irregularities, shortcomings or violation of condition of recognition are noticed by the University or the State Government, they shall be at liberty to report the same to the Regional Committee of NCTE, whereupon the Regional Committee of NCTE shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 12. CLMA No. 5500 of 2014 also stands disposed of accordingly.