Skip to content


Rosammal Memorial Minority College of Education (Women), Rep. by its Correspondent Vs. Dr. S. Kalaichelvan, Advocate. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberL.P.A. No.3 of 2016 & W.A.No. 1166 of 2016
Judge
AppellantRosammal Memorial Minority College of Education (Women), Rep. by its Correspondent
RespondentDr. S. Kalaichelvan, Advocate.
Excerpt:
.....be allocated as even the existing seats have not been filled in primarily because it is now a two-years degree course. 6. the appellant is, thus, now confronted with the situation where it can only begin the two years degree course for 2017-2018 and thus, we asked the learned additional advocate general as to what has to be done by the appellant for the same so that the next year also the appellant is not in the same boat. 7. learned additional advocate general, on instructions, states that there is no impediment now to grant affiliation to the appellant for 2017-2018. 8. we, thus, direct that the application of the appellant already submitted should now be considered for affiliation for the academic year 2017-2018 within the maximum period of two (2) months from today. 9. the appeals,.....
Judgment:

(Prayer: Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the common order dated 30.08.2016 passed in Contempt Petition No.1497 of 2016 and W.P.No.23770 of 2016 on the file of this Court.)

Common Judgment

1. The endeavour of the appellant to convert from a Diploma B.Ed. degree course to an one year B.Ed. degree course and thereafter, to the now prevailing two years B.Ed. course seems to have no end, as, on one pretext or the other, the appellant has been denied the right to carry on the course.

2. We may note that it is as early as on 01.09.2011 that the appellant moved an application for starting the one year B.Ed. degree course. But the same was kept pending and then, rejected beyond the time prescribed under the Regulations in terms of an order dated 13.01.2012. The appellant assailed this order in a writ petition, but the same was dismissed on 04.06.2012, which resulted in the writ appeal being filed against the same, in which interim orders were granted on 16.10.2012 directing the officials of the NCTE to conduct inspection. This direction was well within the time required, but the NCTE failed to comply with the directions and did not conduct the inspection as directed within the stipulated time. The appellant had to file contempt petition, which was met by an endeavour of the NCTE to seek review after a delay of 117 days, but those applications were dismissed. The result was that the Division Bench, by passage of time, could not give the appellant the benefit of recognition for the year 2013-2014, but only from 2014-2015 on account of the violations of the directions by the NCTE. This judgment is reported as 2014-2-MLJ-305 (Rosammal Memorial Minority vs. Member Secretary, NCTE).

3. A simultaneous development at that stage was that the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed directions for appointment of a Committee chaired by Late Justice J.S. Verma (Retired Chief Justice), which opined that the B.Ed. course should be a two-years course. This was accepted and in the sequel to that, the new regulations came into being on 28.11.2014. Practically, for the appellant, thus even 2014-2015 became an infructuous exercise in view of the new regulations having come into force.

4.We have recorded the aforesaid facts since the appellant, vide order dated 25.05.2015, has been granted recognition for the two years duration course from 2015-2016, but that also went into another round on the issue of the requirement of seeking fresh affiliation. It is conceded by the learned Additional Advocate General that had the appellant been granted recognition for 2013-2014, there would not have been any problem whatsoever because then the appellant would have been treated as an existing institution, but since the appellant was given affiliation only from 2014-2015, that could not happen.

5. Learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, states that there is no impediment now on the appellant proceeding with the two years duration course and being so affiliated, but the time period even for 2015-2016 is over and even for 2016-2017, the last date for submission of applications was 31.07.2016, counseling was over and the students have been allocated to the existing colleges. On our query, we are informed that there are no remaining students to be allocated as even the existing seats have not been filled in primarily because it is now a two-years degree course.

6. The appellant is, thus, now confronted with the situation where it can only begin the two years degree course for 2017-2018 and thus, we asked the learned Additional Advocate General as to what has to be done by the appellant for the same so that the next year also the appellant is not in the same boat.

7. Learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, states that there is no impediment now to grant affiliation to the appellant for 2017-2018.

8. We, thus, direct that the application of the appellant already submitted should now be considered for affiliation for the academic year 2017-2018 within the maximum period of two (2) months from today.

9. The appeals, accordingly, stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

10. List for compliance on 09.12.2016.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //