the following persons attended the meeting - src and minutes 2015/minutes/minutes of 279th... ·...

279 Meeting of SRC 1st February, 2015

(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

1

SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION BANGALORE

Minutes of the 279th Meeting of SRC held at the Conference Hall of NCTE,

Bangalore on 1st February, 2015

The following Persons attended the Meeting:-

1. Shri S.Sathyam. I.A.S (Retired) - Chairman

2. Prof. K.Dorasami - Member

3. Prof. Sandeep Ponnala , - Member

4. Prof. M.S. Lalithamma - Member

5. Dr. R. Ayyappan (TN). - Member

6. Mrs. M.S.S. Lakshmi Watts(AP) - Member

7. Dr. P. Revathi Reddy. Non-Member

Regional Director - Convenor

1.The following Members did not attend the Meeting.

Dr. M.P. Vijayakumar. I.A.S (Retd). Member, Dr. (Smt.) Padma Sarangapani, Member, and the Representatives of the Govts. Of Karnataka, Kerala, Telangana, Lakshadweep, Pondicherry & Andaman & Nicobar Islands.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

2

SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

BANGALORE

Minutes OF 279th MEETING OF SRC-NCTE

Sl.

No.

Brief Description

Remarks of SRC

• Confirmation of Minutes of 278th

Meeting of SRC held on 25

January, 2015.

Confirmed

• Action Taken Report (ATR) on the

Minutes of 277th Meeting held on

on 20 – 22 January, 2015.

Consideration of Court case, pending application, request for withdrawal, (Vol-1)

Sl.N

o.

Code No

Course

Name of the

institutions

State

Remarks

1. SRCAPP2058

D.P.Ed

Mokshitha

College of

Physical

Education,

Singarayakon

da , Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Mokshitha College of Physical Education, Kasara No. 492/1, 493, Plot No. 1-247A,

Somarajupali Village, Singarayakonda Post Office, Kondepi Taluka,

Singarayakonda City, Andhra Pradesh

Sri Sai Educational Society, Enimerla Road, Pamur Village, Enimerla Post Office,

Kanigiri Taluka, Pamur City, Prakasam District – 523 108, Andhra Pradesh had

applied for grant of recognition to Mokshitha College of Physical Education, Kasara

No. 492/1, 493, Plot No. 1-247A, Somarajupali Village, Singarayakonda Post Office,

Kondepi Taluka, Singarayakonda City, Andhra Pradesh for D.P.Ed Course for one

year duration under Section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional

Committee, NCTE online on 29.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the

application on 31.12.2012.

NCTE-Hqrs had directed to process the applications in accordance with NCTE

Regulations 2009, it amendment Notified on 26th November 2010 which reads as

follows:-

2 (B) for Sub Regulation (1-A) the following shall be submitted namely. 1 (1-A) (I)

the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

3

circumstances:

a) The processing fee, as provided under Rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application.

b) Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

c) Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society. Institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of online application.

The SRC in its 238th Meeting held on 05th-06th February, 2013 and on careful perusal of the original of the institution and other related documents, NCTE Act, 1993, Regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table the Regional Committee decided to reject the application on the following grounds:

• The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application.

Accordingly, a rejection letter was issued to the institution vide no.

F.No.SRCAPP2058 (2013-14)/D.P.Ed/AP/2012-13/49314 dated 06/03/2013.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs and the appellate authority vide no. F.No.89-193/2013 Appeal/10th Meeting-2013

dated 25/09/2013

stated that

“…the council concluded that the appeal deserved to be accepted and the matter

remanded to the SRC with a direction to process the application as per

Regulations.

NOW THEREFORE, the council hereby remands back the case of Mokshitha

College of Physical Education, Prakasam, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE,

for necessary action as indicated above.”

The SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25th-27th October 2013, considered the Appellate Authority order dated 25/09/2013 and decided to process the application of the said institution as per Regulations. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government

for recommendation on 29.11.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on

29.11.2013.

Southern Regional Committee in its 261st meeting held during 9th – 10th February,

2014, considered the reply of the institution to the deficiency letter and the reply was


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

4

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under :-

• The Sai Educational Society is running already B.P.Ed course (SRCAPP332) and recognition of the same was granted on 10/09/2013. This information has been suppressed by the management while replying to the deficiency letter.

• 3 year gap between B.P.Ed and D.P.Ed is not there as per NCTE regulations 2009.

Application for D.P.Ed is rejected

As per the decision of SRC, a rejection order was issued to the institution vide

F.No.SRCAPP2058/D.P.Ed/AP/2013-14/57198 dated 26/02/2014.

On 27/01/2015, the institution has submitted a written representation along with the

copy of the court order from the Hon’ble Court of Delhi at New Delhi dated 22.12.2014 in

W.P.( C ) No. 9102 of 2014.

The institution has stated as under :-

I have already applied for physical education college i.e Mokshitha College of

Physical Education, Singarayakonda of Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh

course by D.P.Ed

I am herewith submitting the Hon’ble High Court order.So kindly accept and give

permission.”

The Hon’ble Court order dated 22/12/2014 in W.P. ( C ) No. 9102 of 2014 is as

under :-

Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

A. issue an appropriate writ[s]/directions[s] or order[s] quashing and setting aside

the impugned decision taken by the SRC, NCT4E in its 261st meeting held

between 09-10.02.2014 as contained in Annexure P-1, and/or;

B. issue an appropriate writ[s]direction[s] or order[s] remanding back

the case to the SRC for further processing of the application and grant

of the Formal Recognition Order for running the D.P.Ed Course from

academic year 2015-2016, and/or;

B. Pass any such other orders/directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and

proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.?

Mr. T. Singhdev, learned counsel for respondents states that new regulations dated

28th November, 2014 have already been published in the Gazette of India on 1st

December, 2014 and the petitioner must apply afresh for the academic year 2015-


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

5

2016 in accordance with the same.

Mr. T. Singhdev also relies upon the order dated 30th July, 2014 passed by this

Court in similar facts in George College Department of Education Vs. National Council

for Teacher Education and Anr., W.P.(C) 3371/2014.

Consequently, in view of the order dated 10th September, 2013 passed by the

Supreme Court in SLP No. 4247-4248/2009 directing that all pending applications

shall be decided in accordance with new regulations, the present writ petition is

disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall apply afresh in accordance

with new regulations, if required and the same shall be considered by

respondents-NCTE/SRC for academic year 2015-2016 in accordance with new

regulations.

If any deficiency is found, the same shall be conveyed to the petitioner, who shall be

given an opportunity to remove the said deficiency, in a time bound manner. In case

the deficiencies are removed within the given time, the application shall be processed

in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations. If the deficiencies are not

removed, the application shall stand rejected.

Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with no order as

to costs.

The institution has not submitted any documents along with the letter.

The documents available in the file of SRCPP2058/D.P.Ed and SRCAPP332/B.P.Ed

(existing course).

The Committee considered the matter, Court Order dated 22.12.2014, decided as

under:

1.The Case is considered in compliance of the Court Order.

2. Advised Southern Regional Office to Issue Show Cause Notice for submission of land and building documents relating to D.P.Ed. 3.Also, obtain affidavit to adhere to the new Regulations.

2

APS02409

B.Ed

Sri Sadashiva

B.Ed College

Bagalkot

Karnataka

KA

Sri Sadashiva B.Ed College, Bagalkot District, Karnataka

Sri Sadashiva B.Ed College, Bagalkot District, Karnataka was granted recognition for offering B.Ed course on 3.2.2006 with the condition to shift to its own premises/building within 3 years from the date of recognition. The institution has submitted proposal for shifting premises and the inspection of the institution was carried out on 17.10.2010. The inspection report was placed before SRC in its 198thmeeting held on 24-26November, 2014 and the considered the V.T, VCD and all relevant documents of the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

6

institution and it was decided to issue notice. Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 11.1.2011. The institution has submitted reply on 11.2.2011. The SRC in its 201st meeting held on 22-23 February, 2011 considered the written representation and decided to issue final show cause notice. Accordingly, final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 25.3.2011. The institution has submitted the written representation on 28.4.2011. The SRC in its 205th meeting held on 18-19 May, 2011 considered the written representation and decided to serve another final show cause notice. Accordingly, final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 15.6.2011. The institution submitted the written representation on 20.7.2011. The reply was considered by SRC in its 210th meeting held on 22-23 August 2011 and the Committee considered the reply and decided to withdraw recognition for the following;

• Land documents in the name of the Society/Trust/Institution is not submitted. The institution has submitted only an affidavit instead of sale deed/registered gift deed

Accordingly, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 12.10.2011. The institution filed a court case in W.P. no. 68435 of 2012, the court direction is as follows;

“…..to direct the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and in any even within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order”.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs., and the appellate authority in its order dated 6.3.2013 confirms the order appealed against.

Again, the institution filed a court case in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No. 79186 of 2013 dated 16.7.2013. The Hon’ble Court has directed as follows;

“…..the petitioner is at liberty to approach the NCTE, in accordance with law, for grant of recognition to the petitioner to run B.Ed course, after complying the lacuna pointed out in the impugned withdrawal order dated 12.10.2011. If any application is made in this behalf by the petitioner, in accordance with law, the NCTE is at liberty to reconsider the matter in accordance with law and in the light of the law laid down by various judgments of the Supreme Court on the aspect of grant of recognition.

Petition disposed of”.

The court order was placed before SRC in its 275th meeting held on 1-2 December, 2014 and the Committee decided as follows; “…..Whenever they are ready with title to land, etc., they can make a fresh application under the new Regulations”.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

7

The same was communicated to the institution on 6.1.2015. Now, the institution as per the website information has submitted land documents. The SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th to 22nd January, 2015 considered the matter and decided to process and put up. As per the decision of SRC the application is processed. The Committee considered the matter, Court order dated 16.7.2013, decided that: 1. Case is processed and documents are examined as directed by the Court. 2. This has been directed by the Court to be treated as a fresh application.

Therefore, Advised Sothern Regional Office to obtain application fee. 3. Resibmit for consideration of restoration of recognition after completion of these formalities.

3

APS07312

B.Ed

PSB College

of Education,

Prakasam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

PSB College of Education, Parthipati Nilayam, Wood Nagar, Chirala -

523155, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh

Sri Venkateswara Educational Society, Chirala -523155, Prakasam District,

Andhra Pradesh had submitted an application to the Southern Regional

Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition to PSB College of Education,

Parthipati Nilayam, Wood Nagar, Chirala -523155, Prakasam District,

Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed Course of one year duration and was granted

recognition on 12.04.2007.

The Government of Andhra Pradesh vide letter dated.06.03.2007 forwarded a

list of institutions not recommending them with the specific reasons and with a

request to NCTE, SRC to take necessary action against the institutions. This

institution is one of the institutions not recommended by the State Government.

The SRC considered this issue in its 150th meeting held on 28th-29th December

2007 and decided to conduct the inspection of the institution under section 17 of

NCTE Act, 1993. Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was carried out on

23.04.2008.

The report was considered by SRC in its 161st meeting held on 6th-7th August

2008 whereby it was decided to issue a show cause notice as to why the

recognition granted not be withdrawn on account of following deficiencies:

• The institution has to submit modified absolute, unconditional, irrevocable lease deed for a period of 30 years for proposed B.Ed course.

• The built up space of 4567 sq.ft. is not adequate to run the B.Ed course.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

8

• The size of class rooms 273 sq.ft; and multipurpose hall 570 sq.ft. not adequate for B.Ed course.

• The visiting team observed that the Management couldn’t provide sufficient proofs with regard to infrastructure and instructional facilities.

• The labs. Classrooms, Library is inadequate and maintenance is very poor.

• The labs. Equipment in Science, Psychology, E.T. and library books are not adequate.

• The lease documents submitted not clear with regard to location of land and leased building. The Management has to provide lease land and building, approved building plan in originals for verification as per Regulations, Norms and Standards of NCTE.

• VCD is not working. The college may be requested to submit a copy of the VCD once again.

The institution submitted a reply on 27.09.2008. The Southern Regional

Committee in its 166th meeting held on 18th-19th October 2008 after careful

consideration of all aspects decided to withdraw the recognition of the

institution forthwith i.e., from the academic year 2008-2009 for the following

reason:-

1. The institution has been asked to submit modified absolute, unconditional, irrevocable lease deed for a period of 30 years for proposed B.Ed course. Instead of submitting the same it has submitted an affidavit of the lessee. Which is not a substitute of the required land document.

2. The institution did not submit any material proof of removing the deficiencies with regard to 4567 sq.ft built up space shown for B.Ed course where as 1500 sq.mts built up space is required. The institution instead of removing the deficiency submitted a penalty receipt dated.19.09.2008 issued by SJM Court, Chirala, which is not an acceptable document as a proof to removal of the deficiency with regard to built up space.

3. The institution did not submit any material proof with regard to size of the classroom, which was observed to be 273 sq.ft and multipurpose hall 570 sq.ft the reply given shows that the classroom size is 510 sq.ft and multipurpose hall is 1030 sq.ft. The institution has submitted only a building plan and certificate indicating part payment of penalty is made and the application is under scrutiny. This document does not establish in any way the change in size of rooms in the said building.

4. As per the inspection conducted under section 17 the Science, Psychology, ET labs are inadequate. In reply to show cause notice the institution claims to have removed the deficiencies by way of adding sufficient items. The copies of bills and vouchers submitted are backdated pertain to 2006 moreover instead of removing the deficiency the institution gave assurance to improve the same in future.

5. Under point no.7 of the reply dated.24.09.2008 to show cause notice the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

9

institution informed that the college building is located in the limits of Chirala Municipality in ward no.22 and the land is located near by 1 km from the building. This establishes the land and building are at different places, which does not meet the NCTE requirements.

6. The institution violated the provisions contained under various sections of NCTE Act and regulations there under.

As per the decision of SRC, withdrawal recognition issued on 22.10.2008.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to

NCTE H’qrs vide the appellate authority Order dated 19.12.2008 has

Conformed the order of SRC.

On, 23/01/2015, a Court Order is received from the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature

Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad dated 24.12.2014. The institution filed a writ petition

No.27890 of 2008 before the High Court of judicature at Hyderabad.

“ Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for

NCTE appearing for 1st and 2nd respondents, and learned counsel appearing for the

4th & 5th respondents.

This writ Petition was filed seeking to declare the action of the first respondent in

rejecting the appeal submitted by the petitioner on 28.11.2008 vide impugned

proceedings dated 16.12.2008, conforming the order of the 2nd respondent vide

proceedings dated 22.10.2008, as arbitrary and illegal.

A perusal of the record goes to show that the petitioner institution was allotted

students for the academic year 2008-2009.

The Court by order dated 22.12.2008 granted interim suspension of the impugned

proceedings and in view of the same, the petitioner –institution has been running.

In that view of the matter, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.”

The Committee considered the matter, Court order dated 24.12.2014, decided as

under:

1.Court order seen. 2.There has been no notice to us. 3.There is only an interim order. There is no final order on merits.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

10

4.Advised Southern Regional Office to ask Lawyer to file an appeal.

4

SRCAPP1790

M.P.Ed

Sri

Renugambal

College of

Physical

Education,

Tiruvannamal

ai, Tamilnadu

TN

Sri Renugambal College of Physical Education, Khasara No. 01/108, Plot no. 01,

C.C.Road, Ettivadi Village and Post, Polar Taluka, Tiruvannamalai District, Pin-

606907, Tamilnadu

Sri Renugambal Educational Trust, Plot no. 01, C.C.Road, Ettivadi Village and

Post, Polar Taluka, Thiruvannamalai District, Pin-606907,Tamilnadu had applied for

grant of recognition to Sri Renugambal College of Physical Education, Khasara No.

01/108, Plot no. 01, C.C.Road, Ettivadi Village and Post, Polar Taluka,

Tiruvannamalai District, Pin-606907, Tamilnadu for M.P.Ed Course for two years

duration under Section 15 of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee,

NCTE online on 09.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application

on 26.12.2012 along with processing fees paid through challan dt.10.12.2012 for

Rs.50100/-.

Para 7[1-A(i)] and 7[1-A(ii)] of extant NCTE Regulations published in the Gazettee of India on 31st August 2009, as amended from time to time, the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

Para 7[1-A(i)] (a) The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for

Teacher EducationRules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;

(b) Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application;

(c) Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

Para 7[1-A(ii)] The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the

circumstances referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the

applicant and refund the processing fees within 30 days of the online

submission of the application.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 238th meeting held on 5-6 February 2013 considered the matter and on careful perusal of the original file of the institution and other related documents NCTE Act 1993 Regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table. The Regional committee decided to summarily reject as per Regulations [ 7 1–A (i) ] the application on the following grounds:

•••• On-line application was submitted on 09.12.2012, whereas the hard copy of the same is submitted on 26.12.2012, as such, the Society has not dispatched the Hard copy of the application within 7 days of the submission of the on-line


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

11

application. Accordingly, a rejection letter was issued to the institution on 15.03.2013.

In the meantime, an interim court order in MP.No.1 of 2013 in W.P.10567/2013 dated

16.04.2013 filed by the institution and the court order stating as follows:-

“…Order: This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the

affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/s.R.Suresh

Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order:-

There shall be an order of injunction as prayed for.

Notice.”

An e-mail was received by SRC on 23.04.2013 from Shri.Ramachandran.A. enclosing

the court order dated 16.04.2013.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 25.04.2013 along with

enclosing original FDRs of Rs.5 lakh and Rs.3 lakh drawn on Indian Overseas Bank.

Court order dated 16.04.2013 copies enclosed. The institution stating in its reply as

follows:-

“….we have applied for recognition of M.P.Ed course to SRC, NCTE on 09.12.2012 and

our application ID is SRCAPP1790. The hard copy of the application along with

processing fee, FDR and other necessary documents on 26.12.2012 in person.

The NCTE rejected our application as per reference cited (1). No other way we

approach the Hon’ble High Court of the Madras for want of remedy. The Hon’ble High

Court of Madras issued the direction as per our prayer; the copy of the High Court order

is enclosed for your perusal.

We herewith enclosed the original FDRs of Rupees Five lakhs vide to FDR No.339059

dt. 09.07.2009 and Rupees Three Lakhs vide to FDR No492013, dt. 20.01.2012, held

with Indian Overseas Bank, Polur. Please kindly acknowledge it.

Hence, we request that the Hon’ble Authority may please consider our application for

grant of recognition to conduct M.P.Ed., course in our Physicl Educational College from

the academic year 2013-14 onwards.”

A letter dated 2.05.2013 from NCTE-Hqrs received by SRC on 06.05.2013 requesting

that to defend the case including on behalf of NCTE (Hqrs) and to file a detailed counter

affidavit before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras immediately in the light of NCTE Acts,

Rules & Regulations, and various court directions and get vacated the stay.

Accordingly, a letter to Shri. A. Sivaji, Advocate was sent on 14.05.2013 along with a

copy of NCTE-Hqrs letter.

The SRC has received a court notice dated 16.04.2013 from the Hon’ble High Court of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

12

Madras (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P.10567 of 2013 on 17.06.2013

A letter dated 18.06.2013 from NCTE-Hqrs received by SRC on 21.06.2013 stating that

forward herewith a copy of court notice dt. 16.04.2013 received from the Hon’ble court.

The matter was listed for hearing on 11.06.2013.

Accordingly, a letter to Sri.A.Sivaji, Advocate was sent on 28.06.2013.

A court notice in M.P.No.1 of 2013 in W.P.No.10567 of 2013 received from Hon’ble High

Court of Madras on 07.10.2013 stating as follows:-

“…..the above petition, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit

filed in support thereof, a copy of which is annexed hereto, the High Court will be

pleased to grant an interim order of injunction restraining the respondents from

returning the application of the petitioner dated 09.12.2012 along with processing

fee and FDR submitted for the grant of recognition for M.P.Ed course at the

petitioners institution namely Sri Renugambal College of Physical Education at

Ettivadi Village & Post, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District for the academic year

2013-14 pending disposal of the writ petition and whereas the petition will come

up for hearing on 24.10.2013, you are hereby directed to appear, in person or by

advocate, to show cause why the petitioner’s prayer should not be granted, in

default of which, the matter will be heard and decided in your absence. Notice and

injunction have been ordered by court on 16.04.2013.”

Accordingly, a letter was sent to Sri.A Sivaji, Advocate on 04.11.2013.

(Note: it is observed from the file, there is no action taken)

The institution has submitted its written representation on 15.09.2014 along with copies

of rejection order, court interim order and online application. The institution stating in its

letter as follows:-

“We have obtained interim order of injunction restraining our application M.P.Ed., dt.

09.12.2012 along with processing fee and FDR submitted for the grant of recognition for

M.P.Ed., course at the petitioners institution namely Sri Renugambal College of Physical

Education at Ettivadi Village and Post, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District, for the

academic year 2013-2014 pending disposal of the Writ Petition No. 10567 of 2013.

On 23rd April 2013, we have submitted the order of the High Court of Madras along with

orininal FDR’s for Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh) bearing the number 339059, Rs.

3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) bearing the number 492013, dt.20.01.2012 joint with

NCTE of IOB, Polur.

More than one year we have not yet received any communication from your office

regarding recognition of M.P.Ed., course. We lost two academic years even throughwe

are taking all efforts to starting M.P.Ed., course in our college.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

13

However, we request that this Hon’ble Authority may please grant recognition to start

M.P.Ed., course for the academic year 2015-16 on the basis of the processing fee of Rs.

50,100/- through ICICI bank challandt. 10.12.2012 and our application dt.26.06.2012,

the order of the Hon’ble High court and our representations.

The SRC in its 273rd meeting held on 30 September & 1 October 2014 considered the

matter, advised Southern Regional Office to ask our Lawyer to apprise the Court

concerned that, because of the Supreme Court Orders concerned this case can be

processed further only after notification of the new Regulations.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to advocate on 20.11.2014.

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing

of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on

19.12.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 16.01.2015 along

with affidavit, DD of Rs.50,000/- and relevant documents.

The SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25th January, 2015 considered the matter and the

committee decided to process and put up.

As per the decision of SRC the application is processed.

The Committee considered the matter, Court order, affidavit along with the letter

dated 16.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to Cause

Composite Inspection - D.P.Ed & M.P.Ed.

5

SRCAPP426

M.Ed

Rangumudri

M.Ed College,

Srikakulam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Rangumudri M.Ed College, Plot no. 003, Village-Iruvada, Post-Chilakalapalli, Talukavangara, District-Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh. Code/Course

SRCAPP426/M.Ed

Name the institution

Rangumudri M.Ed College,

Letter as per NCTE Hqrs guidelines dated 18.12.2014 sent on

As per the website information

Affidavit affirming adherence to Regulations 2014 received on

21.01.2005

Intake Requested. Not mentioned

Other Course offered in the institution

B.Ed, D.Ed, B.P.Ed,

Rangamudri Educational Society, Village-Chilakalapalli, Post-Chilakalapalli, Taluka-Balijipeta, Post-Chilakalapalli, District-Vizianagaram-535557, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Rangumudri M.Ed College, Plot no. 003, Village-Iruvada, Post-Chilakalapalli, Talukavangara, District-Srikakulam,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

14

Andhra Pradesh for M.Ed course of one year duration under section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 08.10.2010. The application was processed and the deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 09.12.2010. The institution submitted its written representation on 09.02.2011. The institution has submitted the documents. The SRC considered the matter in its 202nd meeting held on 14th-15th Februray, 2011 and on careful perusal of the original file of the institution and other related documents, NCTE Act 1993, Regulations and guidelines issued from time to time laid on the table, written representation from the institution, the Regional Committee decided to reject the application on the follwing grounds;-

• National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) Certificate with 'B' Grade is not submitted.

