ORDER : ALOK SHARMA, J. 1. Both the petitions are identical and hence being disposed of under this judgment. The facts in SBCWP No. 16704/2017 titled J.M B.S.T.C College v. Coordinator, BSTC 2017 will however be adverted to for the purpose of disposing of these petitions. 2. This petition J.M B.S.T.C College v. Coordinator, BSTC 2017 has been filed with the following prayers:— 1. By an appropriate order or direction to the respondent no. 1 to include the name of the petitioner's institution in running counseling BSTC-2017. 2. By an appropriate order or direction to the respondent no. 1 to allot the students for the academic sessions 2017-18 for B.S.T.C course to petitioner's institution. 3. By an appropriate order or direction to the respondent no. 1 to grant damage as compensation if failed to participate and allotment of students for the academic sessions 2017-18 for B.S.T.C course to petitioner's institution. 4. Any other which this Hon'ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioner. 3. Admittedly the petitioner-College has recognized by the NRC, Jaipur for conducting a Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed) Course in the Academic Year 2017-18. For reasons of ongoing litigation during which the students of the petitioner-College were admitted to the D.El.Ed Course in the Academic Years 2015-16 and 16-17 under the interim order of this Court in DB Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1068/2015 & others, it was granted temporary affiliation under the orders dated 21.12.2015 and 18.07.2016 passed by the Directorate of Elementary Education, Bikaner for the Academic Years 15-16 and 16-17. A matter related to the same issue as in DB Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1068/2015 appears to have also travelled to the Apex Court, as submitted by both the counsel for the parties. In the said case titled State of Rajasthan v. LBS B.ed College [(2016) 16 SCC 110] the Apex Court held as under:— 17. In course of hearing, we have been apprised that NCTE has granted recognition to some of the institutions. As the recognition has already been granted, the controversy with regard to the said institutions shall stand closed. In the said case titled State of Rajasthan v. LBS B.ed College [(2016) 16 SCC 110] the Apex Court held as under:— 17. In course of hearing, we have been apprised that NCTE has granted recognition to some of the institutions. As the recognition has already been granted, the controversy with regard to the said institutions shall stand closed. Needless to say, in future, whenever an application is received under the Regulations for grant of recognition, NCTE shall be guided by its own Regulations and the judgments of this Court and the State shall remain bound by the principles set out hereinabove. Needless to say, NCTE shall take into consideration the recommendations and views of the State despite the fact that it has the final say. 4. In terms of the principle enunciated in the judgment of the Apex Court in the aforesaid case i.e. State of Rajasthan v. LBS B.Ed College (supra) the entitlement of the petitioner-College to conduct the D.El.Ed course in view of the recognition granted by the NRC for Academic Years 2015-2016 and 2016-17 was established. The petitioner-College thus appears to have taken a view that a NOC from the State Government for the Academic Year 2017-18 to run the D.El.Ed course was not required. But a NOC not having applied for or granted by the State Government for Academic Year 2017-18 it was not included in the list of institutions/Colleges for admission of students to its D.El.Ed course. 5. Alerted the petitioner-College appears to have then applied for NOC on 05.05.2017 Thereupon the application was processed by the Government at various levels and the NOC for running the D.El.Ed Course Academic Year 2017-18 came to be issued to the petitioner-College on 17.08.2017 On 18.08.2017 affiliation followed. But in the meantime, the first and second round of counselling for admission into the D.El.Ed course Academic Year 2017-18, in the institutions recognized by the NRC and to whom NOC has been issued by the State Government, came to be completed. In the circumstances vide letter dated 18.08.2017 the petitioner-College required the Coordinator, BSTC, (D.El.Ed), 2017 at Kota requiring to be considered for admission of students into D.El.Ed Course at the College in Academic year 2017-18 in the third round of counselling. That third round of counselling however did not happen. In the circumstances vide letter dated 18.08.2017 the petitioner-College required the Coordinator, BSTC, (D.El.Ed), 2017 at Kota requiring to be considered for admission of students into D.El.Ed Course at the College in Academic year 2017-18 in the third round of counselling. That third round of counselling however did not happen. The petitioner-College has now approached this Court by way of this petition filed on 20.09.2017 with the prayers detailed hereinabove. 