JUDGMENT Rakesh Tiwari and Amar Singh Chauhan,JJ. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on Delay Condonation Application and perused the affidavit filed in support thereof. Cause shown for delay in filing the special appeal is sufficient. Delay is condoned. The Delay Condonation Application is allowed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties on merits of the special appeal also and perused the record. 3. This Special Appeal has been preferred challenging the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment and order dated 3.7.2010 passed by the Writ Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 677 of 2010, Amrit Bhushan Singh and others versus State of U.P. & others along with other connected connected Writ Petition Nos. 17311, 4192 & 15915 of 2010 and 62549 of 2009, whereby the aforesaid writ petitions were allowed. 4. Brief facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that State Government authorized Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra to conduct Joint Entrance Examination for B.Ed. Course, 2008-2009. Pursuant to the said authorization given by the State Government, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra on 20.8.2008 issued advertisement for holding of combined examination. A corrigendum was also issued again on 13.9.2008 wherein date of joint entrance examination was fixed for 19.10.2008. Each one of the petitioners claim that they undertook aforementioned joint entrance test on 19.10.2008 and thereafter, result of aforementioned examination was declared and said result was pasted on official website of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra. Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur was assigned as counseling center to all the petitioners and said University in its turn enabled the petitioners to complete their admission formalities as per their rank from the list of the colleges shown by the authorities. Each and every information of the counseling i.e. center of the counseling, date and admission for counseling was available on the website of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra. Petitioners appeared at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur for counseling and out of 30 colleges available on the website, Serial No. 1 to 27 were affiliated with Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur, while colleges of Serial No. 28 to 30 were affiliated with Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University, Jaunpur. Petitioners deposited requisite counseling fee of Rs. 500/- with the counseling centre whereupon registration slip was issued in favour of each one of the petitioner. Petitioners of Civil Misc. Petitioners deposited requisite counseling fee of Rs. 500/- with the counseling centre whereupon registration slip was issued in favour of each one of the petitioner. Petitioners of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 677 of 2010, Writ Petition No. 62549 of 2009, Writ Petition No. 17311 of 2010 and Writ Petition No. 15915 of 2010 gave choice for Dulari Devi Degree College, Bhikhampur, District Deoria, whereas petitioners of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4192 of 2010 gave choice for Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak Post Graduate college, Anand Nagar, Mahrajganj. Petitioners were allocated institution of their choice and they got admission by provisional allotment of seats and petitioners were asked to report to their respective colleges by 27.4.2009 for admission, failing which provisional allotment of seat was to be considered as cancelled. Petitioners claim that within the time frame provided for, they approached their respective institution, joined the same and they have been attending the college and perused the course regularly. Petitioners while pursuing their study, acquired knowledge that institution in question had no authority to take admission of B.Ed. Course for the academic year 2008-2009 and in view of absence of recognition by N.C.T.E. under N.C.T.E. Act, 1993 their pursuing of studies in the institution in question is of no consequence. In this background complaining that it is matter of public fraud by statutory body, as in spite of fact that institution was not at all accorded recognition by N.C.T.E., said institutions were shown in the list of the institution wherein admissions were to be offered through State Sponsored Joint Entrance Examination of B.Ed. and in unrecognized colleges, petitioners have been sent for admission and in such a situation request had been made for justice being done by according relief as has been claimed in the bunch of writ petitions. The writ petitions were allowed vide judgment and order dated 3.7.2015. Aggrieved, the State-appellants have preferred this special appeal. 5. and in unrecognized colleges, petitioners have been sent for admission and in such a situation request had been made for justice being done by according relief as has been claimed in the bunch of writ petitions. The writ petitions were allowed vide judgment and order dated 3.7.2015. Aggrieved, the State-appellants have preferred this special appeal. 