• Certified copy of the registred land documents issued by the competent authority is not submitted. The application of Rangumudri M.Ed College, Plot no. 003, Village-Iruvada, Post-Chilakalapalli, Talukavangara, District-Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh for permission to M.Ed course is hereby rejected. The original FDR No. 021910 dated 27.09.2010 of 5 lakhs issued by Andhra Bank and FDR No. 021911 dated 27.09.2010 of 3 lakhs issued by the Andhra Bank are returned herewith in original. On 21.01.2015, a letter dated 20.01.2015, along with affidavit and FDRs received by this office from Secretary & Correspondent, Rangumudri Educational Society, Vani Nagar, Chilakalapalli (post), Balijipeta (Mdl), VZM District regarding for grant of recognition to Rangumudri M.Ed College for M.Ed course to NCTE by fulfilling all the norms and standards of NCTE. And also submitted written representation to the notice. In the meantime, a letter along with original FDR;s and copy of the court order is received from the Secretary , Rangumudri Educational Society, Vani Nagar, Chilakalapalli Post, Balijipeta Mandal, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh on 29.01.2015. as under:- "The petitioner impugns an order dated 11.04.2014 passed by the Southern Regional Committee rejecting the petitioner's application for recognition of M.Ed Course. The learned counsel point out that in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court issued on 10.09.2013 in SLP No. 4247/2009 new regulations have been framed and all applications are to be considered in accordance with the said regulations. The Supreme Court had further observed as under:- "Those who are desirous of establishing teacher education colleges/instructions shall be free to make application in accordance with the new regulations. Their applications shall be decided by the competent authority keeping in view the relevant statutory provisions. All the pending applications shall also be decided in accordance with the new regulations".


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

15

In view of the above, the petitioner would be at liberty to apply afresh for the accademic session 2015-2016 in accordance with the New Regulations. Needless to mention that petitioner's application shall be considered in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. The Committee considered the matter, written representation from the institution vide letter dated 09.02.2011, decided and advised Southern Regional Office as under: 1.Cause Composite inspection - D.Ed / B.Ed / B.P.Ed / M.Ed. Ask the B.P.Ed VT to do this also. 2.Ensure that they have given affidavit for all courses to come under the new Regulations.

3.Ensure that fees have been paid in all the cases.

6

SRCAPP422

M.Ed

BS and JR

M.Ed College ,

Srikakulam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

BS and JR M.Ed College No.001, Village Akkavaram P.O.-Taluka Tekkali, District Srikakulam-532201, Andhra Pradesh. Code/Course

SRCAPP422/M.Ed


BS and JR M.Ed College

Letter as per NCTE Hqrs guidelines dated 18.12.2014 sent on

As per the website information

Affidavit affirming adherence to Regulations 2014 received on

21.01.2005

Intake Requested. Not mentioned

Other Course offered in the institution

B.Ed

Sri Salivahana Rural Educatiomnal Society, P.No.1-1-5G V.P.O, Taluka Tekkali Srikakulam-532201 Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to BS and JR M.Ed College No.001, Village Akkavaram P.O.-Taluka Tekkali, District Srikakulam-532201, Andhra Pradesh for M.Ed course of one year duration under Section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 08.10.2010. The application was processed and a deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 09.12.2010. The institution submitted its written representation on 09.02.2011 as under:- The institution has submitted the documents on 09.02.2011:- The SRC considered the matter in 202nd meeting held on 14th-15th Februray, 2011 and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

16

on careful perusal of the original file of the institution and other related documents, NCTE Act 1993, Regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table, written representation from the institution, the Regional Committee decided to reject the application on the follwing grounds;-

• National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) with 'B' Grade certificate is not submitted.

• Sy.No. starting at 277 falls under Akkavaram Panchyat and other survey nos falls under Jojipadu panchayat whereas in building plan all the survey no. are reflected for contiguous site and the plan is approved by sarpanch Akkavaram Panchyat. The application of BS and JR M.Ed College No.001, Village Akkavaram P.O.Taluk Tekkali, District Srikakulam-532201, Andhra Pradesh for permission to M.Ed course is hereby rejected. The original FDR No. 254271 dated 27.09.2010 of 5 lakhs issued by Andhra Bank and FDR No. 254272 dated 27.09.2010 of 3 lakhs issued by the Andhra Bank are returned herewith in original. As per the decision of SRC, a rejection order was issued to the insitution on 29.04.2011. On 21.01.2015, a letter dated 20.01.2015, along with affidavit is received by this office from Secretary & Correspondent, Sri Salivahana Rural Educational Society, Tekkali-532201, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh regarding grant of recognition to BS & JR M.Ed College for M.Ed course to NCTE by fulfilling all the norms and standards of NCTE. On 29.01.2015, a letter dated 28.01.2015 is received by this office from the institution along with FDRs and certified copy of the Court Judgement as under:- " The petitioner impugns an order dated 29.04.2011 passed by the Southern Regional Committee rejecting the petitioners request for grant of recognition for the M.Ed course. The learned counsel for the parties point out that the Supreme Court in its order dated 10.09.2013 passed in SLP No. 4247-4248/2009 had directed that the concerned authorities including NCTE/SRC to notify new regulations latest by dated 13.11.2013. The Supreme Court had further directed that:- Those who are desirous of establishing teacher education colleges/instructions shall be free to make application in accordance with the new regulations. Their applications shall be decided by the competent authority keeping in view the relevant statutory provisions. All the pending applications shall also be decided in accordance with the new regulations. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that the new regulations were notified on 28.11.2014. In the aforesaid circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed by the Supre,e Court in SLP No. 4247-4248/2009; the petitioner would be at liberty to apply afresh in accordance with new regulations, if required. The same


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

17

shall be considered by the respondents i.e NCTE/SRC for the academic year 2015-2016 in accordance with new regulations. If any deficiency is found, the same shall be convyed to the petitioner, who shall be given an opportunity to remove the said deficiency, in a time bound manner. In case the deficiencies are removed within the given time, the application shall be processed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations. If the deficiencies are not removed, the application shall stand rejected. No order as to costs. Since the institution is already offering B.Ed course (APS00313), The Committee considered the matter, Court order, letter dated 20.01.2015 &

28.01.2015 from the institution, decided as under:

1.Case is considered in compliance of Court Order. 2. Advised Southern Regional Office to obtain affidavit about willingness to come under new Regulations. 3.Ensure that fee has been paid.

4.Cause Composite inspection - B.Ed & M.Ed

7

APS06181

B.Ed

S.R.M. College

of Education,

vellore,

Tamilnadu

TN

S.R.M. College of Education, No. 85, Trunk Road, Valayampattu, Vaniyambadi-635751, Vellore District, Tamilnadu. S.R.M. College of Education, No. 85, Trunk Road, Valayampattu, Vaniyambadi-635751, Vellore District, Tamilnadu had submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition for Secondary (B.Ed) Course of one year from the academic session 2005-06. The application was scrutinized and the inspection of the institution was conducted and finally SRC granted recognition to the institution for B.Ed course of one year duration from the academic session 2005-2006 with an annual intake of 100 students on 28.04.2006 with a condition to shift to its own premises within three years from the date of recognition (in case of the course is started in temporary premises). The institution had submitted its shifting proposal for B.Ed course (APS06181) and D.T.Ed course (APS01139) on 18.1.2010 along with the DD of Rs.40.000/- towards shifting fees. The inspection of the institution was conducted on 01.06.2011 and the inspection report was received in this office on 06.06.2011. A letter was received from the institution on 11.07.2011 stating that the building completion certificate was not submitted during inspection and the same was submitted in original. As per the records of the file, the Visiting Team Report was not placed before SRC and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

18

the original note sheets are not found in the Part 2 file. A letter was received from the S.Akilandshwari on 26.09.2011 stating that, she had left the job from the college and she had requested NCTE to delete her name in the staff list. The institution has submitted its written representation on 22.08.2014, stating as follows:

“It is informed herewith that we had applied for shifting institution to the permanent building and requesting for change of address in prescribed format with Demand Draft of Rs. 40,000/- as the fee for change of address on 18.01.2009.

The inspection of the institution was conducted on 01.06.2011. due to the shortage of built up are for D.T.Ed the recognition granted to Diploma in Teacher Training was withdrawn from the academic year 2012-13, as per your order the D.T.Ed course running in the same building was closed and now B.Ed Degree course is alone functioning which has sufficient built up area as per the norms of NCTE, Hence we request your good self to make arrangements to change the address of B.Ed course given below where inspection was conducted.

Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement (SRM) College of Education, Chinnakallupallim, Kalandhira Post, Vaniyambadi – 635751, Vellore District, Tamilnadu.

The Xerox copies of the necessary documents are herewith enclosed for reference.” Note:

1. It is observed in the file that the VT report received on 06.06.2011 was not placed before SRC and the original note sheets are not found in the Part 2 file.

2. The institution was submitted proposal for shifting. Shifting inspection was conducted and the VT Report is lying in the file for B.Ed course. It is verified from inward that any action had been taken or not. No information available.

The SRC in its 273rd meeting held on 30th September & 01st October 2014 considered

the submission of written representation from the institution vide letter dated 22.08.2014,

decided and advised Southern Regional Office to ask the institution for details to check

whether shifting was permitted and whether shifting has taken place.

As per the decision of SRC a letter to the institution was sent on 27.11.2014.

In response to this office letter, the institution has submitted its written representation

along with relevant documents on 05.12.2014 stated as follows:

“.......The shifting of B.Ed course to new permanent building we herewith submit the

detailed report, pertaining to the shifting and change of address.

We had applied for shifting institution to the new permanent building and requesting the

change of address in prescribed format with Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/- on


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

19

18.01.2009.

The inspection of the institution was conducted regarding shifting on 01.06.2011 in

permanent building only. As per the inspection report the D.T.Ed Course which was

functioning in the same building was withdrawn and admission were not done during

the year 2012-2013 Now the B.Ed Course alone is functioning in new building.

After the inspection was over we had not received for which the requisition letter was

sent on 18.01.2009.(Xerox Copy enclosed )

Hence we request your good self to consider permission and the change of address of

the institution as mentioned below.

Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement (SRM) College of Education,

Chinnakallupalli, Kalandhira Post, Vaniyambadi -635751- Vellore District, Pin-,

Tamilnadu ”.

The matter was placed before SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25 January 2015,

considered the matter, and the committee decided to Process VT Report for shifting and

put up in the next meeting.

Accordingly the VT Report is processed .

Details of Re-inspetion & Report: Comments of VT Members. OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE VT MEMBERS:

• Human resource: The management ha appointed principal and 7 Faculty members all of them are qualified and experienced as per NCTE Norms.

• Infrastructural facilities: The management has constructed 2 storied new building in an elevated place which has adequate physical space to run both B.Ed and D.T.Ed courses, all rooms are quite specious and well equipped with furniture such as class rooms, books, library, etc.

• Instructional facilities: Library is well equipped with books journals etc however more books to be added to the library book related to education. & computer lab to be strengthened by adding more computers and language to be established except computer lab the rest of the labs are well equipped with required equipments. College is having internal facility and Website College is running canteen adjacent to the college blog.

Remarks:

• The institution has not submitted Encumbrance Certificate.

• In the Building Plan Total Extent of land and Total Built up area is not legible.

• Building Completion is not in the prescribed format.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

20

The Committee considered the matter, VT report dated 01.06.2011, decided that: 1.Affidavit about willingness to come under new Regulations is received. The Committee Considered the matter, VT report dated 06.01.2011, written

representation from the institution dated 22.08.2014, and all the relevant

documentary evidence and decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE

act. For the following deficiencies.

1.Affidavit about willingness to come under new Regulations is received. 2. Issue Show Cause Notice for submission of

• Building Plan duly approved by the competent authority.

• Building Completion Certificate duly certified by the Govt. Engineer as

per NCTE format.

• Approved Staff list.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the

institution and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a

written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice

along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in

the matter including withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available,

with no further notice.

8

SRCAPP2132

B.P.Ed

Sri

Krishnaveni

College of

Physical

education,

Krishna ,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sri Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, Plot/Khasra No.

222/1,224/3,Tatineni Nagar,1st Street, Gollanapalli Village and Post Office,

Gannavaram Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Krishna District – 521101,Andhra

Pradesh

Code/Course SRCAPP2132 / B.P.Ed


Sri Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, Plot/Khasra No. 222/1,224/3,Tatineni Nagar,1st Street, Gollanapalli Village and Post Office, Gannavaram Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Letter as per NCTE Hqrs

guidelines dated 18.12.2014

19.12.2014


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

21

sent on

Affidavit affirming adherence

to regulations 2014 received

on

24.12.2014

Intake Requested Intake not specified

Other Courses offered in the

institution.

UG and PG (as per their online

application)dated

31.12.2012

Tatineni Gopaiah Memorial Educational Academy, Plot No. 1-2, Tatineni Nagar, Poranki Village and Post Office, Penamaluru Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Krishna District - 521137, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Sri Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, Plot/Khasra No. 222/1,224/3,Tatineni Nagar,1st Street, Gollanapalli Village and Post Office, Gannavaram Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Krishna District – 521101,Andhra Pradesh for B.P.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 06.02.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 23.05.2013.

The SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th-22nd June 2013, considered the reply

of the institution to the Deficiency letter vide letter dt. 23-05-2013, the committee

decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the

institution for recognition of B.P.Ed-SRCAPP2132 course.

Accordingly, rejection order was issued to the institution on 31.7.2013.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution filed a court case in the

Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No. 22725 of 2013.

Shri. Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate in its e-mail letter dated 1st August, 2013

stating that “……that a deficiency letter was issued by the NCTE and the

institution replied stating that the deficiencies pointed out by NCTE were

complied. On 19th June, 2013, SRC had rejected the case of the institution on

the ground that the reply given by the institution was not satisfactory.

On 13th March, 2013, State Government addressed a letter to the NCTE stating


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

22

that deficiencies pointed by NCTE were complied with by the college. NOW

THE COURT WANTS TO KNOW BY TOMORROW 2:15 PM AS TO WHETHER

THE NCTE CONSIDERED THE STATE GOVERNMENT RECOMMENDATION

WHICH STATED THAT DEFICIENCIES WERE COMPLIED BY THE

COLLEGE”.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the advocate on 05.08.2013.

Meantime, a letter dated 5th August, 2013 has been received from the advocate,

Shri. K. Ramakanth Reddy stating as follows; “……writ petition in W.P. No.

22725 of 2013, filed by Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, was heard

by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at 10:30 a.m. on 5.8.2013. The

Hon’ble High Court after hearing the matter directed the NCTE to reconsider the

case of the petitioner after considering the recommendations of the State

Government within four weeks for the academic year 2013-2014, while granting

time to NCTE to file counter affidavit.

I am of the considered opinion that though the recommendations of the State

Government were considered earlier, the SRC of NCTE can again reconsider

the case of the petitioner in the light of the recommendations of the State

Government already considered and pass appropriate orders. If the SRC of

NCTE feels that the recognition cannot be given, the SRC of NCTE can reject

the same again. It can also be stated in the rejection order about the cut-off date

fixed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, if the cut-off date is applicable in this case

also. If the SRC again resolves to reject, it should be stated in the rejection

order that the State Government recommendations have been considered. Thus

all aspects can be covered again while reconsidering the case instead of filing

vacate stay petition/appeal in the matter.

The matter may be placed in the immediate next meeting of the SRC-NCTE to

avoid contempt of court and legal complications.

The SRC in its 250th meeting held on 11th-13th August 2013, considered the

matter and decided to review the earlier decision and considered the State

Government letter and the enclosed report. Further decided that since the

Building Plan is not approved by the competent authority the case is rejected.

The court order (interim order) received from the High Court of Andhra Pradesh

in WPMP.No.27859 of 2013 in WP.No.22725 of 2013 dated 05.08.2013

received by SRC on 19.08.2013 stated as follows:-

“the State Government has made its recommendations vouching for the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

23

infrastructural facilities put in by the petitioners. Therefore, it is only appropriate

that Respondents 1 and 2 shall reconsider the case of the petitioners afresh in

the light of the report submitted by the State Government and take an

appropriate decision for grant of recognition to the institution established by the

1st petitioner herein for commencing the Bachelor of Physical Education Course

for the academic year 2013-

14 at the earliest, at any rate, within a fortnight’s time from the date of receipt of

a copy of this order and communicate its decision to the petitioners.

Sri.K.Ramakanth Reddy learned Standing Counsel for Respondents 1 and 2

seeks two weeks’ time for securing instructions in the matter. Post after two

weeks.”

The NCTE H-qrs in its letter dated 12.09.2013 received by SRC on 09.10.2013

stated as follows:-

“….after perusal of the Hon’ble High Court order dated 05.08.2013 it is seen

that the Hon’ble High Court directed to reconsider the case of the petitioners

afresh in the light of the report submitted by the State Govt. and take an

appropriate decision for grant of recognition to the institution established by the

1st petitioner herein for commencing the Bachelor of Physical Education course

for the academic year 2013-14 at the earliest from the date of receipt of copy of

this order.

The following has been observed in the matter:

1. No show cause notice has been given on the final deficiencies. 2. Proposal was initially refused without receipt/consideration of mandatory

recommendations from the State Govt. 3. In case, the recommendations dated 06.04.2013 were considered by the

SRC, then the court was not briefed about the same thereby issued orders for its consideration.

4. When statutory remedies are available under section 18, no orders are likely to pass by the Hon’ble High Court and as such the case was not properly defended.

Since, the SRC, NCTE has already implemented the interim orders dated

05.08.2013, we have no other option but to file a detailed affidavit in the matter

for disposal of the case in favour of NCTE.

Accordingly, a letter to Shri.K.Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate sent on 13.11.2013

along with brief of the case with request to file a detailed counter affidavit.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

24

The institution has submitted its written representations series on 12.08.2013,

13.08.2013, 26.09.2013, 05.11.2013, 22.01.2014.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 24.01.2014 stating as

follows:-

“……requesting to kindly verify your records and reconsider the case as the two

objections stated by the SRC are complied and take an appropriate decision at

the earliest, that we have already lost an academic year and incurring huge

expenditure for the upkeep of the building and maintenance of the staff hired by

us in anticipation of the

recognition. I once again request you to place the matter before the SRC at the

earliest as the approved building plan issued by the competent authority is

already submitted and the original FDRs submitted by us are still with you at the

earliest”.

A letter sent to the Advocate through e-mail dated 05.02.2014 requesting for

latest status of the above said case. In reply the advocate has stating as

follows:-

“please go through the file and please let me know whether any thing is left in

the case. In my opinion there is nothing left.”

The Committee in its 261st meeting held on 9-10th February, 2014

considered the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh order dated

5/08/2013 and decided to process the case as directed by the Court, and to

be put up in the meeting.

Accordingly, the application was processed.

The SRC in its 262nd meeting held on 17th – 19th February, 2014 considered

Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh order dated 5/08/2013 and all other

relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of

NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per

the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the

deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms.

Accordingly, inspection of the university was fixed between 17th – 22nd March, 2014. The Inspection intimation was sent to university on 13.03.2014. The inspection of the university was conducted on 22.03.2014 and the VT Report received in the office of SRC on 27.03.2014


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

25

1. Encumbrance Certificate is not Submitted. On 26.06.2014, the institution has submitted a written representation (copy

enclosed ) stating that

‘even after submission of the report by the inspection committee in the month of

march 2014, our application was not processed further and LOI is not issued to

us and the original FDRs for Rs. 8.00 lakhs was also not returned. The said FDRs

will be converted as corpus fund with the joint signature of RJD, A.P. School

Education, Kakinada..

That due to delay we again had to approach the Hon’ble high court by way of writ

petition and the same was numbered as W.P.No.s 16007/2014.’

A copy of the court order from the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad

for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 16007

of 2014 filed by the institution where in ,1st respondent – Chairman, NCTE (HQ),

2ndrespondent - SRC,NCTE3rd respondent – State of A.P and 4th

respondent is The Commissioner and Director of School Education, Govt. of

A.P is enclosed.

The institution has prayed for a direction or writ more particularly a writ of

mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to process our application duly taking

into consideration the report of the inspection Committee and the

recommendations of the State Government at an early date and grant

recognition to the petitioners institution for

starting the B.P.Ed program for the academic year 2014-2015 treating the

application as an old one and declare the inaction of the respondents in not

processing the application at an early date as illegal , arbitrary and contrary to

the Principles of natural justice and equity and may be pleased to issue

any other writ or direction which the Hon’ble High Court deems just and proper

under the circumstances of this case

WPMP.No. 19844 of 2014

Petition under section 15A CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the

affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to

pass interim order directing the respondent to process our application

duly taking into consideration the report of the inspection Committee and the

recommendations of the State Government at an early date and grant

permission for B.P.Ed program for the academic year 2014-2015 treating the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

26

application as an old one pending final disposal of the writ petition No. of 2014

by the Hon’ble High Court.

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 17.06.2014 is as under ;

Shri.K. Ramakanth Reddy, learned standing Counsel for National

Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) would point out that the next

Southern Regional Committee of NCTE meeting is slated for 1st and 2nd

July, 2014 at Bangalore and the case file of the petitioner colleges of

Education is also being placed for consideration of the said Committee.

I hope and trust that the applications of the petitioners colleges will be

considered fairly and in accordance with the norms specified in the

Regulations framed by the NCTE and appropriate final decision will be

taken in accordance with law and communicated to the petitioners

immediately.

With this, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

As per the Hon’ble High Order, Hyderabad, the Committee in its 262nd meeting

held on 17-19th Feb, 2014, decided to cause inspection of the said institution,

accordingly, inspection of the institution was done on 12.03.2014.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 269th Meeting held during 1- 2 July,

2014 had considered the matter, decided that as per the Court Order we had

caused inspection on 13.03.2014, but, in view of the Supreme Court Order,

communicated to this office on 27.03.2014, the case can not be processed

further. Further, the Committee advised SRO to ask the Lawyer to file a review

petition explaining this difficulty to the Court.

As per the decision of SRC , a letter was addressed to the advocate on

31.07.2014 to file a review petition in the Hon’ble High court explaining the

difficulty in further processing of the file in view of the supreme Court directive .

On 07.08.2014, the advocate Shri .Ramakanth Reddy via e-mail has opined as

under :

1. As you are aware the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. passed orders in

W.P.No. 16007 of 2014, directing the SRC to consider the

case of the petitioner. Therefore, wherever there is a direction to

consider, the question of review does not arise, since the SRC

can reject if the rules do not permit. This closes the matter and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

27

prevents further litigation among other.

2. In the subject cited case the SRC at its 269th meeting resolved to

file a review as further processing of the file is difficult in view of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court order.