6. Mr. R.K Agarwal Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. O.P Sharma, for the petitioner, submitted that the delay in the grant of NOC and the following affiliation is not attributable to the petitioner-College but wholly to the account of the respondent-State and the Directorate of Elementary Education, Bikaner—the affiliating body for the D.El.Ed course. It was submitted that resultantly thus for non-admission of the students to the petitioner-College in its D.El.Ed course for the Academic Year 2017-18 despite all requisite permissions obtaining is wholly arbitrary and unjust. It was submitted that in the event of the students being admitted even now to the D.El.Ed Course Academic Year 2017-18 by the special round of counselling there is enough time for the students so admitted to have 200 working days for classes/training to be eligible to write the annual examination at the ending of the Academic Year 2017-18. 7. The defence of the Coordinator, BSTC (D.El.Ed), 2017 represented through Mrs. Anita Agarwal, is that the third round of counselling for admission into the D.El.Ed Course was not held in view of the fact that in terms of the instructions issued by the State Government it could be so held only in the event of 2% seats of the total numbers of seats in the D.El.Ed Course sanctioned/approved/recognized by NRC at various Colleges in the State of Rajasthan were vacant. The request of the petitioner-College to be considered in the third round of counselling in terms of its letter dated 18.08.2017 thus, could not be acted upon as the aforesaid 2% of seats in the D.El.Ed course were not vacant. Mrs. Anita Agarwal submitted that even otherwise admission to D.El.Ed course cannot be permitted in November, 2017 as the year end annual examination for Academic Year 2017-18 will be conducted in May-June 2018 by which time students now admitted will not and cannot in any reasonable manner have the mandatorily required of 200 days of classes/training to write the year end examination. 8. 8. Mr. S.K Gupta, AAG appearing with Mr. Y.S Jadoun also submitted over two months have lapsed since the commencement of class in D.El.Ed Course Academic Year 2017- 18. Admissions cannot now be granted at this belated stage. It was submitted that application for affiliation having been filed by the petitioner-College on 05.05.2017 three months time for processing the said application and grant of NOC is not excessive as the State machinery is complex and it takes time to process the application, issue requisite instructions for inspection and the matter being considered at various levels before the NOC is issued. He submitted that even otherwise the petitioner-College had in the first instance vide letter dated 18.08.2017 only required the Coordinator, BSTC, D.El.Ed, 2017 to consider it for being allocated students in the third round of counselling. This third round of counselling as submitted by Mrs. Anita Agarwal was not held for reasons of the pre-condition thereof not being satisfied. The petitioner-College cannot now change its earlier stated case in its letter dated 18.08.2017 and pray for special round of counselling for admission of students to its D.El.Ed Course Academic Year 2017-18. Mr. S.K Gupta, AAG then submitted that in the event if any directions were to be issued by this Court for admission of students into the D.El.Ed course in Academic Year 2017-18 in the month of November, it would create havoc with the academic calendar for the D.El.Ed course and end-up rushing the students through classes and training to meet attendance requirement before the annual examination without acquisition of necessary skills and learning essential to teach at the primary level. Mr. S.K Gupta, then pointed out that the petitioner has also prayed for damages in the alternative which remedy can be availed by it laying a civil suit. If it so laid, such a suit will be addressed on the evidence before the Trial Court as to what where the reasons for the delay in grant of NOC/recognition to the petitioner-College, who was responsible, if at all, therefor and appropriate relief if warranted thereon will be granted. 9. Heard. Considered. 10. The importance of primary education cannot be over emphasized. It is the essential building block for students for further study. State of Primary Education in the country for which the D.El.Ed course trains teachers is universally acknowledged to be abysmal. 9. Heard. Considered. 10. The importance of primary education cannot be over emphasized. It is the essential building block for students for further study. State of Primary Education in the country for which the D.El.Ed course trains teachers is universally acknowledged to be abysmal. It is not a secret, for one, that substantial percentage of Class V students cannot read the text of Class-2, nor solve the arithmetic problems designed for Class-2. 11. It is the duty of all, the Government, Regulatory Bodies and the Courts to ensure that the quality of Primary Education is not compromised in any eventuality. For the discharge of this responsibility, the admission processes, the academic calendar and teaching/training modules have to be safeguarded without compromise. Two rounds of counselling were visualized by policy experts for admission to D.El.Ed course with a last date for the purpose and for the commencement and conduct of classes during the academic year. A third round of counselling was contemplated if 2% of vacant seats with reference to the aggregate number of seats in all institutions running D.El.Ed courses in the state obtained. No special rounds of counselling was provided under the policy for admissions to the D.El.Ed course mid way in an academic year. If the policy of the State is to be breached for purported reasons of equity with reference to facts in a given case, mid-session special counselling permitted and resultantly admissions made several months after the commencement of the academic year it would willy-nilly dilute the standard of the D.El.Ed course designed by experts to spread over 10 months and end-up rushing the students through classes in a couple of month less. Inevitably such compressed course teaching/training will compromise the quality of education at the primary level. That risk and responsibility by breaching State policy designed by academic experts cannot be arrogated to itself by the Court which constitutionally can duly adjudicate and protect legal and fundamental rights. 12. The academic calendar can not to be tinkered with and students can be admitted to a course only within the time prescribed to read, learn and train as required in the estimation of experts in education. Teacher Training Courses cannot be rushed through with the sole intent of mechanically completing the number of learning/training days required under the NCTE Regulations for writing the year end examination. Teacher Training Courses cannot be rushed through with the sole intent of mechanically completing the number of learning/training days required under the NCTE Regulations for writing the year end examination. If in the month of November, 2017 where the course has commenced in the month of August, 2017, it were to be directed that admissions of students in the said course be made through a special round of counselling, it would be destructive of the integrity of the academic calendar designed and learning outcomes would be adversely affected. 13. Besides, in any event the petitioner-College vide its letter dated 18.08.2017 had first set up a case for being considered for allotment of students to its D.El.Ed course in the third round of counselling. That third round of counselling was not held as per Government's policy and the pre-condition therefore not being satisfied. The petitioner-College as an after thought cannot now claim a special round of counselling for admission into its D.El.Ed Course in this belated petition filed on 20.09.2017 The ground of equity is also not available to the petitioner-College as it itself appears to have applied for a NOC/from the State Government on 05.05.2017 for Academic Year 2017-18 when as per NCTE Regulations of 2014 who listically construed, such NOC ought to have been applied for, as submitted by Mr. S.K Gupta latest by the month of May 2016 i.e the preceding year. 14. In the facts of the case I am therefore not inclined to direct, as prayed for, that a special round of counselling be conducted for admission of the students to the petitioner-College's D.El.Ed course for the Academic Year 2017-18. 15. The petitions stand dismissed accordingly with liberty to the petitioner/s, as prayed for in the alternative, to lay a suit for damages against the State Government. 16. It would be however appropriate to clarify that as to whether the State Government procrastinated on the petitioner College's application for grant of NOC for the Academic Year 2017-18 or the college itself belatedly applied therefore, is best left to be determined as a question of fact with reference to the NCTE Regulations, 2014 by the Trial Court. 16. It would be however appropriate to clarify that as to whether the State Government procrastinated on the petitioner College's application for grant of NOC for the Academic Year 2017-18 or the college itself belatedly applied therefore, is best left to be determined as a question of fact with reference to the NCTE Regulations, 2014 by the Trial Court. The petitioner-College, if advised, would be free to lay a suit for damages against the State for the alleged reason of the delay on its part in issuing the NOC for Academic Year 2017-18 entailing financial loss from non-admission of students to its D.El.Ed Course to the extent permitted by NRC in Academic Year 2017-18. In the event of such a suit for damages being laid by the petitioner-College, it be addressed and adjudicated by the Trial Court on the evidence laid before it and obtaining law without being influenced by the observations of this Court. 17. A copy of this judgment be placed on the file of SBCWP No. 16425/2017.