5. The aforesaid judgment and order is challenged on the ground that the Writ Court was not justified in awarding compensation against the State Government as it had not committed any fraud or illegality, it only recommended for grant of affiliation believing the categorical comments given by the authorities of the University of Gorakhpur, without thoroughly verifying the records while forwarding the application and other records of the college to the State Government for obtaining its recommendation for grant of affiliation to the concerned college. It is stated that admittedly the affiliated college had no recognition from NCTE, therefore, it was not entitled to admit the respondents-student after counseling and that the liability, if any, lies with the University which forwarded the application and the papers of the college along with its express comments that the college is already recognized by the NCTE and fulfills all the requisite conditions for grant of affiliation. 6. It is submitted that the State Government is not at fault, if at all there is any fault, it lies with the University and the college, which are basically responsible for committing fraud against the students, apart from the facts that the respondents-student are equally responsible for taking admission in the college. Last but not the least, it is argued that the petitioners of Writ Petition No. 677 of 2010 had demanded compensation only against the Gorakhpur University and Dulari Devi Degree College, Deoria but not against the State Government. Therefore, the Writ Court has unjustifiably awarded compensation against the State Government. 7. Mrs. Subhash Rathi, learned Addl. Chief Standing counsel submits inter-alia that the State is only challenging the part of the order by which the State is liable to pay compensation to the students. 8. Therefore, the Writ Court has unjustifiably awarded compensation against the State Government. 7. Mrs. Subhash Rathi, learned Addl. Chief Standing counsel submits inter-alia that the State is only challenging the part of the order by which the State is liable to pay compensation to the students. 8. Sri J.J. Munir, learned counsel for the respondents submits that admittedly the students were admitted to the college which has not been recognized by NCTE for which the State has conducted an Entrance Examination, therefore, the State can not be fasten with liability by merely showing that the students have not suffered any loss of session for the reason that the students appeared in the examination was declared zero session; that they were to be admitted in next session; that the students have incurred a lot of expenses and suffered mental agony in fighting their cases for their legal rights, therefore, the State is also responsible to pay compensation to the students at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per student. 9. The Writ Court has considered the stand taken by Dulari Devi Degree College, Deoria, Gorkhapur University and the State Government as well as the relevant provisions of regulations 7,8,9 11,14, 15 and 16 of (National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations, 2007 regarding recognition of institutions offering course or training in teacher education and Section 16 NCTE Act and held that- "However, in the facts of the present case, as petitioners have not manipulated anything and to the contrary record in question clearly reflects that under State Sponsored Test conducted by Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra, petitioners appeared and thereafter were declared successful, and in the list of the college, which was admittedly supplied by the University for counseling they were accorded admission in the said respective institution. Here petitioners before this court are at not at all fault and they have been accorded admission in un-recognised institution of the NCTE for academic session 2008-2009, on account of there being gross negligence on the part of the University-authority/ State in not being vigilant words to their obligation, the institution in question succeeded in getting its name included in the list of recognised institution and thus perpetuated fraud on the students. Fact of the matter is that petitioners are not at all fault and in this situation and in this background, as it has been found that both the institutions are un-recognized for the academic year 2008-2009, in such a situation this court directs management of both the institutions to return entire fees to the petitioners alongwith 9% simple interest within next one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order." 10. In so far as compensation is concerned, the Writ Court held thus: - "Compensation is also being accorded for the wrong which has been done on account of gross negligence on the part of the State Authority including University and on account of misrepresentation on the part of the institution concerned. One academic year of the students cannot be returned back. Compensation can always be awarded when there is infringement of States obligation, in proceedings under Article 226, by-passing the old doctrine of relegating aggrieved to the remedies available in civil law suits, and current judicial trend is to provide expeditious relief to an individual . Court of law cannot close its consciousness and aliveness to stark realties, by adopting justice oriented approach. In the facts of present case driving the students to civil court to contest litigation, when they are in such stage of career will not at all be appropriate, when either they should be in classroom or preparing themselves to settle them selves. In this background in order to bring their agony to an end, as State Government/University, Deen Dayal Upadhaya, University Gorakhpur and respective institution all have contributed to such situation, compensation of Rs One lac is awarded to each student. Out of this one lac rupees fifty thousand each shall be paid to the student by the Management of the institution within two months from the date of judgment. Remaining fifty thousand amount shall be paid by State Government/ University in equal proportion, to the students concern within the same period as mentioned above. State Government/University, would be entitled to recover the said amount, from its erring official/employees after making due enquiry into the matter and after fixing due responsibility in accordance with law." 11. While allowing the writ petitions the Writ Court in paragraph 11 held thus: - "11. The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs. The judgment and order dated 31-10-2003 of the High Court is set aside. While allowing the writ petitions the Writ Court in paragraph 11 held thus: - "11. The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs. The judgment and order dated 31-10-2003 of the High Court is set aside. The respondents are directed to give admission to the appellant in any one of the State medical colleges forthwith. In case the State seats have already been filled up, one extra seat shall be created for her. On the parameters as set out as petitioners had undertaken entrance test and admittedly have been accorded admission. Had State/University-authority been vigilant, such situation would never have occurred and petitioners would not have been put in such great dis-advantageous situation in such a situation and in this background, it is hereby directed that as academic session 2009-2010 has been declared to be zero session, in such a situation and in this background it is hereby directed that for academic session 2010-2011 State Government shall make arrangement of admission of these students in any affiliated college of Deen Dayal Upadhaya University, Gorakhpur without asking them to undertake any regular process of examination etc on the basis of their merit status in the earlier examination, preferably within period of next two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. For this purpose State Government shall call for the list of private affiliated college, affiliated to Deen Dayal Upadhaya University, Gorakhpur, wherein B.Ed. course, approved by NCTE is imparted and in the said institution, students be distributed in equal proportion as per their merit status and choice. With these observations, writ petitions are allowed." 12. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record we are of the considered opinion that the duty lay heavily upon the shoulder of the State Government which had conducted the Entrance Examination for taking admission in the B.Ed. Course 2009-10 and after declaring zero session they were admitted subsequently in 2010-11. Not only the State Government was merely responsible for these acts but also its officials have failed to discharge their duties as they had not verified the documents sent by the college and forwarded by the authority of the University. Therefore, the State Government is also responsible for payment of compensation along with University and the college. 13. Not only the State Government was merely responsible for these acts but also its officials have failed to discharge their duties as they had not verified the documents sent by the college and forwarded by the authority of the University. Therefore, the State Government is also responsible for payment of compensation along with University and the college. 13. We find that the Writ Court has directed that the State Government would be entitled to recover the said amount from its erring official/employees after making due enquiry into the matter and after fixing due responsibility in accordance with law. Thus, the State Government by this appeal wanted to get an interim order so that it may not have to proceed against the erring official/employees in departmental proceedings for recovery of the amount which the State ought to have paid to the students. 14. Learned Standing Counsel has not been able to inform the Court that the departmental enquiry was proceeded against how many erring official/employees for the purpose of the recovery of the amount of compensation and also the fact as to whether any such compensation as directed by the impugned order has been paid to the students or not as there is no interim order in this case. The natural course for the State to have complied with the impugned order dated 3.7.2010. Almost five and a half years have elapsed since the date of passing of the order and taking up the case today, the State has not complied with the order. 15. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order of the Writ Court. The State Government is directed to make payment and comply with the order of this Court dated 3.7.2010 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 677 of 2010 forthwith. In case the amount of compensation is not paid to the students, they shall be paid interest also for the aforesaid period from the date of the impugned order up to the date of admission within a period of 3 months from today at the rate of 6% simple interest per annum. 16. The Special Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. 17. 16. The Special Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. 17. However, the matter shall be listed on 8th March, 2016 and 11th April, 2016 only for the purpose of monitoring it as to whether the order of this Court is complied with on the aforesaid two dates. The State Government shall file an affidavit showing progress made in compliance of the order of this Court.