3. I am of the opinion that legally speaking , SRC can pass an order

that the matter has been considered as per the directions of the

Hon’ble Court and the same is rejected as the Hon’ ble

Supreme Court order (

Please mention the SLP number) does not permit processing of

the petitioners application.

4. Therefore, this matter may be placed before the SRC again to

consider in the above manner which may be appropriate and put

quitus to the litigation and in all probabilities received appreciation

from the Hon’ble Court.

On 20.08.2014, another e-mail is received by this office from Shri.Ramakanth

Reddy which is as under :-

“ With reference to the subject cited above, (court order dated 17.06.2014

in W.P.No. 16007 of 2014 filed by Sri Krishnaveni College of

Physical Education, Vijawayada, Andhra Pradesh), the NCTE requested

the lawyer to file review. The question of filing review does not arise since

the direction of the Hon’ble court is to consider in Juxtaposition to the

resolution of 269th meeting of SRC. Therefore, the same resolution can be

passed in the form an order which could be as follows:

As directed by the Hon’ble Court the SRC considered the matter and in view of

the difficulty in further processing of the case of the petitioner in view of the

Hon’ble Supreme directive in SLP(Civil) number 42427 – 4248 of 2009 dated

10.09.2013 that all the pending applications shall also be decided in accordance

with the new regulations, the application of the petitioner is rejected.”

The Committee in its 272nd Meeting held during 1st –2nd September,2014

considered the matter, e-mail dated 20.08.2014 from Advocate Sri

Ramakanth Reddy, Hyderabad, decided that, In compliance of the Court

order we have ordered VT Inspection. The VT Inspection report has also

come. But, in the meanwhile, the Supreme Court order about freeze on

further processing of cases until notification of the new Regulations has

come we have, therefore, to keep this case on ‘hold’.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

28

Note:-

As per the decision of 262nd SRC, inspection of the university was fixed between 17th – 22nd March, 2014. The inspection intimation was sent to university on 13.03.2014 the inspection of the university was conducted on 22.03.2014 and the VT Report received in the office of SRC on 27.03.2014

The institution has submitted Affidavit to process the application as per NCTE

Regulations 2014, on 26.12.2014

The Southern Regional Committee in its 276th meeting held during 7th-9th January

,2015 considered the matter and decided as under:-

• They have asked for an intake of 100 which, under the 2014 Regulations, will fall into two units of 50 each, this is therefore, treated as an application for 2 units. But, further action to process the case can not be taken because this is a case of stand-alone institution which, in terms of Regulation 3, is not eligible to make this application. Keep this case pending and ask for clarification from NCTE (H’qrs).

• As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the NCTE H’qrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015.

On 16.01.2015 an e-mail from Shri. Shrikanth Chauhan, Under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this office providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:-

“The pending applications have to be processed, and they may be persuaded for making these institutions as composite gradually, preferably by 2016-2017.”

The SRC, in its 277th meeting held during 20 to 22nd th January, 2015 considered the

Show Cause Notice Reply & affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper expressing their

willingness for the application to be processed as per Regulation, 2014. and decided as

“Issue Show Cause Notice for Encumbrance Certificate”

In the meantime, On 23.01.2015 before issuance of Notice to the institution, on seeing

website, the Correspondent , Sri Krishnaveni College of Physical Education,

Gollanapalli, Gannavaram, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh has submitted reply to Show

Cause Notice .

The Committee considered the matter, written reply from the institution vide letter

dated 23.01.2015 decided as under:

1.Affidavit received.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

29

2.Advised Southern Regional Office to Issue LOI.

3.Request them to give reply by 28.2.2015 so that this case can be considered for

Formal Recognition before 3.3.2015.

9

SRCAPP200

D.P.Ed

Gopal Krishna

College of

Physical

Education,

Nalgonda,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Gopal Krishna College of Physical Education, SY.No.93,111,112, Plot No. 0-2,

Sagar Road, Shrinadapuram R/O, Ambatipally Village, Ramadguu Post,

Annumula Taluk, Haliya City, Nalgonda District-508278, Andhra Pradesh

Code/ Course

SRCAPP200/D.P.Ed

Name of the institution Gopal Krishna College of Physical

Education, SY.No.93,111,112, Plot No. 0-2,

Sagar Road, Shrinadapuram R/O,

Ambatipally Village, Ramadguu Post,

Annumula Taluk, Haliya City, Nalgonda

District-508278, Andhra Pradesh

Letter as per NCTE guidelines dated 18.12.2014 sent on

online information

Affidavit affirming adherence to regulations 2014 received on

29.01.2015

Intake Request 50

Other Courses offered in the institution

Stand Alone.

Gopal Krishna Educational Society, plot No. 2-98/1, Neelaiguda Village,

Anjanpally Post, Thripuraram Taluk. Miryalaguda City, Nalgonda District-208207,

Andhra Pradesh has applied for grant of recognition to Gopal Krishna College of

Physical Education, SY.No.93,111,112, Plot No. 0-2, Sagar Road, Shrinadapuram

R/O, Ambatipally Village, Ramadguu Post, Annumula Taluk, Haliya City, Nalgonda

District-508278, Andhra Pradesh for D.P.Ed course online on 31.12.2012 for two

years duration with an annual intake of 50 students and was granted recognition on

12.02.2014 from the academic session 2014-15

On 29.01.2015 a letter of the Principal, Gopal Krishna College of Physical Education,

Srinadhapuram Village, Ambhatipally Mandal Anumula District, Nalgonda-508 278,

Andhra Pradesh received by this office (Copy enclosed) stating as under:-

“It is informed that, SRC NCTE has granted recognition for our D.P.Ed

Course under the Gopalakrishan Educational Society.

At the time of grant of recognition our Society had 5 Acres of land. Now one(1)


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

30

more Acre of land is added to the adjoining to the existing 5 Acres of land.

I request you to note the increase in land area from 5 acres to 6 acres for the

exsiting D.P.Ed course. The Survey number of the extra land(1 acre) added is as

under:

Sy, No.65

The Concerned land documents are attached for your reference and request to

affect the same in our SRCAPP200 file in your office.”

The institution has submitted the document.

The Committee considered the matter, letter dated 29.01.2015 from the institution,

decided as under:

1.Request is allowed.

2. Advised Southern Regional Office to update the original Formal

Recognition Order.

10

APS09117

D.Ed

SVR College

of Education,

Khammam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

SVR College of Education, Cherukumallivari Veedhi, No.6-31/2, Madhira,

Khammam District, Andhra Pradesh.

Bhargavi Educational Society, Madhira, Khammam District, Andhra Pradesh has

submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of

recognition to SVR College of Education, Cherukumallivari Veedhi, No.6-31/2, in

S.No.399-400, 403, Madhira, Khammam District, Andhra Pradesh for D.Ed Course

of two years duration with an annual intake of 50 Student and was granted formal

recognition on 18/11/2011 from the academic session 2012-2013.

On 29/09/2014 this office has received copy of PROCEEDINGS OF THE DIRECTOR,

S.C.E.R.T., T.S., HYDERABAD-1, Rc.No.183/(SCERT,AP)/A/TE/TSCERT/2011 dated

26/09/2014 regarding Approval of staff lists for D.Ed course in respect of SVR College

of Education, Cherukumallivari Veedhi, No.6-31/2, Madhira, Khammam District, Andhra

Pradesh )

The Southern Regional Committee in its 274th meeting held during 30th – 31st October, 2014 considered the Proceedings of the Director, SCERT, Telangana State, Hyderabad, dated 26.09.2014 regarding approval of staff lists for D.Ed coarse of the said institution, and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act for the following:

• The Principal is not having experience in Teacher Education Institution at elementary stage.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

31

institution as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21 days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken including the withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available with no further notice. As per the decision of SRC, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on

05.01.2015.

The Committee considered the matter, written reply from the institution vide letter dated 29.01.2015, decided as under:

1.Explanation is accepted

2.Case is closed.

3. Advised Southern Regional Office to obtain affidavit for new Regulations.

10. 11

SRCAPP166

D.El.Ed

Jareenataz

Diet College,

Guntur,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Jareenataz Diet College, Plot No.520, Mulakaluru Village, Post Office,

Narasaraopet Taluk & City, Guntur District-522601, Andhra Pradesh

Datta Sai Educational Society, Plot No.13-2-137/2, V.R.Nagar, Narasaraopet

Village, Post, Taluk & City, Guntur District-522601, Andhra Pradesh had applied for

grant of recognition to Jareenataz Diet College, Plot No.520, Mulakaluru Village,

Post Office, Narasaraopet Taluk & City, Guntur District-522601, Andhra Pradesh

for D.Ed course on 31.12.2012 for Two year duration under section 14(1) of the NCTE

Act 1993 and received in the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 04.01.2013.



follows:-

2 (B) for Sub Regulation (1-A) the following shall be submitted namely. 1 (1-A) (I) the

application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following

circumstances:-




The Southern Regional Committee in its 238th Meeting held on 05th-06th February, 2013 duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffered from basic infirmities was summarily rejected as per Regulations 2009 [7 1–A (i) ].


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

32

• The Processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application – as per the Regulations 2009 Para 7[1-A(i)]a).

Accordingly, a rejection letter was issued to the institution on 06/03/2013.

As per the Public Notice dated 5th September, 2013 NCTE Head Quarters has stating

that the important Policy Decision taken by the National Council for Teacher Education

in its 31st Meeting held on 29th July, 2013 that the applications of the institutions, who

could not make payment of processing fee on or before submission of Online

Applications resulting in summary rejection by the concerned Regional Committees of

NCTE, may be considered if payment has been made on the next banking / working day

following the date of submission of the application, since the software does not allow for

payment of the processing fees either on or before the date of submission of

applications.

The SRC in its 255th meeting held on 13th-15th November 2013, considered the matter

and decided to process the application.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government

for recommendation on 03.12.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on

03.12.2013.

The Institution submitted its reply on 20.12.2013.

The SRC in its 258th meeting held on 3rd-5th January 2014, considered the reply to the

deficiency letter from the institution vide letter dated 20-12-2013 and all other relevant

documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to

examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the

proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly

rectified by the University, as per the norms.

Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed between16th-22nd January 2014. The

inspection intimation was sent to institution on 06.01.2014.

The inspection of the institution was conducted on 25.01.2014 and the VT report

received in the office of SRC on 27.01.2014

The SRC in its 260th meeting held on 9th-10th February 2014, considered the VT report

and decided to 1. VTI Report is incomplete, 2. VCD has not been submitted, 3. Cause

re-inspection at our cost.

Accordingly, re-inspection of the institution was fixed between13th -18th February 2014.

The inspection intimation was sent to institution on 12.02.2014.

The re-inspection of the institution was conducted on 15.02.2014 and the VT report


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

33

received in the office of SRC on 18.02.2014

The Southern Regional Committee in its 262nd Meeting held during 17th – 19th February,

2014 duly considered VT report, VCD of the institution and all the relevant documents of

the institution and deficiencies still persisted as under:

• As per VT inspection report, a school is being run in the building. Unless vacant position is shown we can not consider for D.Ed course.

As per 8, 7 (ii) of NCTE regulations 2009,

“The society sponsoring the institution shall have to ensure that proposed

teacher education institution has a well demarcated land area as specified

by the norms. The teacher education institution shall not be allowed to

have any other institution within its demarcated area or building and shall

not have any other course(s) in its building”.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected &

based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE

Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of D.Ed

course

As per the decision of SRC, the application of the institution was rejected vide

this office order dated 03.03.2014.

On 17/12/2014 , the institution has submitted a written representation as under :-

“ Datta Sai Educational Society”, applied for Jareenataz DIET College “ on

31/12/2012 for two year duration. After various corresponding, the SRC,NCTE

conducted the course of inspection on 25/01/2014 .In its 262nd meeting on 17th

to 19th February, 2014, as per VT Inspection Report, the SRC-NCTE , rejected our

application.

Whereas, the SRC-NCTE found deficiency i.e a school is being run on the same

building. The management of the Society was astonished and shocked regarding

VT Report, under this society, the management , is not run any institution in that

building except D.Ed course only.

There is no school running under this society.

Hence, the Management is requesting you that as per Re-Inspection regarding

the above said college and consider the management request in humanity grounds.

Due to the ill-ness of the Secretary and correspondent of that society, we are unable to

communicate the reply in proper time.”

On 24/02/2014, the institution has submitted another written representation which is as

under :-

“ The visiting team inspected the college on 15/02/2014.But in their report has


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

34

pointed that a school is being run in the same building.

Whereas, the building plan has its 4 (four ) floors , in that floors, earmarked

3 floors building is exclusively meant for D.Ed course only, the

remaining one floor a primary school is running . As per the

Government norms, there should be model school to run the D.Ed (or )

B.Ed courses for this reason, the society earmarked only one floor

utilizing for primary school, that’s why the primary school is running in the same

building. The same thing was pointed out by the visiting team. Here with the

society is submitting the BCC ( Building Completion Certificate) along

with this letter.”

It was observed from the records, that the institution had approached the Hon’ble Court

in W.P.No.25825 of 2013 against the rejection order of SRC dated 06/03/2013.Hence, a

letter was addressed to the advocate, Shri.Ramakanth Reddy on 16/01/2015 requesting

him to get the case dismissed at the earliest .

In the mean time , the institution has approached the Hon’ble Court in W.P.No. 39693 /

2014 against the rejection order of SRC dated 03.03.2014.

On 19/01/2015, the institution has submitted the Hon’ble Court order dated 24.12.2014

in W.P.No. 39693 of 2014 which is as under :-

“Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.Ramakanth Reddy,learned

counsel for the respondent.

The petitioners are aggrieved by the order of rejection, dated 03.03.2014,passed by the

respondent, whereby their request for approval of college for commencing D.Ed course

was rejected. The said order is questioned in this writ petition, primarily, in view of the

directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.4247-

4248 of 2009, vide order, dated 10.09.2013.

The said directions read as under:

“Those who are desirous of establishing teacher education colleges/institutions shall be

free to make application in accordance with the new regulations. Their applications shall

be decided by the competent authority keeping in view the relevant statutory provisions.

All the pending applications shall also be decided in accordance with the new

regulations.

The Government of India, NCTE and the Implementation Committee shall be free to file

interlocutory applications as and when any direction is required from the Court in the

matter of implementation of the recommendations made by the Verma Commission and

the committee constituted vide order, dated 14/16.05.2013.”

It is not in dispute that the new regulations framed have come into force on 28.11.2014

and in terms of the aforesaid directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the respondent


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

35

has to consider the pending applications as per the new regulations. Since the

impugned order, dated 03.03.2014, is passed considering the petitioners’ request

under old regulations, the same is set aside and the matter is relegated to the

respondent to examine the petitioners’ request in terms of new regulations and to

pass appropriate orders.The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. The

miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to

costs.” As per the Hon’ble Court order, the documents available in the file are

examined .

As per the website information of the Hon’ble Court , the W.P.No. 25825 of 2013 filed

against the earlier rejection order of SRC dated 06/03/2013 is still pending before the

Hon’ble Court and a letter is addressed to the advocate ,Shri.Ramakanth Reddy on

16/01/2015 to get the case dismissed.

The institution is not offering any other course in the premises. As per the VT

Report, a school is running in the same building.

SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25th January, 2015 considered the matter and

decided as under :-

“Show cause notice for school building in the same premises.”

The Committee considered the matter, show cause notice reply from the institution vide letter dated 30.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to:

1.Check receipt of affidavit for new Regulations.

2.Issue LOI.

3.Request them to give reply by 28.2.2015 so that this, case can be considered for FR before 3.3.2015.

11. 12

APS07460

D.El.Ed

Mother

Theresa D.Ed

College,

Nalgonda,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Mother Theresa D.Ed College, Suryapet, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh

Code/Course APS07460/D.EI.Ed

Name of the Institution Mother Theresa D.Ed College, Suryapet, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh

Letter as per NCTE Hqrs

guidelines dated 18.12.2014 sent

19.1.2014

Affidavit affirming adherence to

Regulations 2014 received on

30.12.2014 and 05.01.2015

Intake requested Two units ( 100 students)


institution

B.Ed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

36

An application was submitted by Solmanraj Educational Society, Suryapet, Nalgonda for

grant of recognition to D.Ed course in the office of SRC-NCTE, vide dated 27.09.2006.

The file was processed and this office letter dated 21.11.2006 communicating therewith

the deficiencies and directing therewith for removal of the same within 90 days from the

date of issue of the deficiency letter as per the provisions contained in the NCTE

Regulation dated 13.01.2006.

On perusal of the application it was noted that the stipulated period of 90 days has been expired and the institution has not complied to the letters dated 21.05.2007, 31.07.2007 & 17.09.2007.

Consequent upon the direction of the SRC the application submitted for grant of teacher education course has been treated incomplete.

As per the decision of SRC, the application was closed on 01.02.2008.

The institution has approached to Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.20439/2010 without

exhausting remedy of appeal to appellate authority under section 18 of NCTE Act.

The Hon’ble High Court has passed an order as hereunder:

“The petitioner intended to established a College of Education at Suryapet, Nalgonda

District. The National Council for Teacher Education, first respondent herein, had to

accord approval for this purpose. Application dated 27.09.2006 was made to it by the

petitioner enclosing the required documents and remitting an amount of Rs.40000/- for

the purpose of inspection of the proposed college. This writ petition is filed by the

petitioner complaining that the first respondent had not taken any steps to inspect the

proposed college.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the first

respondent”.

The State Government is said to have reviewed the situation as to the necessity of

according permission to establish new colleges of education in the State in future and by

its letter dated 07.01.2009 communicated its policy decision to the first respondent that

the existing institutions were adequate. However, the right that is accrued to the

petitioner on the basis of its application and the consideration thereof by the first

respondent cannot be taken away on account of the change of policy. It is settled

principle of law that whenever an application is made, it must be considered and

processed in accordance with the provisions of law or the policy that existed as on the

date of its presentation. Subsequent changes may apply to the applications that are

made thereafter.

Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent(SRC) to take

necessary steps in the matter and pass appropriate orders. No order as to costs.”


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

37

SRC considered the matter in its 197th meeting 13th – 14th October, 2010 and directed the Management /institution to resubmit the old application returned by SRC along with necessary documents as originally submitted relating to land, building, FDR, Application fee, Building Completion Certificate from competent Government Engineer/authority and other relevant aspects for processing and for necessary action. As per the decision of SRC a letter was issued to the institution on 19.10.2010 and a deficiency letter was issued on 18.11.2010. In reply to our letter dated 18.11.2010 institution has submitted its reply on 22.11.2010 & 27.12.2010. From the reply it is found that the institution purchased land only on 14/05/2008 and 20/05/2008 after submission of the initial application on 27.9.2006.

The SRC in its 200th meeting held on 20-21 January, 2011 considered the written

explanation to the notice and other documents submitted by the institution and decided

to cause inspection.

The land and building is on lease for 30 years as per Regulation 2006. However lease deed is of November, 2010. Note:

1) The institution has submitted two sale deed dated 20.05.2008 and 14.05.2008 now in favour of Maram Venkata Reddy and Damidi Prabhakar Reddy for S.No. 316 & 316/E, Bechirag village, Suryapet, Nalgonda S.No. 316 & 65 in the same village respectively. The sales deeds are not in the name of society or institution and they are of a date subsequent to the application date. In the initial application which was processed and closed the land document was a sale deed for sy. No. 215/A3, 215/A, 215/B2 and building plan was for S.No. 9 at Suryapet. The application was closed for non reply to Dl.

2) Along with resubmitted application a private lease deed of 10/11/2010 has been submitted for S.No. 316 & 316E, leased out by private party Maram Veakat Reddy to Solman Raju Educational Society which is not in accordance with regulation 2009. Even if the application is taken to be of 2006. The lease deed is a subsequent one of 4 years late. The institution’s application is not closed due to any change in policy but for not replying to DL in time as per notes in the main files letter dt. 01.2.2008 refers.

As per the decision of SRC, the inspection of the institution was carried out on 28.03.2011.

The SRC in its 204th meeting held on 27th and 28th April, 2011 considered the VT Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice for the following:

1) The VCD received is not functioning. 2) A Certificate from the Government Affiliating body to the effect that no other

programme is being run by the institution in the same building / Campus, along with the existing Course B.Ed to be submitted.

3) The institution has submitted two sale deed dated 20.05.2008 and 14.05.2008 now in favour of Maram Venkata Reddy and Damidi Prabhakar Reddy for S.No. 316 & 316/E, Bechirag village, Suryapet, Nalgonda S.No. 316 & 65 in the same


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

38

village respectively. The sales deeds are not in the name of society or institution and they are of a date subsequent to the application date. In the initial application which was processed and closed the land document was a sale deed for sy. No. 215/A3, 215/A1,215/B2 and building plan was for S.No. 9 at Suryapet. The application was closed for non reply to Dl.

4) Along with resubmitted application a private lease deed of 10/11/2010 has been submitted for S.No. 316 & 316E, leased out by private party Maram Venkat Reddy to Solman Raju Educational Society which is not in accordance with regulation 2009. Even if the application is taken to be of 2006. The lease deed is a subsequent one of 4 years late. The institution’s application is not closed due to any change in policy but for not replying to DL in time as per notes in the main files letter dt. 01.2.2008 refers.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to the

institution as to why the recognition be not refused and thereby providing an opportunity

to the institution to make a written representation within 30 days from the date of issue

of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final

decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken including the refusal of

recognition, based on the records available, with no further notice.

The Chairman, SRC, NCTE has directed on 23.05.2011 to include records land

documents in SCN which is already reflected in minutes note:- 1 and 2 and same be

placed in SRC meeting for information and rectification.

As directed SCN has been issued on 26.05.2011 for the following as the institution did

not possess the land on the date of application to NCTE.

The SRC in its 206th meeting held on 9th and 10th June, 2011 and the committee after

going through the reply of institution dt.4.6.2011, come to the conclusion that the reply is

not satisfactory and not convincing and hence, the recognition is refused.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 8.7.2011.


Hqrs., and the appellate authority in its order dated 4.11.2011 stating as follows; the

Council reached and conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and

hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected and SRC’s order dated

8.7.2011 is confirmed.

The institution moved to the court and this office has received court notice in W.P.M.P

No. 41833 of 2011 in W.P. No. 33651 of 2011 and whereas the petition will come up for

hearing on the 18.1.2012, hence it is directed to appear in person or through advocate.

Accordingly, brief of the case was sent to the advocate on 13.1.2012.

As directed by the advocate, the original file was sent to the advocate on 11.1.2013.

Meantime, a court order in W.P. No. 33651 of 2011 was forwarded by the petitioner

institution on 24.4.2013 and 21.3.2013. The Hon’ble Court order stating as follows;


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

39

“…….the writ petition is disposed of upholding the orders of rejection, but leaving it open

to the petitioner to make a fresh application. If the petitioner intends to file application, it

shall be exempted from paying application fee. The D.D.’s submitted by it towards fee

for change of premises etc., shall hold good, if they are renewed.

The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition shall also stand disposed of. There

shall be no order as to costs”.

As per the court direction, the institution has not made fresh application, whereas the

institution has submitted one copy of application, affidavit, by-law, Lease Deed on

21.3.2013.

