JUDGMENT : The Court made the following common order:- As the issue in these two writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are being disposed of by way of this common order. 2. These two writ petitions are filed to declare the action of 3rd and 4th respondents in not granting the recognition for annual intake of 200 students 4 units for admission into Bachelor of Education Courses for the academic year 2024-2025 as arbitrary and the petitioner-colleges unable to participate total 200 intake in admission process for regular B.Ed., Course for the academic year 2024-2025 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct 3rd and 4th respondents to issue Formal Recognition for another seats in addition to existing seats to the petitioner-colleges for total annual intake of 200 students 4 units and permit to participate in admission process for total intake of 200 students 4 units for the academic year 2024-2025 to the said courses. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-Colleges, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education for respondent No.1, Ms S.Parineeta, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, Sri V.Hemanth Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent 3 and 4 and Sri Murali Lincoln, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5. 4. The petitioner-colleges are seeking a direction from this Court for respondents 3 & 4 to increase the number of additional intake seats beyond the existing ones, which have not been considered, hence, these writ petitions. 5. In this regard, it is appropriate to refer Sections 12 and 14 of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 which is extracted here under: Section 12 : Functions of Council. 5. In this regard, it is appropriate to refer Sections 12 and 14 of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 which is extracted here under: Section 12 : Functions of Council. It shall be the duty of the Council to take all such steps as it may think fit for ensuring planned and co-ordinated development of teacher education and for the determination and maintenance of standards for teacher education and for the purposes of performing its functions under this Act, the Council may— (a) undertake surveys and studies relating to various aspects of teacher education and publish the result thereof; (b) made recommendations to the Central and State Governments, Universities, University Grants Commission and recognized institutions in the matter of preparation of suitable plans and programmes in the field of teacher education; (c) co-ordinate and monitor teacher education and its development in the country; (d) lay down guidelines in respect of minimum qualifications for a person to be employed as a teacher in schools or in recognized institutions; (e) lay down norms for any specified category of courses or trainings in teacher education, including the minimum eligibility criteria for admission thereof, and the method of selection of candidates, duration of the course, course contents and mode of curriculum; (f) lay down guidelines for compliance by recognized institutions, for starting new courses or training, and for providing physical and instructional facilities, staffing pattern and staff qualifications; (g) lay down standards in respect of examinations leading to teacher education qualifications, criteria for admission to such examinations and schemes of courses or training; (h) lay down guidelines regarding tuition fees and other fees chargeable by recognized institutions; (i) promote and conduct innovation and research in various areas of teacher education and disseminate the results thereof; (j) examine and review periodically the implementation of the norms, guidelines and standards laid down by the Council, and to suitably advise the recognized institutions; (k) evolve suitable performance appraisal systems, norms and mechanisms for enforcing accountability on recognized institutions; (l) formulate schemes for various levels of teacher education and identify recognized institutions and set up new institutions for teacher development programmes; (m) take all necessary steps to prevent commercialization of teacher education; and (n) perform such other functions as may be entrusted to it by the Central Government. Section 14 : "Recognition of Institutions offering course or training in teacher education. Section 14 : "Recognition of Institutions offering course or training in teacher education. (1) Every institution offering or intending to offer a course or training the 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. (2) The fee to be paid along with the application under Subsection (1) shall be such as may be prescribed. (3) On receipt of an application by the regional Committee from any institution concerned such other particulars as it may consider necessary, it shall:-- (a) if it is satisfied that such institution has adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and that it fulfils such other conditions required for proper functioning of the institution for a course or training in teacher education, as may be determined by regulations, pass an order granting recognition to such institution, subject to such conditions as may be determined by regulations; or (b) if it is of the opinion that such institution docs not fulfill the requirements laid down in sub-Clause (a), pass an order refusing recognition to such institution for reasons to be recorded in writing: Provided that before passing an order under subclause (b), the Regional Committee shall provide a reasonable opportunity to the concerned institution for making a written representation. (4) Every order granting or refusing recognition to an institution for a course or training in teacher education under Sub-section (3) shall be published in the Official Gazette and communicated in writing for appropriate action to such institution and to the concerned examining body, the local authority or the State Government and the Central Government. (5) 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). (5) 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). (6) Every examining body shall, on receipt of the order under Sub-section (4),-- (a) grant affiliation to the institution, where recognition has been granted; or (b) cancel the affiliation of the institution, where recognition has been refused. 6. On reading of the statutes it requires the Council to grant recognition by taking note of adequate financial resources of the educational institution, accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and such other conditions. The object of the Act is to enhance the standard of the teachers who are to impart education at various levels for providing physical and instructional facilities, staffing pattern and staff qualifications. 7. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2013) 2 SCC 617 and in State of Rajasthan Vs. LBS B.Ed. College & Ors., (2016) 16 SCC 110 held that the views of the State Government are to be taken into consideration by NCTE, which is the final authority and the decision taken by it would be binding on the respective parties, State will have no further say in the matter and decision of NCTE would prevail. 8. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court referred above the decision of the NCTE prevails, that the NCTE has the authority and jurisdiction to grant approval to institutions after evaluating the infrastructure they provide. This principle also applies to the increase the strength or number of seats of the institution. To allow any additional seats the respondents have to follow guidelines and regulations of the Council under the Act. The Council is vested with powers to permit additional seats basing upon infrastructure and accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and such other conditions and standards for the academic year 2024-25. The decision of the Council under the Act is final. 9. To issue a direction or writ of mandamus, the petitioner-Colleges must show that the actions of the State or its instrumentality or any public authority or person whose actions demonstrably arbitrary, capricious, irrational, discriminatory or violative of constitutional or statutory provisions, otherwise, the Court cannot go into the wisdom of the State policy. 9. To issue a direction or writ of mandamus, the petitioner-Colleges must show that the actions of the State or its instrumentality or any public authority or person whose actions demonstrably arbitrary, capricious, irrational, discriminatory or violative of constitutional or statutory provisions, otherwise, the Court cannot go into the wisdom of the State policy. The decision is solely rests on wisdom of the Council whether to permit additional intake. 10. Even assuming that the petitioner-colleges argue that the fact a similarly situated college was granted permission for additional intake, while the petitioner-colleges was not, is not a sufficient ground to direct the respondents. In support of this proposition, this Court refers to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Chandigarh Admn. v. Jagjit Singh, (1995) 1 SCC 745 , it was held that the respondent-authority has passed a particular order in the case of another person similarly situated can never be the ground for issuing a writ in favour of the petitioner on the plea of discrimination. The order in favour of the other person might be legal and valid or it might not be. Following the aforementioned judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Usha Mehta vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, (2012) 12 SCC 419 , held that a mandate cannot be issued to the State to commit illegality or pass a wrong order because in another case such an illegality has been committed and wrong order was passed. 11. Hence, it is for the Council to consider the case of the petitioner-colleges request, whether to permit the petitioner-institutions to increase the intake capacity, for the relief prayed that a judicial review can neither expand nor direct the Council to permit the petitioner-institutions to allow giving admissions as requested. This Court cannot determine in the exercise of the power of judicial review. The intake capacity should be allowed or not be allowed is a matter for the Council under the Act, which is based upon the infrastructure provided by the petitioner-colleges. The petitioner-colleges are hereby directed to approach the concerned authorities for their relief and this Court cannot direct the respondents to permit or grant additional seats to the petitioner-colleges that is for the State to consider as there is any requirement to grant additional seats. 12. With the said observation, these Writ Petitions stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. With the said observation, these Writ Petitions stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.