The court order along with original file of the institution was placed before SRC in its

248th meeting held on 13th to 15th July, 2013 and the Committee noted the matter.

Again, the above said institution has submitted three sets of application for D.Ed course

along with court direction in W.P. No. 33651 of 2011 dated 23.1.2013 on 5.8.2013 with

the request to issue LOI

NOTE: The Hon’ble court order stating that

“…….the petitioner re-submitted the application by changing the documents pertaining

to the land. This time, it filed a lease deed for the entire premises and has virtually

withdrawn the ownership documents from the application. The 2nd respondent took the

view that the state of affairs that remained at the time of filing of the application need to

be taken into account and if so done, there is clear non-compliance on the part of the

petitioner. The purpose of the various documents was clearly mentioned. By the time,

the order came to be passed, there is substantial change in the purpose of the

Regulations. The respondents were under obligation to examine the application with

reference to the Regulations that were in force as on the date of application. It is not in

dispute that the petitioner ceased to be the owner of the land, which was shown in the

original application and the lease deed was filed four years thereafter. If it is so advised,

the petitioner can made a fresh application. However, it can be granted the benefit of

exemption from remitting the application fee, since it has not only paid Rs. 40,000/-

along with the original application, but also has paid an amount of Rs. 40,000/-, which is

stipulated for change of the premises.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of upholding the order of rejection, but leaving it

open to the petitioner to make a fresh application. If the petitioner intends to file

application, it shall be exempted from paying application fee. The DDs submitted by it

towards fee for change of premises etc., shall hold good, if they are renewed.

The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition shall also stand disposed of. There

shall be no order as to costs”.

The SRC in its 253rd meeting held on 30th September & 1st October 2013 and the

committee has noted the order dated 23/01/2013 of Hon’ble High Court of Andhra


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

40

Pradesh wherein the Hon’ble High Court has disposed of upholding the orders of

rejection by SRC NCTE Bangalore.

Now, the institution has submitted its written representation on 25.02.2014 with request

to reconsider the case.

The SRC in its 264th Meeting held on 01st – 03rd March, 2014 considered the written

representation and decided as follows:

“Let us accept the application, because of the Court, order, and treat it as a ‘fresh’

case under current Regulations only. They need not be required to pay

application fee again”.

As per the directions of SRC, the application was processed

The Southern Regional Committee in its 266th meeting hed on 2nd May, 2014 considered

the matter, noted that the said case of the institution is a case of pending application

and not of an existing institution. That being so, in view of the Supreme Court orders,

(dated 07 .03.2014 read with ord er dated 10.09.2013) this cannot be processed until

the new regulations are notified and keep it pending.

A letter seeking consent on the willingness of the institution for considering their

application as per Regulations 2014 was sent to the institution on 19.12.2014

In response to this office letter dated 19.12.2014, the institution has submitted a reply

on 05.01.2015 along with an affidavit on Rs.100/- stamp paper expressing their

willingness for the application to be processed as per Regulations, 2014 along with

relevant documents.

Note : -

1. The institution is exempted from submitting the processing fee as per the

directions of the Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.33651 of 2011 and the decision of

264th meeting of SRC.

2. The institution has submitted the 3 sets of the above mentioned documents.

The details of existing courses/courses applied for, is as under :-

APS05123/B.Ed

Date of application 02.01.2006

Name and address

of the Society

Solman Raj Educational Society

Name and address Mother Theresa College of Education, Solman Raj

Education Society, Vidyanagar, Suryapet,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

41

of the Institution Nalgonda- 508213

Present status Recognition granted on 12.04.2007

SRC in its 277th meeting held during 20th – 22nd January, 2015 considered the matter

and decided as under :-

“Title to lands is confusing. The Society ‘owned’ it initially; then, it became

‘leased’ land; and, now, it is shown as ‘gifted’. Whether the same lands are involved or

are they different lands. Let the details be clearly traced; Put up in the meeting

on 1.02.2015.”

As per the decision of SRC,the land documents available in the file were examined and

following are the observations:-

1, Initially the Society owned land in Sy.No. 215/a3,215/a1,215/b2 at

Hussainabad and was showed building at Sy.no. 9 which as on lease for a period of 3

years and later 30 years.

2. At the time of re-consideration of the application, as per the Court order

in W.P.No.20439 of 2010, in response to the deficiency letter, sale deeds dated

14/05/2008 and 20/05/2008 in Sy.Nos 316, 316/E and 65 in the name of individuals and

a private lease deed dated 10/11/2010 has been submitted .(leased out by a private

person)

3.As per VT report dated 28-03-2011, the institution is functioning in leased

premises which is not allowed as per Regulations, 2014

4. n reply to the show cause notice received by this office on 07/06/2011

,Pg(220) the institution has stated that at the time of making application land

documents at Sy.No. 215/A3, 215/A1,215/B2 are submitted. As land document, Sy.No.

215/A3, 215/A1,215/B2 may be ignored . After Court direction we took land and

building in the name of society on lease Sy.No.316 for 30 years as per NCTE

regulations 2006.

5. At the time of submission of affidavit for processing of the application as

per Regulations,2014, the institution has submitted a Gift deed dated 15/03/2014 in the

name of Salmon Raju Educational Society for Sy.No. 316, 316/E.

The above matter is placed before SRC for its consideration and decision.

APS07460/D.EI.Ed

SRC in its 277th meeting held during 20th – 22nd January, 2015 considered the matter

and decided as under :-

“Title to lands is confusing. The Society ‘owned’ it initially; then, it became

‘leased’ land; and, now, it is shown as ‘gifted’. Whether the same lands are involved or


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

42

are they different lands. Let the details be clearly traced; Put up in the meeting

on 1.02.2015.”

As per the decision of SRC,the land documents available in the file were examined and

the following are the observations:-

1,.Initially the Society owned land in Sy.No. 215/a3,215/a1,215/b2 at

Hussainabad and was showed building at Sy.no. 9 whch as on lease for a period of 3

years and later 30 years.

2. At the time of re-consideration of the application, as per the Court order in

W.P.No.20439 of 2010, in response to the deficiency letter, sale deeds dated

14/05/2008 and 20/05/2008 in Sy.Nos 316, 316/E and 65 in the name of

individuals and a private lease deed dated 10/11/2010 has been submitted .

(leased out by a private person)

3. As per VT report dated 28-03-2011, the institution is functioning in leased

premises which is not allowed as per Regulations, 2014

4. In reply to the show cause notice received by this office on 07/06/2011

,Pg(220) the institution has stated that at the time of making application land documents

at Sy.No. 215/A3, 215/A1,215/B2 are submitted. As land document, Sy.No. 215/A3,

215/A1, 215/B2 may be ignored . After Court direction we took land and building in the

name of society on lease Sy.No.316 for 30 years as per NCTE regulations 2006.

5. At the time of submission of affidavit for processing of the application as

per Regulations,2014, the institution has submitted a Gift deed dated 15/03/2014 in the

name of Salmon Raju Educational Society for Sy.No. 316, 316/E.

The Committee considered the matter, reply of the institution vide letter dated

05.01.2015 along with affidavit, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to:

1.Check on receipt of Affidavit

2.Issue LOI

3.Request them to give reply by 28.2.2015 so that this case can be considered for

FR before 3.3.2015.

12. 13

APS03481

B.Ed

Sri T.V.

Venkataswam

y College of

Education,

Tumkur ,

Karnataka

KA

Sri T.V. Venkataswamy College of Education, Madhugiri-572132 Tumkur District, Karnataka was granted recognition on 13.07.2000 with an annual intake of 100 students for B.Ed course with the condition to shift the premises into its own building.

This office is in receipt of a letter NO. TY:VCPS:2011-12.98 dt. 21.05.2011 from the Vice-Chancellor of Tumkur University, Tumkur by enclosing a list of 19 institutions with the committee observations by conducting inspections.

The SRC n its 206th meeting held on 9-10th June 2011, noted the inspection report of the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

43

Vice-Chancellor, Tumkur University, dt. 21.05.2011 and the deficiencies in the 19 institutions in Tumkur District and decided to issue show cause notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 08.07.2011. The institution has submitted its written representation 08.08.2011.

The SRC considered the written reply and all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection at the premises Under Section 17 of NCTE Act. The institution is directed to submit inspection fee of Rs. 40,000/-.

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was carried out on 29.10.2011. in the meanwhile, Tumkur University vide their letter received on 17.10.2011 has conducted visits to the institution during 15-19 and 27th of July, 2011.

The SRC in its 216th meeting considered the VT report, VCD and other documentary evidences and decided to issue show cause notice., under section 17 of the NCTE act.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued on 14.03.2012. The institution was submitted written representation on 16.04.2012.

The SRC in its 223rd

meeting held on 29th – 31

st May 2012 considered the

reply of the institution vide letter dt. 16.04.2012 and all the relevant

documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause

Notice Under NCTE Act.

Accordingly, final show cause Notice was issued to the institution on 25.06.2012,the institution submitted reply vide letter dated 21.08.2012 The reply of the institution to the show cause notice dt. 13.07.2012 was duly considered by the SRC in its 239th meeting held on 26-27 February, 2013 and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. As per BCC dated 18.7.2012, the built up are is 1278.48 sq. mts. As per NCTE norms 1500 sq.mts of built up area is required for offering B.Ed Course.

2. The land is in the name of individual & not in the name the institution / Society as per NCTE norms & regulations 2009, the land should be in the name of the institution. The institution has not submitted land documents duly certified by the Sub- Registrar.

3. As per Building Completion Certificate, the total built up area comes up to 1278.48 sq.mts. It does not match with building plan which says the built up area is 1476 sq.mts Sy no.is not mentioned in BCC.

4. Latest Original Non- Encumbrance Certificate is not submitted.

5. Reserve fund of Rs,3lakhs is not maintained by the institution.

6. An invoice dated 25.07.2012 worth Rs.2,902/- towards purchase of Physical Education equipments is submitted as documentary proof. An invoice dated 21.07.2012 worth Rs 9,423/- towards purchase of Science lab equipment is submitted as documentary proof..

7. No documentary proof provided for the appointment of Principal as per NCTE


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

44

norms. Principal is not having Ph.D & hence not qualified as per NCTE norms.

8. No satisfactory proof has been submitted regarding shifting of I grade college elsewhere.

9. First page of staff approval list is not signed by the authority.

10. Lecturer in foundation / fine Arts /are not appointed.

Based on the above points the SRC decides to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed course run by the Sri T.V. Venkataswamy College of Education, Madhugiri – 572132, Tumkur District, Karnataka from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.

It was made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board / body were informed accordingly. Further, it was decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any.

As per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution vide order no. F.SRO.NCTE/APS03481/B.Ed/KA/ 2013-2014/50355 dated 05.04.2013.

In the meantime the institution had filed an appeal under Section 18 of NCTE Act, before the appellate Authority, NCTE, New Delhi against the withdrawal order of SRC,

The appellate authority Vide order No. F. No. 89-397-2013 appeal/14th meeting -2013 dated 30.10.2013 noted that ``the appellant institution which was granted recognition on 13-07 -2000 does not have the requisite built up area of 1500 sq. mts. as per the NCTE Regulations 2009 even now. The appellant is still planning to construct additional accommodation for which he has enclosed a copy of the building plan. The appellant also stated that the documents have been submitted to civil authorities for approval. The institution is not only short of requisite accommodation for conducting B.Ed. course but has not provided proof for shifting to another institution, namely First Grade College, which according to the VT report was functioning in the same premises. The appellant has not appointed a regular principal possessing the qualifications prescribed in the NCTE Norms. The appellant has not produced a copy of registered land document and has only expressed his readiness to execute specific registered documents to an extent of 2500 sq. mts. the Council, from the response of the appellant to the grounds of withdrawal noted that inadequacies both in infrastructural and instructional facilities still exist despite the SRC having issued two show cause notices. In these circumstances the Council concluded that the SRC was justified in withdrawing recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC confirmed.

After perusal of the documents, Memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on record and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing , the Council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of SRC confirmed.

The Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against “

The above decision of the appellate authority was placed before SRC in its 255th Meeting held on 13th – 15th November 2013 and the committee noted the matter.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

45

Further, the institution has approached the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No. 49492 -49496 and 49812-49813 of 2013 and 50291-50297 of 2013

The Court Order dated 10.12.2013 from the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No. 49492 -49496 and 49812-49813 of 2013 and 50291-50297 of 2013 is as under ;

“…these petitions coming on orders, on service of notice on respondent No. 3 ,

the learned senior advocate Shri. Subramanya Jois appearing for the Counsel for

the petitioners states that notice to respondent No. 3, may be dispensed with an

in the light of the circumstances that this court has already taken a view in

similar circumstances in other batch of writ petitions, that these petitions may

also be disposed of in the light of the same.

2. On the facts of the present case , it is noticed that the petitioners are said to be

running colleges of education, which have been duly recognized by the National

Council of Teacher Education (NCTE) , a statuary body of Government of India

and are affiliated to the Tumkur University. It transpires that by virtue of the

orders passed withdrawing recognition for the academic year 2013-14, which was

not preceded by any notice or an opportunity of hearing, though there was a

reply to the notice issued by the second respondent, the second respondent

however, without affording an opportunity of hearing, has proceeded to pass

several impugned orders in respect of the respective petitioners. It is that which

is sought to be questioned by this common petition filed by the several

institutions.

3. Having regard to the fact that there are no statement of objections filed to the

present petitions and that other respondents, though served, remaining

unrepresented , the fact that there was no opportunity of hearing and that the

objections filed by the respondents in so far as the show – cause –notice issued

notice does not appear to have been considered.

The petition deserves to be summarily allowed and are accordingly allowed. The

impugned annexures are quashed. The respondents, however, are at liberty to

consider the objections filed to the original notice after re-issuing notice to the

petitioners and afford an opportunity of hearing and to proceed further in

accordance with law.”

The above court order was placed before SRC in its 257th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd December 2013 and the committee decided as under ;

‘A number of show cause notices have been given all these cases. Therefore, the Lawyer to be asked to file an appeal immediately in all the cases and obtain ‘stay’. The matter to be pursued with the Lawyer.’

Accordingly, a letter was sent to Mr.Dinesh Kumar ,advocate on 08.01.2014.

On 09.01.2014, an E-Mail was received from Mr.Dinesh Kumar ,advocate stating as under :

‘I have gone through the order dated 10.12.2013.In my opinion, in view of the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

46

observations contained in Paragraph 3 of the order, it is not a fit case to file an appeal.The direction of the Hon’ble Court is to consider the objections filed to the original notice after re-issuing notice to the petitioner and afford an opportunity of hearing.

It is therefore desirable to comply with the order instead of challenging the same in appeal.’

The above opinion of the advocate was placed before SRC in its 259th Meeting held on 17th to 19th January 2014 .The Committee has considered the matter and decided that

‘earlier decision taken in 257th meeting held on 20th -22nd Dec, 2013, to file an appeal through our Lawyer is revised. Even the Lawyer’s advice to file a petition for ‘review’ is put on hold.

Further, it was decided by the committee to issue notice in all the 7 cases(viz. APS01885 , AOS0463, AOS00464, APS03424, AOS00302, APS03481 & APS01767) for a personal hearing in 260th meeting.

Further course of action will be decided after the personal hearing.”

As per the decision of SRC in its 259th meeting held on 17th – 19th Jan, 2014, notice was served to the institutions for personal hearing in the 260th meeting of SRC

Accordingly, the representatives of six of the seven institutions, Viz,

i) APS01885,B.Ed,Kalpathuru Vidhya Samsthe, Tiptur,KA

ii) AOS00463,B.Ed. Sree Siddaganga Education Society, Tumkur,KA.

iii) AOS00464,B.Ed. Sri Siddhartha Education Society, Maralur,KA

iv) APS03424,B.Ed. Indira Education Society, Tumkur.KA

v) AOSO0302.B.Ed. K.S.E.F. College of Education, Tumkur,KA.

vi) APS03481, B.Ed. Sri. T.V.V. College of Education, Tumkur.KA.

have appeared and given personal a hearing. One College by name Vidyavahini Samsthe, (APS01767.B.Ed ).Tumkur, KA, has not appeared for personal hearing inspite of being informed through e-mail, speed post & telephonic call.

As an introductory note the Chairperson, SRC has told to the representatives of the institutions that ‘that we (the Regional Committees) do not have the practice of personal hearing as per Regulations. However, in compliance to the directions of the Honourable High Court of Karnataka, we have called you for personal hearing. You may say what all you want to say. It is entirely the discretion of the institution. But please submit in writing today after this hearing point wise what all submissions you wanted to make before SRC during the personal hearing session such that, later, there would not be scope either to the institution to say that SRC did not hear on these points or to the SRC that the institution has not submitted these points. You may also enclose what all documents you want to enclose to your written representation. Make a photocopy of your representation and take acknowledgement of SRO.’

The oral presentations made by these institutions are recorded which are as under:


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

47

Represented by:

1. Sri C Rajanna, Principal The Principal of the institution has made the presentation on behalf of the institute. She

has said that :

a. the land is in the name of the individual i.e. the President of the Society and it is being transferred to the institution.

b. the required land area as per norms is 1500 Sq.mts but it has only 1400 Sq.mts. however, if time is given, they shall make up the deficit.

c. the first grade college of the society is moving to another building and this institution shall move to the first grade college building

d. the Principal of the college was appointed during the year 1996 and at that time, the qualification of Ph.D. was not an essential qualification for the Principal.

After the presentation, the institutions have requested for time till 03.02.2014 for submitting written representation. The Committee permitted and asked SRO to give signed photocopy of representation as acknowledgement for putting up in the file.

The committee decided as under;

‘Party appeared .Was given a personal hearing. Thereafter, they were advises to give a written submission of their presentation. Signed photocopy was returned as acknowledgement. Put up on file’

Accordingly, the institution has submitted its written representation on 03.02.2014, The committee in its 261st Meeting considered the written representation and directed SRO to Process and put up comparative statement of documents submitted earlier and not submitted at the personal hearing.

Accordingly, the file is processed

The Committee in compliance to the Hon’ble High Court directions dated 10.12.2013; in its 257th meeting decided to give personal hearing. Accordingly, the said college was given a personal hearing in its 260th meeting held on 29-31st Jan, 2014 and advised to give a written representation.

The institution submitted its written representation along with the documents on 03.02.2014.

The reply submitted by the institution to the personal hearing was duly considered by the SRC in its 264th meeting held during 1-3 March, 2014 and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persists as under:-

1. No new land document has been furnished. Land is in the name of an individual. 2. Built-up area us less by 222 sq.mtrs. We cannot go by what is proposed to be

constructed in future. 3. Proof for shifting of the 1st Grade College from the premises is not yet submitted. 4. Principal post is vacant. I/c Principal is not qualified. 5. Staff list is not in accordance with NCTE norms.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

48

Regulations, to reject the application and advised SRO to reissue earlier decision of withdrawal of recognition.

As per the decision of SRC, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 8.5.2014.

In the meantime, the institution has approached the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No. 9261-9269/2014 filed by 9 institutions of Tumkur University against the State of Karnataka and others wherein the institution is the 6th petitioner and SRC, NCTE is the 4th Respondent. NCTE, New Delhi is not a party in the writ petition No.9261-9269/2014.

The Court order dated 16.04.2014 states as under:-

"The matter having been heard earlier, the interim order stood vacated. The petitions were found to be not maintainable and it was adjourned at the request of the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the counsel for the petitioners Thereafter, the matter having been listed before the Court on several occasions, the counsel for the petitioner had sought repeated adjournments on the ground that it should be dismissed only in the presence of the Senior Advocate engaged in the case. Today when the matter is called out, a similar request is made.

2. Since the petitions have been heard at length and as there is no substance in the petitions, repeated request by the learned counsel for the petitioners to dismiss the petitions if at all only in the presence of the Senior Advocate engaged, is not a reason to adjourn the matter. The petitions are dismissed.

3. 3. Incidentally, the learned counsel for the petitioners, as a last effort, states that he has made an application before the NCTE for re-consideration of the petitioners' case for recognition in the light of having complied with the norms prescribed by the NCTE.

If such an application has been made, it is for the NCTE to take further steps, in accordance with law and to expedite the same. With that observation, the petitions stand dismissed."

Remarks of SRO

As seen from the records, there is no communication from the institution regarding the application submitted in view of the above Court order.

The SRC in its 267th Meeting held on 12th – 13th May 2014, considered the matter. In the Hon’ble High Court, the Counsel for petitioners, as a last effort, stated that he had made an application before the NCTE for re-consideration of the petitioners case for recognition in the light of having complied with norms prescribed by the NCTE.

The Hon’ble Court in their order dated 16.04.2014 stated that, if such an application had been made, (as mentioned above), it was for the NCTE to take further steps, in accordance with law, and to expedite the same. With that observation, the petitions were dismissed.

As seen from the records of this office (SRCNCTE), no application was/has been received from the Institution. The question of reconsideration, therefore, does not arise. The committee accordingly, decided to close the case.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

49

The decision of SRC was intimated to the institution on 06.08.2014

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order F.No.89-291/2014 Appeal/11th Meeting dated 15.10.2014 Remanded as follows:

“.....Sh. R.C. Vijaya Kunnathin, Secretar and Sh. Rajanna C. Principal, Sri T.V. Venkataswamy College of Education, Tumkur, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 12.09.2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that ``the management authorities have transferred the land measuring 2500 sq mts in favour of Principal Sri T.V. Venkataswamy College of Education, Madhugiri /572132, Tumkur District, Karnataka. The College authorities are presently constructing building of 234 sq, mts attached to the existing construction work is under progress. The building is expected to be completed within 05 months. Relevant Photocopies of constructing Building is here with enclosed. We will upload the photocopies of progressive construction of building in future. As per VT report and BCC report Ground floor of the building belongs to our college itself. Only some periods of UG course is conducting classes whenever our college is in leisure time. So question of shifting does not prevail. Previously we were misinterpreted about the shifting of classroom of the college. Principal post is vacnt. College authorities have requested the concerned authorities to permit to appoint the principal. Any how we have appointed I/C qualified principal as per NCTE norms. The staff members of the College except Smt. B.J. Sowmya were appointed before 01.04.1993. They were appointed as per the norms of that time. At the same time all the posts were approved by the concerned authorities while admitting the college for salary grants. Smt. B.J. Sowmya’s Appointment is governed by the 2009 NCTE Norms. The appellant in his letter dt. 12.09.2014 submitted that all the staff members except Smt. B.J. Sowmya were appointed before 1.04.1993 as per grant-in-aid norms approved by the Govt. of Karnataka. However, the staff members have been instructed to improve their qualifications as per NCTE norms. They may be provided one month time to fulfil the deficiencies”.

The Council noted that the SRC, after submission of the documents by the appellant following personal hearing and before withdrawing recognition on the five grounds mentioned in the said order has not issued a show cause notice to the appellant, as required under the proviso to Section 17(1) of the NCTE Act, providing a reasonable opportunity of making representation against the proposed order. In the circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations. In the meantime, the order of withdrawal shall remain in abeyance.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations. In the meantime, the order of withdrawal shall remain in abeyance.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Sri T.V. Venkataswamy College of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

50

Education, Tumkur, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

The SRC in its 275th meeting held on 1st -2nd December, 2014 considered Appellate

Authority’s order dated 15/10/2014, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to

process after notification of the new Regulations, as directed by NCTE (H'qrs).

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidelines for

processing of pending applications.

Accordingly, a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The

institution has submitted affidavit on 14.01.2015.

The SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th to 22nd January, 2015 considered the matter

and decided to verify the documents process and put up.

It is verified from the file, the institution has not submitted any documentary proof.

As per appellate authority order remanded to SRC with direction to issue show cause

notice to the appellant and take further action, as per the Regulations.

Show cause notice was not issued to the institution.

The Committee Considered the matter, Appellate authority order dated

15.10.2014, affidavit submitted vide letter dated 14.01.2015, and all the relevant



1) The Committee advised Southern Regional Office to Check on receipt of

affidavit.

The Institution to submit the following documents:

• Certified copy of the land documents issued by the competent authority.

• Building Plan issued by the competent Govt. authority with all details.

• Building Completion Certificate in NCTE format issued by Govt. Engineer.

• Land Use Certificate issued by competent authority.

• Latest Encumbrance Certificate issued by competent authority.

• The Affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper in the prescribed format with notary attestation to be submitted.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

51

• Fixed deposits in joint name towards Endowment fund & Reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank is to be produced.

• Bye-Laws of the Society are to be submitted by the management.



written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice

along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in

the matter including rejection of the application, based on the records

available, with no further notice.

13. 14

SRCAPP1813

B.Ed

St. Mary

Christian

Educational

Development

& charitable

trust,

Tirunelveli,

Tamilnadu

TN

St. Mary Christian Educational Development & Charitable Trust, Plot No. 174, Street/Road. Ambur Road, Vadamalaisamudram Village, Vickramasingapuram Post Office, Ambasamudram Taluk, Tirunelveli District-627425, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to St. Marys College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 174,174/2,174/2,174/2, Plot No. 13, Street No. 100, Vadamalaisamutram Village, Vickramasingapuram Post Office, Ambasamudram Taluk, Tirunelveli District-627425, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 14.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 26.12.2012 along with processing along with processing fees paid through challan dt.17.12.2012 for Rs.50100/-.

The Southern Regional Committee reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, was summarily rejected as per Regulations [ 7 1–A (i) ].

• On-line application was submitted on 14.12.2012, whereas the hard copy of the same is submitted on 26.12.2012, as such, the Society has not dispatched the Hard copy of the application within 7 days of the submission of the on-line application.

As per the decision of SRC , a rejection letter was issued to the institution on 18.03.2013. The institution submitted written representations on 17.9.2013, 19.11.2013 and 16.12.2013 requesting for returning of FDRs. In the meantime, the institution has approached the Hon’ble High court of Judicature at Madras in W.P.No. 16215 of 2013 with a prayer to direct the 2nd respondent (SRC, NCTE) to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of recognition to St.Marys College of Education for B.Ed course for the academic year 2013-14 and pass such or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case and thus render justice.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

52

A letter from the advocate Mr.Ramakrishna Reddy was received by this office on 02.07.2013 enclosing a copy of the Counter Affidavit to be filed on behalf of the respondent,NCTE. Attested copies of the Counter Affidavit were sent to the advocate Shri.Ramakrishnareddy on 18.07.2013. The original FDRs of the institution were returned vide this office letter F.No.SRCAPP1813 /B.Ed / TN/2013-14/55436 dated 17.12.2013. This office is in receipt of the Court Order dated 18.02.2014.The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras vide order dated 18.02.2014 in W.P.No. 16251 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 had made the following observations; ‘The issue involved in this case need not be gone into and decided on merits, in view of the fact that the very academic year for which recognition is sought for namely 2013-14 is going to be over shortly and therefore, the petitioner has to make a fresh application only for the current academic year 2014-15.If any such application is filed, then it shall be considered by the respondents on merits and in accordance with the law.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that they will make fresh application for the academic year 2014-15 and of any such application is filed, a direction may be issued to the respondents to consider the same and pass the order on merits. The learned counsel for the respondents also fairly submitted that it is open to the petitioner to make fresh application for the academic year 2014-15 and if any such application is filed, it will be decided on merits.

Therefore, this writ petition is closed as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to make fresh application for the academic year 2014-15.As and when such application is filed, it is for the respondents to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.’ On 03.04.2014, the institution has submitted a written representation dated 26.03.2014 which is as under; ‘Our application was rejected by SRC for B.Ed program for the year 2013-14.As per the Hon’ble High Court of Madras Judgement in W.P.No. 16215 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 dated 18.02.2014, we have submitted the copy of the application proposal for recognition of St.Mary’s College for the academic year 2014-15.Hence, we request you to kindly consider our application and Hon’ble High court of Madras Judgement dated 18.02.2014 favourably.’ The trust has enclosed copies of the application in triplicate along with the letter. The SRC in its 266th meeting held on 2 May 2014 considered the matter, noted that the said case of the institution is a case of pending application and not of an existing institution. That being so, in view of the Supreme Court orders, (dated 07.03.2014

read wi th order dated 10.09.2013) this cannot be processed until the new regulations are notified and keep it pending.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

53

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly, a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted its reply along with affidavit on 12.01.2015. Note: 1. summarily rejection order was issued to the institution on 18.03.2013.

2. As per court order dated 18.02.2014 petitioner to make fresh application for the academic year 2014-15. As and when such application is filed, it is for the respondents to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

3. But institution has submitted triplicate applications which was placed before SRC in its 266th meeting and the committee has noted that the said case of the institution is a case of pending application and not of an existing institution. That being so, in view of the Supreme Court orders, (dated 07.03.2014 read wi th

order dated 10.09.2013) this cannot be processed until the new regulations are notified and keep it pending.

The matter was placed before SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th -22nd January 2015, considered and the committee decided to process and put up. The Committee considered the matter, reply from the institution vide letter dated

12.01.2015 along with the affidavit, decided as under:

1.This case is considered as an existing institution as directed by the H'qrs in

their Guidelines.

2.Advised Southern Regional Office to Check on affidavit

3.Cause Inspection

4.Ask VT to collect documents - Building Plan not approved by

competent authority. Building Completion Certificate not in

prescribed format.

14. 15

APS05975

B.Ed

Sri

Ramachandir

a Teacher

Training

institute,

Nagapattinam

, Tamilnadu

TN

Sri Ramachandira Teacher Training Institute, Somanathar Koil Street, Vedaraniam Taluk, Nagapattinam District, Tamilnadu. Sri Ramachandira Teacher Training Institute, Somanathar Koil Street, Vedaraniam Taluk, Nagapattinam District, Tamilnadu had submitted an application for D.T.Ed Course on 31.12.2002 and the institution was granted recognition on 12.01.2005 with an intake of 50 students. Further, the institution had submitted application for D.T.Ed-AI on 01.12.2005 and the recognition was granted on 11.12.2007 with an intake of 100 students, which includes the existing intake of 50 and additional intake of 50 students. Thereafter, the institution had submitted another application for starting B.Ed course on 02.01.2006 and the recognition was granted on 01.11.2007 with an annual intake of 100 students, with the condition to shift to own premises within 3 years. SRC,NCTE is in receipt of three complaints against the institution one from the State


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

54

Government, another from Sri.Elango, Joint Commissioner, H.R & C.E. Dept. S.M. Salai, Thanjavur – 613 001, Tamilnadu and third from the Executive Officer, A/M, Vedaranayaswara Swamy, Thirukoil levelling the following allegations:-

“Sri Ramachandra Pharamceutical College and Sri Ramachandra College of Education are functioning in the land belonging to the temple. These two institutions have not obtained any kind of sanction from the temple. The temple authorities has already filed a suite O.S.5/2006 in the District Court, Nagappattinam against one Thiru Venkatachalam and two others for possession of the suit property after removal of superstructure and for permanent injunction from making any further constructions. This suit is still pending”.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 27.09.2011 calling for the remarks. The institution in its reply on 07.10.2011 has stated that the Executive Officer, Arulmigu Vedaraneswarer Swamy Thirukoil, Vedaranyam, Nagapattinam District have given No objection Certificate dated 27.06.2011 vide Na.Ka.No. 171/2011/M, to the effect that the Temple authorities have got no objection for the above Educational Institution to construct buildings and carryout educational activities in the 2.66 acres of land in sy no. 736/1736/2. The above said No objection Certificate is enclosed for your kind perusal. As far as O.S.No. 5 of 2006 pending before the District Court, Nagapattinam is concerned the same will be settled between the parties consequent to the above No objection Certificate issued by the Landlord. Please take note of the fact that there is a Landlord-Tenant Agreement exists between the parties. It may be noted that the institution is stating about which NOC issued by the Executive Officer, is itself one of complainant out of three, stated above. Moreover, SRC is not in receipt of any proposal by the institution for shifting to its own premises. The SRC 215th meeting held on 12-13th December, 2011 considered the matter and decided to keep the decision pending and informed Regional Director to provide the authencity, 3 recognition orders of 3 courses being run by the institution i.e., 1) APS0 1107-D.T.Ed, 2) APS04461-D.T.Ed-Al & 3) APS05975-B.Ed and Xerox copy of the land documents of the institution for further decision in the matter. Accordingly, the following documents are appended:

Recognition order and Sale Deed for APS01107, D.T.Ed course Recognition order and Sale Deed for APS04461, D.T.Ed-AI course. Recognition order and Sale Deed for APS05975, B.Ed course.

The SRC in its 218th meeting held on 28th February, 2012 considered the matter and decided that, the case arising out of the complaints is closed with the observation that the parties should settle their disputes in the Civil Court, where proceedings are already reported to be in progress. Further, the committee directed the Southern Regional Office to examine details and process for shifting of courses as may be relevant.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

55

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 27.03.2012. The institution vide its letter dtd. 20.04.2012 has submitted DD bearing no. 136928 dtd. 19.04.2012 for Rs. 40,000/- towards shifting of premises.

The SRC in its 223rd Meeting held on 29th-31st May 2012 considered the written reply and other relevant documents submitted by the institution and decided to cause Shifting inspection at the new premises and to ascertain infrastructural and instructional facilities Under NCTE Act. Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between 14th to 18th June, 2012. The same was intimated to the institution on 08.06.2012. The VT member vide its letter dtd. 20.12.2012 has stated that college correspondent was not ready for inspection, hence, the inspection of the institution is not yet conducted. A complainant dtd. 13.11.2012 has been received against illegal functioning of Sri Ramachandra College of Education at Vedaraniam, Nagapattinam District, Tamilnadu. from Selvaraj S/o Ammasi, 10-39, Chetty Street, Thethakudi South Post, Vedaraniam Taluk, Nagapattinam District, Pin-614809, Tamilnadu on 07.11.2012. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the complainant on 27.11.2012 requesting to submit an affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper indicating they had written the complaint under his signature or not. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments, Chennai vide letter dtd. 03.12.2012 and has requested to know the recognition status of Sri Ramachandra Pharmaceutical College and Sri Ramachandra Teacher Training College (B.Ed College) situated in temple land. Accordingly, a letter sent to the Commissioner office was sent on 13.12.2012 stating that “Sri Ramachandra Pharmaceutical College does not come under the purview of Southern Regional Committee (NCTE), Bangalore for recognition/affiliation. However, Sri Ramachandra Teacher Training Institute (B.Ed) is approved by the SRC, NCTE Bangalore” and a copy of order is sent to the Commissioner. The complainant had submitted reply along with remarks and documents on 17.12.2012. The complainant has also submitted original notarized affidavit of Rs. 100/- dtd. 12.12.2012 regarding illegal functioning of Sri Ramachandra B.Ed., College at Vedaranayam, Nagapattinam District, Tamilnadu. Remarks:

� The SRC in its 223rd meeting held on 29th-31st May 2012 decided to cause inspection, however, the same is yet not conducted as stated by VT member vide letter dated.20.12.2012.

The SRC in its 241st meeting held on 29th & 31stMarch 2013 & 01st April 2013 considered the matter and all other relevant documents and decided to cause Composite inspection within 15 days notice, under NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

56

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between 13th -17th May, 2013. The same was intimated to the institution on 06.05.2013. The inspection of the institution was conducted on 17.05.2013. The Committee considered the VT report, VCD and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

• Approved building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted.

• Notarized land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted.

• Original Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.

• The institution has not submitted duly approved staff list from the University for B.Ed course.

• No. of faculty as per the list is not adequate for D.Ed and D.Ed-Al courses being run by the institution.

• As per VT report, language learning lab is not available for D.T.Ed course.

• Original Affidavit is not submitted by the institution.

• Affiliation for B.Ed has been withdrawn w.e.f 2013-14, by TTEU, Chennai, vide Withdrawal Order No. TNTEU/R/CCII310/Syn. April-Item No. 18/Withdrawal/2013/782, dt. 07/04/2013.

Supreme Court order regarding time schedule to be followed by the institutions Keeping in view, Supreme Court vide their order in Civil Appeal No. 1125-1128/2011 in SLP No. 17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfills the conditions specified in various clauses of the Regulations. The Council is directed to ensure that in future no institution is granted recognition unless it fulfils the conditions laid down in the Act and the Regulations and the time schedule fixed for processing the application by the Regional Committee and communication of the decision on the issue of recognition it strictly adhered to”.

Based on the above points the SRC in its 248th meeting has decided not to give permission for shifting and to withdraw the recognition of the D.T.Ed (APS01107), D.T.Ed-Al (APS04461) & B.Ed (APS05975) courses run by the Sri Ramachandra Teacher Training Institute, Somanathar Koil Street, Vedaraniam Taluk, Nagapattinam District, Tamilnadu, from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.T.Ed, D.T.Ed-Al & B.Ed courses, if any, to complete their course. Accordingly, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 02.09.2013. Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 02.07.2014 remanded as


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

57

follows:

“…….Sh.R. Rajendran correspondent, Shri Ramachandra College of Education Nagapattanam, Tamilnadu presented the case of the applicant institution on 26.05.2014 in the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that we can’t get building approval from municipality, because it is a temple land.” Appeal Committee noted that recognition for D.T.Ed., D.T.Ed-AI and B.Ed., course has been withdraw vide order dated 02.09.2013. The withdrawal has been made effective from the forthcoming session of 2014-15. Committee also noted that the withdrawal order is based on the observations made by the Visiting Team in its inspection Report dated 17.05.2013. SRC had failed to provide opportunity to the appellant Institution by issue of a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of the Act. Committee therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with direction to issue Show Cause Notice and process the case as per Regulation accordingly. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue Show Cause Notice and process the case as per Regulations. The Council hereby remands back the case of Shri Ramachandra College of Education, Nagapattinam, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.”

The SRC in its 273rd meeting held on 30th September, and 01st October 2014 considered the Appellate Authority order dated 02.07.2014,and the committee decided that as directed by NCTE (H.Q), such cases of ‘appeal remand’ have to be kept on ‘Freeze” until notification of new Regulations. Advised Southern Regional Office to take action accordingly. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014.the institution has submitted affidavit for willingness on 07.01.2015. The matter was placed before SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25 January 2015, considered the matter, and decided to verify the documents, process and put up. Accordingly the application is processed.


02.07.2014, affidavit submitted vide letter dated 07.01.2015, and all the relevant




(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

58

2) The Committee advised Southern Regional Office to Check on affidavit.


• Approved building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

• Original Building Completion Certificate from competent Govt. Engineer is not submitted.

• Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the Educational purpose is not submitted..

• The Institution has not submitted duly approved staff list from the University for B.Ed course.

• Number of faculty as per the list is not adequate for D.Ed and D.Ed-Al courses being run by the institution.

• As per VT report, language learning lab is not available for D.T.Ed course.

• Original affidavit is not submitted by the institution.

• Affiliation for B.Ed has been withdrawn w.e.f. 2013-14 by TTEU, Chennai vide withdrawal order No. TNTEU/R/CC1131/Syn. April-item No. 18/Withdrawal/2013/782, ated 07/04/2013.



written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice along

with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the

matter including withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available, with

no further notice.

15. 16

APS08690

B.Ed

Annai

Veilankannis

College of

Education,

Chennai,

Tamilnadu

TN

Annai Veilankannis College of Education, No. 33, Nedunggudran Village, Gandhi Road, Chengalpattu, Chennai-600048, Tamilnadu Annai Veilankannis College of Education, No. 33, Nedunggudran Village, Gandhi Road, Chengalpattu, Chennai-600048, Tamilnadu had submitted an application for B.Ed Course on 16.05.2007. The institution was granted recognition on 20.02.2008 with an annual intake of 100 students, with the condition to shift to own premises within 3 years. The institution vide its letter dated 12.03.2012 has submitted DD bearing no. 514873


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

59

dtd. 05.03.2012 for Rs.40,000/- towards shifting of premises. The SRC in its 221st meeting held on 19th-20th April, 2012, considered the matter and all relevant documents and decided to cause shifting inspection to examine infrastructural and instructional facilities provided and whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms. Accordingly, inspection of the institution was carried out on 23.05.2012. The SRC in its 224th meeting held on 14th-17th June 2012, considered the VT report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show Cause Notice under NCTE Act, for the following:

• The institution has submitted a copy of lease deed dated 17.03.1999 in favour of the Trust/Society for a period of 55 years. However, as per clause 8(7) (iv) of NCTE norms & standards, 2009, the title of the land should be vested in the name of institution on ownership basis. Hence, certified copy of the registered land documents in the name of the institution is required.

• Approved blue print of building plan is not submitted. Total land area is also not mentioned.

• Original affidavit is not submitted. In affidavit Sy. No. not mentioned. • Building completion certificate not submitted. • Notarized copy of Land use certificate is not submitted. • Non-Encumbrance certificate is not submitted. • Photocopy of FDRs for 5.00 lakhs & 3.00 lakhs submitted. Required to

submit original FDRs. Original FDRs were not shown to VT members for verification.

• The total land area is only 16053 sq.ft which is grossly inadequate against the requirement of 2500 aq.mts as per NCTE norms & standards, 2009 for one unit of B.Ed.

• The library has 3256 books only. Since it has been running since 2008-09, therefore, the library should have been augmented with addition of 200 books annually and it has now at least 3800 books.

• As per VT report, language learning lab needs to be strengthened. • 1+6 faculty is inadequate for one unit of B.Ed against the requirement of

1+7+2 as per NCTE norms & standards, 2009. • Lecture(s) in fine Arts/Physical Education are not available. • As per staff profiles and VTR, consolidated salary is being paid in cash

which is not allowed as per NCTE norms & standards, 2009. • Fresh VCD to be submitted.

Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 04.07.2012. The institution submitted its reply on 23.07.2012. The SRC in its 229th meeting held on 30th-31st July,2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 23.07.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Final Show Cause Notice under NCTE Act for the following:

• Approved blue print of the building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted. The copy of the building plan submitted is not


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

60

clear and readable. In the building plan all the rooms are given nomenclature as class rooms, it is not being segrated for Prinicpal, multipurpose hall, seminar hall and labs.

• Original Affidavit in the prescribed form on Rs. 100/- stamp paper duly attested by oath Commissioner or notary public, is not submitted.

• Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank in favour of Society/college/institution & in joint name is not given.

• Approved staff list from the concerned affiliating body/University is not submitted with their percentage of marks and grade.

• No documentary proof is made available for payment of salary to the staff by Cheque through Bank.

Accordingly, by seeing the website the institution had submitted its written representation on 27.08.2012. The SRC in its 233rd meeting held on 26th-28th September, 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 27.08.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Final Show Cause Notice under NCTE Act for the following:

• In the letter submitted to SRC, the institution has stated that 1+10 faculty members are available, whereas in the letter submitted to TTEU, only 1+9 faculty members are mentioned.

• Lecturer in foundation course is not appointed. • Lecturer in Fine Arts is not eligible. • Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not

submitted. Notarised English version of encumbrance certificate is also not submitted.

Accordingly, a Final Show cause notice was issued to the institution on 29.10.2012. The institution had submitted its written representation on 05.11.2012. The SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21st -22nd November, 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 05.11.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under NCTE Act for the following:

• The institution has not submitted duly approved staff list from affiliating body/University.

• Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.

• The institution has submitted copy of the registered land document and it was executed on 30.12.2002. Whereas non-encumbrance dt. 29.10.2012 is not reflecting land document details and institution/Society name. It needs clarification.

Accordingly, by seeing website the institution had submitted its written representation on 17.12.2012.

The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 09th -11th March, 2013 and decide to withdraw recognition.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

61

The reply of the institution the show cause notice was duly considered and the reply

is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

• In the building plan submitted, total land area is not mentioned, Sy. No. “81” as given in building plan is not matching with other documents.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer in proper format is not submitted.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the

B.Ed course (APS08690) run by the Annai Veilankannis college of Education, No.

33, Nedunggudran Village, Gandhi Road, Chengalpattu, Chennai – 600 048,

Tamilnadu, from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch

of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.

In the meantime, the institution moved to the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P.no. 5526 of 2013 and interim order dtd.19.03.2013 reads as under:-

“……this petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/SB.RABU MANOHAR, Advocate for the petitioner the cost made the following order:-

There shall be an order of interim injunction for a period of three weeks.

Notice. Private notice is also permitted”. The above was placed before SRC in its 241st meeting held on 30th-31st March & 1st April, 2013 and SRC decided to process and put up 242nd meeting. A letter was sent to the advocate on 09.04.2013 to vacate the stay. Further, SRC NCTE has received interim order dt 19.03.2013 on 08.04.2013 which reads as under.

“…. the petitioner above named has presented the above petition, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support thereof, a copy of which is annexed hereto, the High Court will be pleased to pass an order of interim injunction, restraining the Respondent from withdrawing the recognition granted to the petitioner institution dt. 20.02.2008, pending disposal of this writ petition and whereas the petition will come up for hearing on 09.04.2013, you are hereby directed to appear, in person or by advocate, to show cause why the petitioner’s prayer should not be granted, in default of which, the matter will be heard and decided in your absence”.

SRC NCTE has received interim injunction dt. 19.03.2013 on 25.03.2013 which reads as under:-

“ There shall be an order of interim injunction for a period of three weeks”.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

62

The SRC in its 242nd meeting held on 14th-16th April, 2013 considered the Hon’ble High Court interim Injunction order dt. 19.03.2013 received on 25.03.2012 and decided as under:

To move for vocation of ‘interim stay’ if stay continues, if final order is not received within 2 days. Check with lawyer.

1) If the final order allows the petition, file an appeal. 2) The institution was given/shown extraordinary consideration by giving 4

show cause notices to rectify the deficiencies. But, even then the deficiencies are persisting.

Further, the committee reiterates that the order of withdrawal of recognition of the institution is in order, as It is a case of strict application of norms and standards as directed by S,C, in their order dt. 31-01-2011 in case Civil Appeal No.1125-1128/2011 in SLP, SLP No. 17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfills the conditions specified in various clauses of the Regulations. The Council is directed to ensure that in future no institution is granted recognition unless it fulfils the conditions laid down in the Act and the Regulations and the time schedule fixed for processing the application by the Regional Committee and communication of the decision on the issue of recognition it strictly adhered to.”

The Committee considered the matter and advised Southern Regional Office to further process and put up for necessary decision Accordingly, a letter sent to the advocate on 19.04.2013. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. No. 6626 of 2013 and MP No. 1 of 2013 and interim order dtd. 25.04.2013 which reads as under:-

“….this petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.B.RABU MANOHAR, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order:- Post on 12.06.2013. Interim order already granted by this Court is

extended till then”. A letter sent to Shri Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate on 27.05.2013. SRC, NCTE is in receipt of letter dtd. 20.09.2013 alongwith the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in WP No. 6626 of 2013 and MP No.1 of 2013 interim order dtd. 05.09.2013 and reads as under:-

“….. This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.B.RABU MANOHA, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.K.RMAKRISHNA REDDY, Advocate for RI the court made the following order:-


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

63

Post on 03.10.2013 for final disposal. Interim order to continue”.

Accordingly, a letter sent to the Shri K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate on 30.09.2013. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in WP No.WP No. 6626 of 2013 and MP No.1 of 2013 interim order dtd. 08.10.2013 and reads as under:-

“… The petitioner now wanted to issue a madamus to restrain the respondent from exercising its statutory function. There is not question of issuing a mandamus to restrain the statutory authority like NCTE. NCTE was Constituted by the ACT of Parliament. NCTE exercises certain functions and powers. The authority has got power to withdraw recognition. It is only when the recognition is withdrawn the cause of action would arise to challenge the order. The writ Petition is clearly misconceived. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs”.

The SRC in its 260th meeting held on 29-31 January, 2014 considered the Hon’ble High Court Interim Order dated 08/10/2013, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to issue Withdrawal of recognition order as decided in its 240th Meeting held on 09th – 11th March, 2013. As per the decision of SRC, an order of withdrawal was issued to the Institution on 20.02.2014. TNTEU, Chennai had withdrawn the affiliation of the Institution and that is received on 12.05.2014. Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs, the original file was sent to NCTE Hqrs. on 22.07.2014. Court order in W.P. No. 25230 of 2014 and M.P No.1 and No.2 of 2014, order dated 17.09.2014, received by SRC on 24.09.2014.The Court Order stating as follows:

“…..the short prayer of the petitioner is only to direct the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal dated 16.04.2014.

Heard Mr. R. Muthukumaraswamy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. Mr. R. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned standing counsel takes notice for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.V. Venkatesan, learned standing counsel takes notice for the third respondent.

The appeal was already heard on 12.09.2014 and orders reserved. The last date for admission is 30.09.2014. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to pass orders on the appeal on or before 26.09.2014. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

64

NCTE Hqrs. in its e-mail dtd.26.09.2014 has forwarded a copy of Appellate Authority Order dtd.24.09.2014 in respect of AnnaiVeilankannis College of Education, Chennai. The Appellate Authority in its order stated as follows: “….the Council noted the SRC, after conducting an inspection of the appellant institution on 23.05.2012 issued/decided to issue four show cause notices and received replies to all of them while on two occasions the SRC issued the notices on two other occasions the institution sent replies on the basis of the minutes of the meeting of the SRC itself obviating the necessity of issuing formal notices. The committee noted that the SRC in their 240th meeting held on 9-11, March 2013 considered the reply of the institution dt. 17.12.2012(submitted on the basis of the minutes of the 235th meeting of the SRC held on 21-22 Nov, 2012) and decided to withdraw recognition on the ground that the reply was unconvincing and not satisfactory and deficiencies persist as under: (i) in the building plan submitted, total land area is not mentioned. Survey No.81 as given in building plan is not matching with other documents. (ii) Original building completion certificate from competent Government authorized engineer in proper format is not submitted. The Council also noted that withdrawal order as per the above decision had not been issued till 20.02.2014 as the appellant moved petitions before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and they were pending. The SRC considered the matter and issued the withdrawal order only after the Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petitions in their order dt.8.10.2013. the Council also noted that a writ petition No. 25230 of 2014 seeking directions to pass orders immediately on the appeal filed by the institution, came up for admission on 17.09.2014 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The Hon’ble High Court disposed the same directing the Appellate Authority to pass orders on the appeal filed by the institution on or before 26.09.2014. The Council from a perusal of the orders of the SRC dt. 20.02.2014, noted that even though a reference has been made to the decision taken by the SRC in their 240th meeting held on 9-11 March 2013 the grounds on which the recognition has been withdrawn were not mentioned in the order. The withdrawal order also stated that the minutes of the 240th meeting have not yet been finalized the Council further noted from the minutes of the 240th meeting available on the file that the grounds on which withdrawal was to be issued are different from the grounds to be incorporated in the last final show cause notices and for which the institution furnished a reply and the SRC considered the same. In view of the above position, the Council concluded that the matter grounds on which recognition is proposed to be withdrawn and take further action as per the Regulations. While doing so the submissions made by the appellant in the appeal about approval of staff list and updated encumbrance certificate may also be taken into consideration. In the meantime the order of withdrawal shall remain in abeyance. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to communicate to the institution the final grounds on which recognition is proposed to be withdrawn and take further action as per the Regulation. While


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

65

doing so the submission made by the appellant in the appeal about approval of staff list and updated encumbrance certificate may also be taken into consideration. In the meantime the order of withdrawal shall remain in abeyance.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Annai Veilankannis College of Education, Chennai, Tamilnadu to the SRC. NCTE for necessary action as indicated above.

In the meantime the institution has submitted its written representation on 29.09.2014, along with documents enclosed as follows:

1. The Hon’ble High Court Order in W.P. No.25230 of 2014 and M.P. No. 1 of 2014.

2. Appeal Order No. APS08690/B.Ed/TN/2013-14/57009 dt. 20.02.2014. 3. TNTEU letter dt.11.04.2014, regarding Qualifications Approval for the post

of Principal appointed by the College. 4. TNTEU letter dt.09.04.2014, regarding Qualifications Approval for the post

of Assistant Professor appointed by the College. 5. TNTEU letter dt.11.04.2014, regarding Qualifications Approval for the post

of Librarian appointed by the College. 6. letter dt.16.04.2014, regarding Qualifications Approval for the post of

Performing Arts appointed by the College. 7. Certificate of Encumbrance on Property dt.04.04.2014.

The SRC in its 273rd meeting held on 30 September & 1 October 2014 considered the matter, Appellate authority order dated 24.09.2014, the institution’s written representation dated 29.9.014, decided that:

This is an appeal - remand case. In terms of the NCTE circular, this has to be kept in abeyance until notification of the new Regulations.

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 13.01.2015 along with affidavit, DD of Rs.10,000/- and FDR of Rs.4.00 lakh, photocopy of staff lists and encumbrance certificate.

The SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25th January, 2015 considered the matter and decided to verify the documents, process and put up. Note: The SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21st to 22nd November, 2012 decided to issue final show cause notice for the following:

• The institution has not submitted duly approved staff list from affiliating body/ University

• Up-to date encumbrance certificate issued by sub- registrar is not submitted.

• The institution has submitted copy of the registered land document and it was executed on 30.12.2002. Whereas non-encumbrance dt.29.10.2012 is not reflecting land documents details and institution/ Society name. it needs clarification.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

66

Before issuance of show cause notice, the intuition has submitted its written representation on 17.12.2012, by seeing the decision of 235th meeting uploaded in the website. The same was placed before SRC in its 240th meeting held on 9 - 11 March, 2013, the committee decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:

• In the building plan submitted, total land area is not mentioned, Sy. No.

“81” as given in building plan is not matching with other documents.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized

engineer in proper format is not submitted.

Due to interim order the withdrawal order was not issued to the institution.

A court order in W.P. No. 6626 of 2013 dated 18.10.2013 was placed before SRC in its

260th meeting held on 29-31 January, 2014 and the committee advised SRO to issue

withdrawal of recognition order as decided in 240th meeting.

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs. and the Appellate authority order dated 24.09.2014 remanded to SRC with a direction to communicate to the institution the final grounds on which recognition is proposed to be withdrawn and take further action as per the Regulation. While doing so the submission made by the appellant in the appeal about approval of staff list and updated encumbrance certificate may also be taken into consideration.


24.09.2014, and all the relevant documentary evidence and decided to serve

Show cause Notice under NCTE act. For the following deficiencies.

1). The Committee advised Southern Regional Office to Check on affidavit.


• The institution has snot submitted duly approved staff list from affiliating body/University.

• Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.

• The Institution has submitted copy of the registered land document and it was executed on 30.12.2002. Whereas non-encumbrance certificate dated29.10.2012 is not reflecting land documents details and institution/Society name. It need clarification.

• In the building plan submitted, total land area is not mentioned, Survey. Number “81” as given in building plan is not matching with other documents.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

67

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorised engineer in proper format is not submitted.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the institution and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter including withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available, with no further notice.

16. 17

SRCAPP2110

B.Ed

Usha College

of Education,

Dharmauri,

Tamilnadu

TN

Usha College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 180, 181, Street No. 4/117, Vellegoundanpalyam Village, Settikarai Post Office, Dharmapuri Taluk & District, Pin-636704, Tamilnadu. Usha Educational Trust, Plot No. 14/117, Street/Road. Neelapuram Road, Jallihalli Kottai Village, Settikarai Post Office, Dharmapuri Taluk & District, Pin-636704, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Usha College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 180, 181, Street No. 4/117, Vellegoundanpalyam Village, Settikarai Post Office, Dharmapuri Taluk & District, Pin-636704, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 04.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 04.02.2013 followed by reminder on 22.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 22.04.2013.

The Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days and till date.

The SRC in its 250th Meeting held on 11th to 13th August, 2013 had considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted reply for deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days from the date of issue of deficiency letter and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee had decided as per clause 7(1) of NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 12.09.2013.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution had preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014 Remanded as follows:

“…. Appeals Committee noted that the recognition for B.Ed course applied by the appellant Institution was refused on the ground that ‘ Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 day’. Committee further noted that a deficiency letter dated 22/04/2013 was issued to the appellant Institution. The appellant during the course of Appeal hearing produced evidence of having sent reply to the deficiency letter vide letter dated 06/06/2013. This reply was acknowledged by SRC on 06/06/2013 vide Dy. No 127401. The reply is however not available on the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

68

relevant file of SRC. The Committee, however, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to trace out and link the reply dated 06/06/2013 of the appellant Institution for further processing of the application. The appellant should also furnish a copy of the reply to SRC within 10 days of the receipt of the Appeal Order. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to trace out and link the reply dated 06/06/2013 of the appellant institution for further processing of the application. The appellant should also furnish a copy of the reply to SRC within 10 days of the receipt of the appeal Order. The council hereby remands back the case of Usha College of Education, Dharmapuri, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.”

The SRC in its 271st meeting held on 1st August 2014, as per the direction of NCTE

(H'qrs) that all appeal remand cases should be processed only after notification of the

new Regulations. Advised Southern Regional Office to process the case accordingly,

and put up after notification of new Regulations as per NCTE (H.Q) instructions..

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidelines for



institution has submitted affidavit for willingness, instead institutions submitted a reply on

06.01.2015

As per the decision of SRC the application was processed and placed before SRC in its

277th meeting held on 20-22 January, 2015 and the committee decided to cause

inspection.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 28.01.2015 intimating the inspection

will be carried out between 1 to 5 February 2015.

Meantime the institution has submitted a letter on 30.01.2015 requesting to postpone

the inspection scheduled to be held now, for a period of 15 days, since my mother was

hospitalized.

The Committee considered the matter, letter dated 30.01.2015, decided as under:

1.Check on affidavit

2.Advised Southern Regional Office to request is accepted in view of

extraordinary circumstances.

3.Reschedule VT Inspection around 15 Feb, 2015.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

69

17. 18

APS01313

B.Ed

Smt. Mannaru

Yasodamma

Memorial

B.Ed College,

Prakasam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Smt. Mannaru Yasodamma Memorial B.Ed. College, Addanki Road, Darsi (P.O.& M),

Kandukur Revenue Division, Prakasam District, Darsi-523247, Andhra Pradesh.

Smt. Mannaru Yasodamma Memorial B.Ed. College, Addanki Road, Darsi (P.O.& M),

Kandukur Revenue Division, Prakasam District, Darsi-523247, Andhra Pradesh has

submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of

recognition for conducting B.Ed course of one year from the academic session 2003-2004

with an annual intake of 120 students and was granted recognition on 13.10.2003.

On 20.10.2014 and 27.10.2014 , a staff list dated 25.09.2014 is received by this office

from the Registrar, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Nagarjunanagar-522510 (Copy

enclosed) is as under:-

“The University has verified from the records maintained by the aforesaid College found

that the teaching staff members as shown in the enclosed list with qualifications shown

against the names for B.Ed. course for the Academic year 2012-2013 and 2013-14 are

now working in Smt. Mannaru Yasodamma Memorial B.Ed. College, Addanki Road, Darsi

(P.O.& M), Kandukur Revenue Division, Prakasam District, Darsi-523247, Andhra

Pradesh."

The Southern Regional Committee in its 275th meeting held during 1st & 2

December,2014 considered the matter, decided to defer for consideration with

respect to the new Regulations that are being notified by the NCTE (H'qrs).

Further, advised Southern Regional Office to put up in the next meeting.

Remarks of SRO on staff list as put up in 275th meeting .

1. Principal is not having Ph.d and not qualified of as per NCTE Regulation, 2009 2. Part time Lecturer in Art Education in not appointed.

The Committee Considered the matter, letter dated 25.09.2014 from the

Registrar, Acharya Nagarjuna University towards the staff list, and all the

relevant documentary evidence and decided to serve Show cause Notice under

NCTE act. For the following deficiencies.

1). The Committee advised Southern Regional Office to Check on affidavit.


• The institution has not appointed Principal with qualification as per NCTE Norms. The institution has appointed Principal who is not having Ph.D and not qualified as per NCTE Norms.

• The Institution has not appointed Art. Education Lecturer in accordance with NCTE norms.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

70






no further notice.

18. 19

SRCAPP1189

D.El.Ed

Susheela

College of

Education,

Ananthapur ,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Susheela College of Education, Khasara No. 1/16C, Rachanapalli Village and Post Office, Rachanapalli Taluka and City, Ananthapur District - 515 001, Andhra Pradesh St. Marks Educational Institution Society, Plot No. 5, Bellary Road, Rachanapalli Village and Post Office, Rachanapalli Taluka and City, Ananthapur District - 515 001, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Susheela College of Education, Khasara No. 1/16C, Rachanapalli Village and Post Office, Rachanapalli Taluka and City, Ananthapur District - 515 001, Andhra Pradesh for D.Ed Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 29.09.2011 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 05.10.2011.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 28.10.2011/22.12.2011(Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 30.12.2011. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 27.02.2012.

The SRC in its 220th Meeting of SRC held on 30

th – 31

st March, 2012 considered the reply of the

institution dt. 27.02.2102 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve

Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act.

Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 27.04.2012.

The institution has submitted its written representation received in the office of SRC on

16.05.2012 and 29.05.2012

The reply of the institution to the show cause notice was duly considered by SRC in its

223rd meeting held on 29th – 31st May, 2012 and the reply is unconvincing and not

satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

• The institution is already running D.Ed course (APS07769) (recognized granted on Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions towards the existing course B.Ed, from Affiliating body/State Govt. is not given. As per NCTE Regulations 2009, an institution which is already running any other teacher course recognized by NCTE has to complete 3 academic sessions before applying for new course.

• Copy of the building plan submitted is not approved by the competent civil authority. The reply to the show cause notice is not satisfactory and unconvincing.



Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

71

recognition of D.El.Ed course.

Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 29.6.2012.

Aggrieved, the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs., and the Appellate Authority in its order dated 25.7.2013 stating that the

Council decided not to condone the delay in the submission of appeal and therefore,

the appeal is not admitted and the order of the SRC is confirmed.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 251st meeting held during 12

th to 15

th August, 2013,

considered the matter and has noted the matter.

On 26.11.2014 a letter dated 20.11.2014 was received from the NCTE Hqrs with a request to

defend the case on behalf of NCTE (HQ).

On 08.12.2014 a letter was addressed to Shri. Gaurav Sharma, with a request to defend the case

of W.P.No.Nil/2014 filed by Susheela College of Education Vs NCTE and others before the

Hon’ble High Court of New Delhi.

A letter dated 05.01.2015 was received by this office on 5.01.2015 from the Correspondent of Susheela College of Education, Khasara No. 1/16C, Rachanapalli Village and Post Office, Rachanapalli Taluka and City, Ananthapur District - 515 001, Andhra Pradesh stating as under:- “With due respect and humble submission of the following few lines for your kind consideration and do needful in this regard. We approached the Honorable High Court of Delhi Vide W.P. 8064/2014 for additional intake. The Honorable High Court of Delhi order NCTE on 24.11.2014 to grant additional intake 50 to 100 seats for the acadamic year 2015 itself. We enclosed a copy of the Honourable High Court order. So you are requested to arrange to sanction additional intake of Susheela College of Education D.Ed From 50 to 100 Seats for the year 2015.” The Court order dated 24.11.2014 submitted by the institution is as under:- Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

“A. Issue an appropriate writ(s) direction (s) or order(s) quashing and setting aside

the impugned order dated 29.06.2012 passed by the National Council

for Teacher Education as contained in Annexure P-1 and /or ;

B. Issue an appropriate writ(s) direction(s) or order(s)remanding back the case to

the SRC for further processing of the application and grant of formal

recognition order for running the D.El.Ed Course from acadamic year 2015-

2016, and/or;

C Pass any such others /directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper

in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

Mr. T.Singhdev, learned counsel for respondent no.1 relies upon the order dated


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

72

30th July, 2014 passed by this Court in similar facts in George College

Department of Education Vs. National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.,

W.P.(C) 3371 / 2014.

Consequently, in view of the order dated 10th September, 2013 passed by the

Supreme Court in SLP No.4247-4248/2009 directing that all pending applications

shall be decided in accordance with new regulations, the present writ petition is

disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall apply afresh in accordance

with new regulations, if required and the same shall be considered by respondents-

NCTE/SRC for academic year 2015-2016 in accordance with new regulations which

shall be notified in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court.

If any deficiency is found, the same shall be conveyed to the petitioner, who shall be

given an opportunity to remove the said deficiency, in a time bound manner. In

case the deficiencies are removed within the given time , the application shall be

processed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations. If the

deficiencies are not removed, the application shall stand rejected.

Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.”

On 14.01.2015, Certified copy of the Court Order dated 24.11.2014 is received by

this office.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 277th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd, January 2015,

considered the matter, and decided as under:-

• Process under New Regulations and put up in the next meeting.

As per records, the documents available, a comparative statement of B.Ed and D.Ed

courses is provided.

The Committee considered the matter, Court order dated 24.11.2014, decided and

advised Southern Regional Office as under:

1.Check on affidavit.

2.Cause Composite Inspection for D.Ed and B.Ed.

19. 20

APS03524

B.P.Ed

Sri Sarada

College of

Physical

Education, for

Women,

Salem,

Tamilnadu

Sri Sarada College of Physical Education for Women, Fairlands, Salem – 636 016, Tamilnadu for B.P.Ed course of one year duration for the academic session 2000-2001 only with an annual intake of 40 students granted on 15.09.2000. A letter was sent to institution on 06.08.2003 stating that “The Performance Appraisal Report (PAR) for the B.P.Ed course for the session 2002-2003 submitted by you has been reviewed by the Southern Regional Committee. Based on your Performance Appraisal Report the intake of your institution for the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

73

TN session 2003-2004 has been fixed as 40. Your PAR for the session 2003-2004 shall be sent to this office on or before 31st March 2004 failing which renewal of recognition for the same will not be considered. You are advised to send the complete list of teaching staff members duly approved by the authorized representative of the affiliating University / body along with the PAR of the session 2003-2004. A copy of Annexure to the Performance Appraisal Report is enclosed herewith which shall be filled up and submitted along with the PAR for the session 2003-2004”. The institution has submitted series of its written representation on 13.05.2013, 30.05.2013, 01.07.2013. The institution has submitted its written representation on 07.02.2014 stating as follows:- “It is informed that permission pertaining to the enhancement of intake from 40 to 50 (as per existing norms) for B.P.Ed degree course at Sri Sarada College of Physical Education for Women, Salem-16, Tamil Nadu has been sought. The request letter has already been submitted in this regard furnishing with all necessary details on 09.05.2013. As on date the institution has not received any communication in this regard. It is once again requested that necessary permission may kindly be accorded to our institution for enhancing the intake of B.P.Ed degree course from 40 to 50 students (one session). The earlier letter submitted to NCTE is herewith enclosed for your kind perusal.” The SRC in its 268th Meeting held on 04th -05th June, 2014 considered the matter and observed that the request is for increase of intake from 40 to 50 so as to conform to one section of a basic unit. and the Committee advised Southern Regional Office to ensure that the infrastructural and instructional facilities are as per prescribed norms. The Institution should be asked to show that they are; and, also obtain an approved list of faculty in position. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 25.07.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 05.09.2014. As directed again a letter was sent to the institution on 26.09.2014 for submission of required documents. The institution has submitted its written representation dated 20.11.2014 received by SRC on 26.11.2014 along with submission of following documents:

• Photocopy of land documents.

• Photocopy of Building plan.

• Photocopy of Building License.

• Photocopy of Staff list. The institution in its letter stating as follows: “……Sri Sarada College of Education trust runs three educational institutions in diverse


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

74

fields of education viz: Sri Sarada College for Women, Sri Sarada College of Education and Sri Sarada College of physical Education for women at Salem in Tamilnadu. All the three said institutions are functioning over a sprawling area of 26.08.acres in the heart of city. The Building plan of Sri Sarada College of Physical Education for women, Salem is well demarcated in the enclosed site plan. The site plan clearly depicts the infrastructural and the instructional facilities i.e. administrative/academic facilities as well as outdoor play fields such as 400mts standard track, Cricket & Hockey fields and court games like Volley ball, Kho-Kho, Kabaddi, Handball, Ball BADMINTON, Throw ball and Tennikoit. The college functions with a strength of one hundred students with an intake of forty students in Bachelor of Physical Education (B.P.Ed-40), and thirty students each in 1st year and 2nd year in Master of Physical Education (M.P.Ed-30+30). The working schedule of the institution is tabulated below. ”

Details Timing Practical Morning 6.15 AM to 8.15 AM Practical Evening 4.00 PM to 6.00 PM

Theory class 10.00 AM to 1.00 PM The other sister organization of the trust like Sri Sarada College for women with a Strength of 2500 students and Sri Sarada College of Education with a strength of 150 students are functioning within the same campus between10.00 AM to 5.00 PM and the timings of Institutions are different from the timing of Sri Sarada College of Physical Education for Women. Thus, some of the outdoor infrastructural facilities like Tennis, Basket ball courts and football field are being shared with sister institutions in different timings without compromising each other’s broader interest. The other facilities like Sri Sarada College Women’s hostel. Auditorium and canteen are common for all the colleges of the trust. Since its inception the institution continues its march with clear mission and vision in accomplishing the social emancipation of women’s students from the rural background. The management, the institution and the faculty members have continuously been striving hard in providing quality, affordable and accessible education especially for the lowest echelons of the society. The institution is rendering meritorious service for the cause of women students in the field of Physical Education for over three decades with necessary infrastructural and institutional facilities. Considering the above facts, we kindly request you that, permission may please be accorded for an enhanced intake of fifty students from the existing strength of forty students. We shall be very much thankful to you, if necessary permission is accorded in this regard at the earliest. All required documents scrutinized by this office.

Remarks

• Photocopy of Building Plan is not approved by the competent authority.

• The institution has not submitted Staff list in prescribed format.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

75

The SRC in its 275th Meeting held on 1st-2nd December, 2014 decide to process after notification of new Regulation. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE H.qrs Regarding guidelines for



institution has submitted its written representation stating as follows:-

“We have made a request pertaining to the enhancement of intake from 40 to 50

for B.P.Ed. Degree course for which necessary documents have already been

submitted as desired by NCTE vide our letter dated 20.11.2014.

In this context, we would like to inform you that, our request for the enhancement

of intake may please be treated as cancelled. We also hereby convey that we

are willingly withdrawing our application with regard to the request of

enhancement of intake. We shall be very much thankful to you.”

The matter was placed before SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25th January 2015, considered the matter and the committee decided to process and put up

Note: The institution is requesting for withdrawing their application for enhancement of intake.

The Committee Considered the matter, letter dated 29.12.2014 from the

institution, and all the relevant documentary evidence and decided to serve


• Affidavit received.

• The unit proposed is not according to the pattern prescribed by the new Regulations.

• Why the recognition should not be withdrawn if by 31 October, 2015 they do not adopt the prescribed pattern.






no further notice.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

76

Consideration of Pending Application for New Regulation : (Volume- 02).

APS03495

M.S.C.Ed

Regional

Institute of

Education,

(NCERT),

Mysore,

Karnataka

KA

Regional Institute of Education (NCERT), Mysore – 570 006 Recognition was granted to Regional Institute of Education (NCERT), Mysore for B.A/B.Sc.Ed,M.Sc.Ed,M.Ed,B.Ed courses on 26.11.1996.

A letter dated 04.10.2013 was received by this office on 10.10.2013 from the Principal, Regional Institute of Education,Mysore – 570 006 which is as under :-“National Council of Research Training (NCERT) is an autonomous organization under the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Government of India. The apex organization was created with the sole objective of monitoring the issues related to Education in the Country and works as an advisory body to the Union Government and it suggest changes in current global trends in Education. The four Regional Institutes of Education were started by the NCERT in the country and Regional Institute of Education (RIE), Mysore was started in the early 60’s in the Southern Region. The institute, apart from Research and Training in School Education, it also developed and tried out various innovative integrated education programmes like BSc.Ed,B.A.Ed,B.Ed (Elementary),M.Ed(Elementary),MSc.Ed and DCGC.A few courses were designed as pilot programmes and other Universities in the Country are encouraged to adopt them.One of the objectives of starting the RIE was to design and disseminate innovative Teacher Education Programmes.

Referring to the recognition of the programmes offered by the RIE,Mysore,it is to bring the following facts for your kind perusal.

Recognition was given by the NCTE for the 4-year B.Sc-Ed(PCM/CBZ) and 2-year M.Sc.Ed in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics vide certificate of recognition dated 26.11.1996. The six year M.Sc.M.Ed programme is an innovative integration of these two programmes only.

During the year 2008-09 along with the 4-year B.Sc.Ed Programme a 6 year M.Sc.Ed Programme in Physics,Chemistry and Mathematics were also designed and introduced as innovative teacher education programmes and an application for recognition was submitted to NCTE on 12.03.2008. These courses were approved for affiliation by various academic bodies of the University of Mysore at the time of application. All the related queries raised by the NCTE have been answered by this institute vide our correspondence ending on 05.07.2012.The first batch of students admitted to 6-year M.Sc.Ed programme will be passing out in the academic year 2013-14.

The 4- year B.E.I.Ed Programme was also introduced in 2008-09 along with 6 year M.Sc.Ed Programme and application for recognition was submitted on 12.03.2008. Two batches of Students were enrolled in the year 2008-09(4 students) and in 2009-10 (3 students) against approved intake of 30 by the University of Mysore, Mysore. Recognition of four year B.EI.Ed programme was sought from the NCTE only to safeguard the interests of these seven students. Subsequently, the programme was discontinued by the institute.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

77

In view of the facts explained above, it is once again requested that recognition of the following RIEM Programmes may please be accorded. Needless to say that the institute is not seeking retrospective recognition.

a. 6-year integrated M.Sc.Ed in physics,chemistry

and mathematics b. 4- year B.EI.Ed programme.

Your immediate action is solicited without further loss of time.”

As per records, M.Sc.Ed programme of 2 years duration was granted recognition on 26.11.1996 But, there is no application of B.EI.Ed course in NCTE. The SRC in its 255th meeting held on 13th-15th November 2013 considered the letter from the RIE Mysore, dated 04/10/2013 and decided as under:

o Southern Regional Office to advise Regional Institute of Education, Mysore to approach NCTE (H.Q), New Delhi for approval of M.Sc.Ed Curriculum.

o Southern Regional Committee can not give

retrospective recognition for B.El.Ed. Regional Institute of Education, Mysore to be informed to seek advice from NCTE (H.Q),New Delhi, about action possible in B.El.Ed.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 17.01.2014. Brief of the institution was sent to NCTE-Hqrs through E-mail on 16.01.2015. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. An email dated 29.01.2015 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding innovative committee meeting notice. NCTE Hqrs in its mail dated 29.01.2015 has forwarded a copy of Action taken letter of RIE Mysore as follows:

“The Curriculum for MSc.Ed (6 years) Innovative Programmes by Regional Institute of Education, Mysore, Karnataka was forwarded by SRC for consideration by the Standing Committee on Innovative Courses constituted by NCTE.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

78

2. The Standing Committee considered the proposal in its meeting held on 29th January 2015. After careful consideration of all the aspects, the committee made the following observations: The proposal is approved. The committee recommends that the proposed curriculum may be further reviewed and updated in consultation with other leading research institutions specializing in Science and Mathematics Education.

c. The recommendation of the Standing Committee

have been approved by Chairperson, NCTE. Consequently the course content of the proposal of M.Sc.Ed (6 years) Innovative Programmes by Regional Institute of Education, Mysore, Karnataka is approved. The copy of course curriculum presented by the institution before the Standing Committee and the original file of the institution is forwarded along with this letter for further necessary action at your end.

d. You are requested to process the application of

the institution further keeping in view the observations of the Standing Committee, National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and procedure) Regulations 2014 and guidance/ instructions issued by NCTE-Hqrs from time to time”.

The Committee considered the matter, NCTE (H'qrs) letter dated 29.01.2014 action taken letter on RIE Mysore, decided as under:

1.Sub.Committee of Prof. Ponnala and Prof. Lalithamma is appointed to develop norms for the prograamme proposed.

2.Sub. Committee to meet on 7 Feb and give report by 9 Feb.

3.Place before SRC on 12.2.2015.

22

SRCAPP51

B.Ed

Olcott

Memorial

College of

Education,

Vellore,

Tamilnadu

TN

Code/Course SRCAPP51/B.Ed

Name of the institution Olcott Memorial College of Education,

Plot/Khasara No. S.No.231/4, Plot No.

Union TTI Campus, Viruthampet Village,

Gandhinagar East Post Office, Katpadi

Taluk, Vellore District, Pin-632006,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

79

Tamilnadu



sent on

19.12.2014


to 2014 Regulations received

on

21.05.2015 (one unit of B.Ed course)

Other courses offered by the

institution

-----

Union Teacher Training School Society, Plot No.UTTI Campus, Street/Road.Kalinjur Main Road, Viruthampet Village, GandhiNagar East Post Office, Katpadi Taluk, Vellore District, Pin-632006, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Olcott Memorial College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. S.No.231/4, Plot No. Union TTI Campus, Viruthampet Village, Gandhinagar East Post Office, Katpadi Taluk, Vellore District, Pin-632006, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 04.02.2013 followed by reminder on 23.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 23.04.2013.The institution has submitted reply on 24.06.2013. The reply of the institution has been received on the 62nd day from the date of issue of deficiency letter. Hence, the institution has submitted the reply after the stipulated period of 60 days. The matter was placed before SRC in its 248th Meeting held on 13th - 15th July, 2013 and it has decided to process. As per the decision of SRC the reply of the institution to the deficiency letter was duly considered by SRC in its 251st meeting held on 25th -27th August 2013 and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. The institute has not submitted the approved Building plan from a competent Govt. authority.

2. The latest Building Completion Certificate from the competent Government Engineer is not submitted.

3. The Survey Number 23/4 as given in building completion certificate is not tallying with other document submitted.

4. Total land area is not mentioned in Affidavit submitted. 5. Land usage certificate is in the name of the Union Teacher Training School and

not in the name of the proposed institution. 6. Notarised English version of Encumbrance certificate is not submitted.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

80

The reply to the show cause notice is not satisfactory and unconvincing. Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course. Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 09.10.2013. Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs. and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 16/25.09.2014 received by SRC on 15.10.2014 remanded as follows:

“….the case of the appellant institution on 31/07/2014 i.e. the second opportunity given to them in the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that "(i) the approved building plan from the competent Govt. authority was already submitted to SRC on 23/08/2013, (II) the latest building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer was submitted to SRC on23/08/2013; (iii) the correct survey number 231/4 found in all the accompanying documents has been incorrectly shown in the building competition certificate as 23/4 and it has been rectified, (iv) the total land area for the proposed institution is now shown in the affidavit as 2.5 acres out of 10.90 acres in Survey no 231/4; (v) the Union Teacher Training School is the Society which runs the proposed Olcott Memorial College of Education and ;(vi) the encumbrance certificate is in both English and Tamil and a translated notarized version has been furnished."

The Council noted that the SRC before refusing recognition did not issue ashow cause notice to the appellant institution as required in proviso to Section 14(3) (b) of the NCTE Act providing a reasonable opportunity to the institution for making a written representation in the circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further action as per the Regulations.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further action as per the Regulations. The Council hereby remands back the case of Olcott Memorial College of Education, Vellore, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. The SRC in its 274th meeting held on 30th 31st October 2014, considered the Appellate Authority’s order dated 25/9/2014, and decided that, as per the Hqrs circular this can be processed only after notification of new Regulations. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 21.01.2015 (Triplicate) along with affidavit, relevant documents and stated as follows:


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

81

“…..Due to holidays in Tamilnadu from 14 to 18 January we were not able to arrange the amount for the FDR’s Hence we request you to kindly give us 10 days time for the submission of two FDR’s for Rs.12.00 Lakhs”. As per NCTE New regulation the application is processed. The Committee considered the matter, appellate authority order dated 16/25.09.2014, letter dated 21.01.2015 along with the affidavit, decided and advised Southern Regional Office as under: 1.Check on affidavit

2.Cause Inspection

3.This is treated as an ‘existing institution’ in accordance with NCTE (H'qrs) ‘Guidance’

23

SRCAPP1945

B.Ed

Beattie

Memorial

College of

Education,

Vellore,

Tamilnadu

TN


Name of the institution Beattie Memorial College of Education

Letter as per NCTE Hqrs guidelines

dated 18.12.2014 sent on 19.12.2014


Regulations, 2014 received on 21.01.2015

Other courses offered in the institution. B.Ed (fresh)

CSI Trust Association, Plot No 19, Railway Station Road, Ranipet Village and Po, WalajaTaluka, Vellore District, Pin- 632401, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Beattie Memorial College of Education, Plot No 19, Ranipet Village and Po, Walaja Taluk, Vellore District, Pin- 632401, Tamilnadu for B.Ed course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 28.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 03.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 05.02.2013 followed by reminder on 22.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institutionon22.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on24.06.2013.

The reply of the institution has been received on the 63rd day from the date of issue of deficiency letter. Hence the institution has been submitted reply after the stipulated period of 60 days.

The matter was placed before SRC in its 248th Meeting held on 13th-15th July, 2013 and decided to process.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

82

As per the decision of SRC, the reply of the institution was processed and the same was duly considered by SRC in its 250th meeting held on 11th -13th August 2013, the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. Institution has submitted land documents but title to the land is not clear. 2. Institution has submitted blue print of the Building plan, wherein total plot area is

not mentioned and total earmarked area for proposed course is not mentioned .So Building Plan is not legible.

3. Building Completion Certificate is not approved by Government Competent Authority.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 25.09.2013. Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs. and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 16/25.09.2014 received by SRC on 15.10.2014 remanded as follows:

“…. the case of the appellant institution on 31 72014 i.e. the secondopportunity given to the appellant. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submittedthat "(i) the institute belongs to CSI Vellore Diocese and the entire properties of the Diocese namelyschools, institutions, colleges, hospitals. churches, hostels etc are registered only in the name of the CSI Trust Association as per its bye-laws, (II) for getting recognition for their TTl an agreement wasentered between the Ranipet DIET Principal and CSI Vellore Diocese Bishop and it was registered inWalajapet Sub-Registrar Office in 1996: (iii) a true copy of the building plan approved by Municipal Commissioner, Ranipet on 30/06/2006 was submitted and as it was only for construction, total land area and marked area for the proposed course were not mentioned. The total area is mentioned in the land document and the marked area for the proposed course is 2714 sq.mts: and (iv) the institution applied to the Ranipet Municipality for the building completion certificate, which is yet to bereceived due to completion of the certain formalities and in the meanwhile they have obtained abuilding completion certificate from an engineer who is in the panel approved by Vellore DistrictCollector,"

The Council noted that the SRC before issuing the refusal order dt.25/09/2013 did not issue a show cause notice to the appellant as required in the proviso to Section14(3) (b) of the NCTE Act, providing a reasonable opportunity for making a written representation inthe circumstances, the council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded thatthe appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to theappellant and take further action as


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

83

per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Beattie MemorialCollege of Education, Vellore, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as per the Regulations.

The SRC in its 274th meeting held on 30th-31st October, 2014 considered the Appellate Authority’s order dated 25/9/2014, and decided that, as per the H'qrs circular this can be processed only after notification of new Regulations.

As per the Appellate Authority direction the application is processed.

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE H.qrs Regarding guidelines for


Accordingly, a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted affidavit on 21.012015, along with relevant documents.

The Committee considered the matter, appellate authority order dated 16/25.09.2014, letter dated 21.01.2015 along with the affidavit, decided and advised Southern Regional Office as under:

1.Affidavit to come under new Regulations is given.

2.Cause Composite Inspectio. D.Ed & B.Ed

24

SRCAPP2154

M.P.Ed

Karnataka

State

Women’s

university,

Bijapur

Karnataka

KA

Code/Course SRCAPP2154/M.P.Ed

Name of the institution Karnataka State Women’s University

(Jnanashakti Campus) Department of

Studies in Physical Education and

Sports Sciences ( M.P.Ed ) Plot No.

11A, ( Jnanashakti Campus) Bijapur

Village & Post, Bijapur District – 586108,

Karnataka



sent on

19.12.2014



on

21.01.2015


institution

Single


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

84

Karnataka State Women’s University (Jnanashakti Campus) Department of Studies in Physical Education and Sports Sciences ( M.P.Ed ) Plot No. 11A, ( Jnanashakti Campus) Bijapur Village & Post, Bijapur District – 586108, Karnataka, had applied for grant of recognition to Department of Study in Physical Education and sports sciences ( M.P.Ed ) Plot no. 11A, Bijapur Village & Post, Bijapur District – 586108 for M.P.Ed Course of two year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 22.07.2013 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 26.07.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 29.10.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 21.10.2013. The Southern Regional Committee in its 251th Meeting held on 25th – 27th August 2013 considered the application and it has decided to process. As per latter No. F.49-15-2013-N & s/A73915 dated 12 September 2013 the Department of Higher Education Ministry of HRD. Govt. of India vide its letter no.46-32013 desk dated 27.08.2013 has requested for grant of relaxation as per the provisions of the Regulations. In each application of the Central Universities in order to expedite the recognition process the Central Universities to commence the teacher education courses at the earliest. The SRC in its 256th meeting held on 04th – 06th December 2014 considered the matter and all relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 to examine whether the Central Universities & State University (Govt. Only) applied for the session 2014-15, fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the Universities/institution, as per the norms. The inspection was scheduled during 10th and 11th January 2014 and the same was informed to the University. Accordingly, the inspection of the University was carried out on 10th- - 11th January

2014.

The SRC in its 260th meeting held on 29th – 31st January 2014 was duly considered VT report, VCD of the University/Institution and all the relevant documents of the University and deficiencies still persist as under:

• The University/Institution is already running the M.P.Ed Course. And, as stated by the V.T. Inspection Report, they seek regularization.

• Again, as per VT Inspection report B.P.Ed and M.P.Ed are in 2 different places 10 kms apart. It is considered inappropriate to run the two courses like that.

• As per VT inspection report, the building is incomplete, it is still under Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected &


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

85

based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the University/institution for recognition of M.P.Ed course. Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the university on 03-03-2014. Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the university preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order No.F.no.89-206/2014 Appeal/11th Meeting on 15-10-2014 remanded as follows: “…..Dr. N. Chandrappa, Chairman and Sh. Rajashekara, Liaison Officer, Karnataka state women’s University, Bijapur, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 10.09.2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the University had applied for recognition M.P.Ed. course along with B.P.Ed. Course on 07-09-2009 with requisite fees and complying all the conditions. It is at the advice of the NCTE Regional Authority: the applicant university did not press for recognition of M.P.Ed as to get final recognition of B.P.Ed Course. However, both the courses were commenced with a hope of getting final recognition. It is submitted that the M.P.Ed. Course is having the entire infrastructure as per guidelines of NCTE. Now, both the courses, i.e. B.P.Ed. & M.P.Ed. are conducted in University campus in a new independent building.The Building Committee completion Certificate issued by Residential Engineer of University, Possession certificate issued by syndicate of Karnataka State Women’s University. Approved plan of the building, positive photo copies of existing B.P.Ed. &M.P.Ed.building and Letter of Regional NCTE authority Bangalore advising Applicant University to apply for M.P.Ed. course after securing recognition of B.P.Ed. Course are enclosed.

The Council noted that the SRC after conducting an inspection of the institution on 10-11 January, 2014 and before refusing grant of recognition, did not issue, as required in the proviso to Sections 14/15(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, a show cause notice to the appellant, providing a reasonable opportunity for making a written representation. In the circumstances the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Karnataka State Women’s University, Bijapur, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.

The SRC in its 275th meeting held on 01st -02nd December 2014 considered the Appellate Authority’s order dated 15/10/2014, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to process after notification of the new Regulations, as directed by NCTE (Hqrs). An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

86

Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 21.01.2015 (Triplicate) along with affidavit, relevant documents.

As per NCTE New regulation the application is processed.

intake.

The Committee Considered the matter, appellate authority order dated

15.10.2014 from the , and all the relevant documentary evidence and decided

to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE act. For the following

deficiencies.

• The University/Institution is already running the M.P.Ed course. And, as stated by the VT insepection report, they seek regularisation.

• As per VT inspection report B.P.Ed and M.P.Ed are in 2 different places 10 kms aprt. It is considered inappropriate to run the two courses like that.

• As per VT inspection report, the building is incomplete, it is still under construction.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the institution and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter including rejection of the application, based on the records available, with no further notice.

25

SRCAPP1788

B.Ed

Lords and

Angels

College of

Education for

women,

Thoothukudi,

Tamilnadu

TN


Name of the institution Lords and Angels College of

Education for Women



sent on

19.12.2014


Regulations, 2014 received on 23.01.2015

Other courses offered in the

institution. D.T.Ed (APS02249) B.Ed (fresh)

Lords and Angels Minority Educational and Cultural society, plot No. 2/87, Udangudi Road, thailapuram village and Post, Sathankulam Tauk, Nazareth City, Thooothududi district, pin-628617, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Lords' and Angels' College of Education for Women, Minority Educational and Cultural Society, Plot No.2/87, Pidaneri Village, Thailapuram P.O., Sathankulam Taluka, Nazareth,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

87

Thoothukudi District, Pin - 628617, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 08.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 13.12.2012 along with processing along with processing fees of Rs.50,000/- vide Demand Draft bearing No.777660 dt.10.12.2012 drawn on Central Bank.


Para 7[1-A(i)]

(a) The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher EducationRules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;



Para 7[1-A(ii)]

The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the circumstances referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the applicant and refund the processing fees within 30 days of the online submission of the application.

In this application the following has been observed: On-line application was submitted on 08.12.2012 and DD drawn from bank on 10.12.2012. Hence, the society has not remitted the processing fee as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher EducationRules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application, as required under sub-regulation 7(1-A)(i)(a) of NCTE Regulations 2009.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 240th meeting held on 09th – 11th March, 2013 reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [ 7 1–A (i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009. Accordingly, rejection letter was issued to the institution on 27.04.2013. SRC, NCTE was in receipt of Court Order from the Hon’ble High Court, Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 the judgment dated 27.03.2013 where in

The Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 27.03.2013 had stated as under;

‘These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and these respective affidavits filled in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/s.R.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions and of SPECIAL


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

88

GOVERNMENT PLEADER takes notice on behalf of the respondents R1 and R2 in both the petitions and of Mr. Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate for R3 in both the petitions the Court made the following order:-

‘Learned special Government pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents R1 and R2.Learned Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to serve notice on Mr.Ramakrishna Reddy learned Counsel appearing for the third respondent (NCTE)

There shall be an interim order of injunction till 15.04.2013.’

SRC, NCTE was in receipt of Court Order from the Hon’ble High Court, Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 where in the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 15.04.2013 had stated as under ;

‘Interim order already granted by this Court is extended by one week and the matter will remain in the list”.

SRC, NCTE was in receipt of Court Order from the Hon’ble High Court, Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 where in the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 22.04.2013 had stated as under ;

‘Interim order already granted by this Court is extended by one week and the

matter will remain in the list”.

A letter was addressed to Shri.A.Shivaji,Advocate on 10.05.2013 to defend the case on behalf of NCTE.

On 02.05.2013 , a copy of the Counter Affidavit to be filed I the above mentioned writ petition was received from advocate Mr.Shivaji

SRC, NCTE was in receipt of Court Order on 13.05.2013 from the Hon’ble High Court, Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 where in the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 22.04.2013 had stated as under ;

‘Interim order already granted by this court is extended till 13.06.2013.’

Duly signed Counter Affidavit was sent to the advocate Mr. Shivaji pn 31.05.2013. SRC, NCTE was in receipt of Court Order on 13.05.2013 from the Hon’ble High Court, Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 where in the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 13.06.2013 had stated as under ;

‘Learned standing Counsel seeks further time to file Counter.Post on 25.06.2013.Interim stay to continue in the meantime.’

A letter was addressed to the advocate, Mr.A.Shivaji to vacate the interim stay granted to the institution on 04.07.2013 SRC, NCTE was in receipt of Court Order on 13.05.2013 from the Hon’ble High Court,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

89

Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 where in the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 27.06.2013 had stated as under ;

‘ None appears for the respondents. There shall be an interim order not to return the application submitted by the petitioner.’

A letter was addressed to the advocate,Mr.A.Shivaji to vacate the interim stay granted to the institution on 26.07.2013

In the mean time, the institution preferred appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order no. F.No. 89-577/2013 Appeal/15th Meeting- 2013 dated 12.11.2013 has stated as follows:

“after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process the application as per the Regulations.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case for necessary action as indicated above”.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 256th meeting held on 04th -06th December, 2013 considered the Appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013, directing SRC to process the application as per the regulation and decided to process and advised Southern Regional Office to put up the case in 258th meeting.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 22/01/2014. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 23.01.2014.

The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 04/02/2014.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 262nd

Meeting held on 17th

– 19th

February,2014

considered the Appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013 reply of the institution to the

deficiency letter and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve

Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE Act for the following:

• Building Plan duly approved by the competent authority is not submitted.

• Building Completion Certificate in the prescribed format duly approved by the competent authority, i.e, Govt. engineer is not submitted.

• Encumbrance Certificate submitted is not covering all the survey numbers involved.

As per the decision of SRC, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 12.03.2014.

The institution submitted its replies on 24.03.2014 and 27.03.2014.

A email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE H.qrs Regarding guidelines for processing of pending applications.

Accordingly, a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted affidavit on 23.01.2015.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

90

The Committee considered the matter, reply from the institution vide letter dated 24.03.2014, 27.03.2014 and affidavit along with letter dated 23.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to:

1.Check on affidavit

2.Cause Inspection

3.Ask VT to collect Building Plan approved by competent authority.

26

APS03617

B.Ed

R.V.S College

of Education,

Dindigul,

Tamilnadu

TN

Code/Course APS03617/B.Ed

Name of the institution R.V.S College of Education, Tamilnadu



sent on

19.12.2014



on

27.01.2015 two units of B.Ed course


institution

----

R.V.S College of Education, RVS Nagar, Kulathur, P.Paratpatti, Dindigul-624005, Tamilnadu had submitted an application for B.Ed course on 24-12-2004. The institution was granted recognition on 31.08.2006 with an annual intake of 100 students. The direction of MHRD to re-inspect all the institutions granted recognition by SRC in its 116th meeting as per the recommendation of Sri Sathyam Committee reports. The inspection of the institution was carried out on 17.12.2008. The VT report was considered by SRC in its 170th meeting held on 16th 17th February 2009 and it has decided to issue Show Cause Notice. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 02.04.2009 for certain deficiencies. The institution had submitted its reply on 18.05.2009. The SRC in its 178th meeting held on 13th-14th July 2009 decided to issue notice under NCTE Act. The notice was issued to the institution on 17.08.2009. The institution has submitted written representation on 01.09.2009. The SRC in its 183rd meeting held on 22nd September 2009 decided to seek clarification. Accordingly a clarification letter was issued to the institution on 03.11.2009. The institution submitted its reply on 24.11.2009. The SRC in its 188th meeting held on 28th-29th January 2010 decided to call for clarification. Accordingly, clarification letter was issued to the institution on 02.30.2010.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

91

The institution submitted its reply on 15.03.2010. The SRC in its 190th meeting held on 29th-30th March 2010 considered the reply of the institution and it has decided to continue the recognition accorded to the institution. Accordingly, continue recognition order was issued to the institution on 18.05.2010. The institution vide its letter dated 21.11.2013 and has stated that: “We are presently running the B.Ed College at Dindigul, the following address.

RVS College of Education, RVS Nagar, N.Pariapatti Post, Karur Road, Dindigul-624005.

Due to some administrative compulsion the college is being shifted to new premises to the following address.

RVS College of Education, RVS Nagar, RVS Mettu hostel, Kullathur Post, Karur Road, Dindigul-624005.

The new campus is situated very close to the existing building. The land where the new building is situated is in the name of RVS Educational Trust and the above building is owned by us .The building is constructed as per the NCTE norms and is having all infra-structure facilities for running the B.Ed Colleges. We request you to kindly send all our future correspondence in the new address mentioned above”. The SRC in its 259th meeting held on 17th-19th January 2014 ,considered the matter, letter from the institution dated 21.11.2013 and all relevant documents of the institution and decided that:

1. Collect the Inspection fee of Rs.50.000/- first 2. The institution is to be directed to submit the following within 21 days of the

receipt of the notice, Duly filled in questionnaire along with all the necessary documents for land, building approval and completion certificate from a competent Govt. Engineer, FDR’s, up-to-date non encumbrance certificate and other relevant documents. All the documents to be fully analysed and to put up in April 2014 for all the 3 courses run by the institution Viz, D.T.Ed, B.Ed and M.Ed. courses.

3. After collecting the inspection fee and all documents as mentioned above, to arrange for causing inspection of the institution for shifting.

4. The institution has shifted to new premises without the prior permission of SRC NCTE, Bangalore. This is against 8 (11) of NCTE Regulations 2009 ,which reads as under:

“In case of change of premises, prior approval of the Regional Committees concerned shall be necessary , which could be accorded after due inspection of the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

92

institution at the new site. Application for change of premises, in triplicate, in the specified format along with other relevant documents shall be submitted by the institution to the Regional Office for prior approval of change of premises. The change can permitted to a site which, if applied initially, could have qualified for establishment of an institution as per specified norms of National Council for Teacher Education. The change shall be displayed on website thereafter. The application for change of premises shall be accompanied by a demand draft of Rs.50,000 (or as revised from time to time) of a Nationalized Bank drawn in favour of the Member Secretary, National Council for Teacher Education and payable at the city where the Regional Committee is located. The fee may also be paid online at the designated by National Council for Teacher Education”.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 05.03.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 17.03.2014.

The SRC in its 269th meeting held on 04-05th July 2014 considered the matter , reply of the institution vide letter dated 17.03.2014 and all the relevant documentary evidence and it was decided to serve Show Cause Notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• Building completion certificate is not in the prescribed format.

• Building completion certificate is not approved by competent authority,

• Inadequate teaching staff. Accordingly a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution 07.08.2014.The institution has submitted its written representation on 01.09.2014 and the institution has submitted Revalidated D.Ds bearing Nos (865935636) and (865935675) of Rs. 25,000/- each. The SRC in its 273rd meeting held on 30th September and 01st October 2014, considered the matter, written reply of the institution vide their letter dated 01.09.2014. all other relevant documents of the institution and noted that the Institution has not submitted the following documents:

• Building Completion Certificate is not approved by competent authority.

• Staff list is not approved by the affiliating authority.

• Advised Southern Regional Office to ask them to submit these documents by 1 Nov 2014 for causing shifting inspection.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 03.11.2014 (with reference to website in the decision of 273rd meeting of SRC). The SRC in its 275th meeting held on 01st and 02nd December 2014, considered the written representation from the institution vide their letter dated 03.11.2014, advised Southern Regional Office to await notification of the new Regulations and to put up the case in the next meeting. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

93

institution has submitted its written representation dated 16.12.2014 received by SRC on 19.12.2014 along with DD of Rs. 25.000/- each. A letter dated 10.01.2015 from Rathnavel Subramaniam Eduactional Trust received on 27.01.2015 regarding Endowment and Reserve fund document of Renewal. A letter was sent to the institution on 28.01.2015 regarding permission for obtaining duplicate certificates for FDR’s. The Institution has submitted its willingness letter along with relevant documents (Triplicate) on 27.01.2015 to process their pending application as per Regulations 2014. As per new regulation the application was processed. The Committee Considered the matter, letter from the institution dated

16.12.2014 and all the relevant documentary evidence and decided to serve


• Building Completion Certificate is not approved by competent authority.

• Staff list is not approved. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the institution and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter including withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available, with no further notice.

27

APS04929

B.Ed

Sri

Rajarajeswari

College of

Education,

Tiruchirappal

li, Tamilnadu.

TN


Name of the institution Sri Rajarajeswari College of Education,

No.36 A&B, Town Station Road,

Tiruchirappalli District, Pin-620 002,

Tamilnadu.



sent on

19.12.2014



on

23.01.2015 (Two unit of B.Ed course)


institution

-----


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

94

Sri Maruti Educational Trust, Tiruchirappalli District, Tamilnadu has submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition to Sri Rajarajeswari College of Education, No.36 A&B, Town Station Road, Tiruchirappalli District, Pin-620 002, Tamilnadu for Secondary (B.Ed) Course of one year duration with an annual intake of 100 (Hundred) Students on 29.12.2005. The application was scrutinized and the institution was granted recognition on 06.03.2008. The institution has submitted the letter dated 28.02.2013 seeking permission for shifting the rental building to permanent building. Further, the institution in its letter states that, “as per the regulations laid down by the TNTEU, Chennai, we had shifted the college to the permanent premises from 29.02.2012. We submitted an application requesting the permission from NCTE Bangalore for shifting on 12.01.2012 with all the necessary enclosures. So far, we have not received any order from NCTE, Bangalore. Due to the urgency, we have shifted to the permanent place”. The Permanent Address is: Sri Rajarajeswari College of Education (Code 12720) Opp. Government Higher Secondary School, Trichirappalli - Chennai National Highway, SIRUGANUR – 621 105 Trichirappalli - Dt. As per VT report institution is in rented premises. Recognition Order granted on 06.03.2008 where no condition was put regarding shifting of premises within the stipulated period of three years from the date of recognition. Now institution shifted their premises without permission. The SRC in its 243rd meeting held on 29th- 30th April 2013 considered the institutions letter dt. 28.02.2013 seeking permission for shifting to new permanent building and decided to issue show cause notice to the institution to submit the following documents before causing shifting inspection of the institution under NCTE Act. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 31.05.2013, 05.06.2013 and 17.07.2013. The institution had submitted its written representation on 23.08.2013.

The SRC in its 253rd

meeting held on 30th September and 01

st October 2013 considered the

written representation of the Institution vide letter dated 23.08.2013 and decided and advised

Southern Regional Office to obtain the following documents before causing Shifting

Inspection of the institution to the new premises.

1. The institution is required to submit notarized English version of building plan

from the approving authority. In the building plan submitted, total land area and built up area is also not mentioned.

2. Original building completion certificate from competent authority in the

prescribed format is not submitted.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

95

Accordingly, a letter regarding submission of Building plan and Building completion Certificate was issued to the institution on 27.12.2013. The institution had submitted its written representation on 03.02.2014.

The SRC in its 262nd

meeting held on 17-19 February 2014, considered the reply of the

institution vide letter dt. 17/02/2014 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was

decided to serve show cause notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• The institution has not submitted building completion certificate in a proper format duly approved by Govt. Engineer.

• As per building plan, total built up area shown is only 12521 sq.ft. which is less than the requirement of 16000 sq.ft. as per NCTE norms 2009.

Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 12.03.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 07.04.2014. The SRC in its 268th meeting held on 04th-05th June 2014, considered the letter from the institution dated 07.04.2014, and directed Southern Regional Office to put up after notification of the New Regulations as per NCTE (H.Q) instructions. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation along with affidavit on 23.01.2015.

As per NCTE New regulation the application is processed. The Committee considered the matter, reply from the institution vide letter dated 07.04.2014, affidavit vide letter dated 23.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to:


2.Cause Inspection. 3.Ask VT to collect Building Completion Certificate; and, check

carefully the dimensions of the building.

28

SRCAPP507

D.El.Ed

Sri Y.N.

College of

Elementary

Education,

West

Sri.Y.N. College of Elementary Education, No. 47 , 7th Ward , Narasapur Village ,

Post and Taluk , West Godavari District - 534275 Andhra Pradesh.

Code/Course SRCAPP507/D.El.Ed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

96

Godavari,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Name of the Institution Sri.Y.N. College of Elementary

Education, No. 47 , 7th Ward ,

Narasapur Village , Post and Taluk ,

West Godavari District - 534275

Andhra Pradesh. Letter as per NCTE H’qrs


sent on

19.12.2014


regulations 2014 received on

12.01.2015

Intake Requested Intake not specified


institution.

B.Ed

Sri Y.N College Committee R.S. No 47 , Narasapur Village , Post and Taluk ,

West Godavari District 534275 ,Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition

to Sri.Y.N. College of Elementary Education, No. 47 , 7th Ward , Narasapur Village

, Post and Taluk , West Godavari District - 534275 Andhra Pradesh for D.Ed

Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act,1993 to the

Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 09/09/2011 and Physical application

has been received in the office of SRC on 14/09/2011

The application was scrutinized and a copy of the application was sent to the

State Government for Recommendation on 23/09/2011 followed by reminder on

17/11/2011.A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 18/10/2011. The

Institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 28/11/2011

The SRC in its 215th meeting held on 12th -13th December,2011, considered the reply of

the institution dated 28/11/2011 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was

decided to Cause inspection at the premise to examine whether the institution fulfills all

the requirements as per norms and to ascertain infrastructural facilities available at the

premises for the proposed course

The inspection to the institution was fixed between 27th to 30th January 2012. The same

was intimated to the institution on 17/01/2012. Accordingly, inspection of the institution

was conducted on 27/01/2012.

The SRC in its 218th meeting held on 28th February, 2012 considered the VT Report,

VCD and all relevant documentary evidences it was decided to serve show cause

notice under section 14(1) of the NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 26/03/2012. The

institution has submitted written representation on 11/04/2012


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

97


meeting held on 19th

– 20th

April 2012,

considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 11.04.2012 and all the relevant

documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show Cause Notice under Section

14(1) of NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 09/06/2012. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 19.06.2012.

The reply of the institution vide letter dt,. 19.06.2012 to the show cause notice was duly

considered by SRC in its 226th Meeting held on 9th-10th July, 2013 and the reply is

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist.

• As seen from VCD, some portion of the building is covered with Asbestos sheets, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.

8 (10) of Regulations 2009 says:

“At the time of inspection, the building of the institution shall be complete in the

form of a permanent structure on the land possessed by the institution in terms

of sub-regulation (7) of Regulation 8, equipped with all necessary amenities and

fulfilling all such requirements as prescribed in the norms and standards. The

applicant institution shall produce the original completion certificate issued by

the competent Government Authority or local body authority, approved building

plan in proof of the completion of building and built up area and other

documents to the visiting team for verification. No temporary structure or

asbestos roofing shall be allowed in the institution, even if it is in addition to the

prescribed built up area”.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality information collected &

based on a collective application of mind, the committee has decided as per NCTE

Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of

D.El.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 27/07/2012. Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order No. F.No. 89-636/2012Appeal/11th

Meeting – 2012 dated 03/01/2013 stated that “…the council concluded that there

was adequate ground to accept the appeal. The appeal is accepted and the

matter is remand to the SRC for further processing as per the Regulations”.

The SRC in its 240th Meeting held on 09th – 11th March, 2013 considered the

Appellate authority order dt. 03/01/2013 and decided to further process the application

of the said institution as per NCTE Regulations.

As per the decision of SRC the application was processed and placed before SRC in its

244th meeting held on 9th-11th May 2013, and the committee has decided to re-submit


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

98

along with the B.Ed case.

As per the direction of SRC, the comparative statement of B.Ed & D.Ed file was placed

before SRC in its 245th Meeting held on 19th-21st May, 2013 and the committee

considered the matter and all other relevant documents of the institution, and decided

to reject the application for the following deficiencies:

• The society that get the land from the Andhra Pradesh Government and the society sponsoring the two – B.Ed & D.Ed colleges are different.

• The society that got the land from the Andhra Pradesh Government does not have the power to transfer title (freehold or lease hold) to the two colleges.

Regulations 8 (7) (iv) of NCTE Regulations 2009 requires that within 6 months title

must be transferred to the institution. This Regulation cannot be fulfilled in this case.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution vide no.

F.No.SRCAPP507/D.Ed/AP/2013-14/52367 dated 20.06.2013.


Hqrs the appellate authority order no. F.No. 89-570/2013 Appeal/17th Meeting -2013 A

80748 dated 17.01.2014 stating that “… the council concluded that the appeal

deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process further as per the

Regulations.

NOW THEREFORE, the council hereby remands back the case of Sri YN College

of Elementary Education, West Godavari, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for

necessary action as indicated above”.

The SRC in its 260th meeting held on 29-31st Jan, 2041 considered the Appellate

authority order dated 17-01-2014 and decided to further process the application as per

regulations.

The SRC in its 262nd

Meeting held on 17th

– 19th

February, 2014 considered the Appellate

authority order dated 17/01/2014 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided

to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE Act for the following:-

• As per Building Completion Certificate dated 28/10/2011 issued by the Dy. Executive Engineer, Narasapur Muncipality, in Block 5, Ground floor and First floors area of 11,024.46 sq.ft roofing is covered with RCC & Asbestos sheet,

• As per NCTE regulations 2009, Asbestos sheet roofing is not permissible.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 07.03.2014. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 18.03.2014.

The SRC in its 265th meeting held during 24th -25th March, 2014 had kept the matter

pending in view of Supreme Court directions.

Further, a letter seeking consent on the Willingness of the institution for considering


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

99

their application as per Regulations 2014 was sent to the institution on 19.12.2014.

In response to this office letter dated 19.12.2014, the institution has submitted a reply

on 12.01.2015 along with an affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper expressing their

willingness for the application to be processed as per Regulation, 2014.

The SRC, in its 278th meting held during 25th January,2015 considered the Show

Cause Notice Reply & affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper expressing their willingness

for the application to be processed as per Regulation, 2014. and decided as “Notice

for submission of all documents related to new building.”


website, a reply to the Notice received by this office from The Correspondent Sri. Y.N

College of Education, Narsapur- 534 275, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

The Committee considered the matter, reply from the institution vide letter dated 28.01.2015, affidavit vide letter dated 12.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Office to:

1Affidavit for new Regulations received.

2.LOI - Issue.

3.Request them to give reply, if possible, by 28.2.2015 so that this case can be considered for Formal Recognition before 3.3.2015.

29

SRCAPP1423

D.El.Ed

Jesus and

Mary College

of Diploma in

Education,

Visakhapatna

m, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Jesus and Mary College of Diploma in Education, Khasara No. 137, Plot No. 130/6

and 130/7, Sowbhagyarayapuram Colony, V. Juttada Post, Pendurthi Taluk,

Visakhapatnam City and District – 531173, Andhra Pradesh

Code/Course SRCAPP1423/D.EI.Ed

Name of the Institution Jesus and Mary College of Diploma in

Education, Khasara No. 137, Plot No.

130/6 and 130/7, Sowbhagyarayapuram

Colony, V. Juttada Post, Pendurthi Taluk,

Visakhapatnam City and District – 531173,

Andhra Pradesh



sent on

Affidavit is not sent


to Regulations 2014 received

on

05.01.2015

Intake requested Not specified


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

100


institution

B.Ed

Jesus and Mary Educational Society, Plot No. 39 27 44/7, VUDA Layout,

Visakhapatnam Village and Taluk, Madhavadhara Post, Visakhapatnam City and

District – 530018, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Jesus and

Mary College of Diploma in Education, Khasara No. 137, Plot No. 130/6 and 130/7,

Sowbhagyarayapuram Colony, V. Juttada Post, Pendurthi Taluk, Visakhapatnam

City and District – 531173, Andhra Pradesh for D.EL.Ed Course of two years

duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional

Committee, NCTE online on 30.09.2011 and physical copy received on 07.10.2011.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 08.11.2011 followed by reminder on 29.12.2011.

A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 30.12.2011. The institution has

replied to the deficiency letter on 05.03.2012.

The SRC in its 221st Meeting held on 19th-20th April, 2012 considered the reply of the

institution dt. 05.03.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was

decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act, for the

following:

• Original certified copy of the land documents from Govt. authority is not submitted. The land document of sale deed dt. 31.05.2001 on Sy.No. 130/6 & 130/7 is on lease deed for 30 years, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.

• Encumbrance certificate submitted is not reflecting the Societies name.

• Notarized land usage certificate from the Revenue Divisional Office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the purpose of educational institution only is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes.

• Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalized Bank in favour of Society/college/institution name if not given.

• Details of other teacher educational programmes run by the institution in the same building/premises is not given.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 16/05/2012.

The institution has not submitted reply for Show Cause Notice even after the

expiry of stipulated time of 21 days from the date of issue of the notice.

Keeping in view, Supreme Court vide their order in Civil Appeal No. 1125-1128/2011 in

SLP No. 17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfills the conditions specified in

various clauses of the Regulations. The Council is directed to ensure that in future no

institution is granted recognition unless it fulfils the conditions laid down in the Act and

the Regulations and the time schedule fixed for processing the application by the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

101

Regional Committee and communication of the decision on the issue of recognition it

strictly adhered to”.

The committee considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted reply even

after stipulated period of 21 days from the date of issue of show cause notice letter dt.

16.05.2012 and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a

collective application of mind, the SRC in its 226th Meeting held on 09th-10th July, 2012

decided as per clause 7(1) of NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the

application of the institution for recognition of D.El.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 13/08/2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order No. F.No.89-829/2012Appeal/3rd Meeting-

2013 dated 06/03/2013 stated that

“…the council noted that the submission of the appeal was delayed by two months and

ten days beyond the prescribed time limit of 60days. The reason adduced for delay is

the health problem of the Secretary of the appellant institution. the appellant enclosed a

copy of the certificate dated 13/12/2012 issued by Deepthi Nursing Home

Visakhapatnam, to the effect that due to surgery the Secretary, Jesus and Mary

Educational Society was hospitalized from 22/05/2012 to 13/12/2012. On being asked

why any other office bearer of the society could not make an appeal in time, the

appellant could not give any satisfactory reply the council also noted that the appeal

bears the signatures of two persons. On the grounds of refusal also the council noted

that no reply to the show cause notice dated 16/05/2012 was sent.

In view of the above position the council decided not to condone the delay and

therefore the appeal is not admitted.

After perusal of the documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering

oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council decided not to admit the

appeal for consideration.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 242nd Meeting held during 14th – 16th April,

2013 has noted the matter.

The institution has approached the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for

the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 37397 of 2013 .

The institution has prayed for directions particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus

declaring the action of the Respondent in rejecting the application for considering the

recognition by the 1st Respondent (SRC,NCTE) vide F.No.SRCAPP

1423/D.E1.Ed./AP/2012- 13/45169 dated 13.08.2012 and as well the impugned order

in appeal vide F.No.89-830/2012 Appeal/3rd Meeting 2013/A64176 of the 2nd

Respondent (NCTE-HQ) and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law,

contrary to the principles of natural justice, violative of Article 14 & 21 of the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

102

Constitution of India and contrary to the orders of this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of

justice

On 29.12.2014, this office has received the Court order dated 17.12.2014 in W.P.No.

37397 of 2014 which is as under :-

“The petitioner’s educational society applied to the first respondent for grant of

recognition for running D.EL.Ed course. On the said application, the first respondent

pointed out certain deficiencies and required the petitioner to rectify the same within 21

days by issuing a show-cause notice dated 16.5.2012. The petitioner claims that in

response to the said show-cause notice, he rectified the deficiencies and sent a reply to

the first respondent on 2.6.2012 by courier. Copies of the said reply and receipt of the

courier are filed along with writ petition as Annexure-P4. However, the first respondent

passed the impugned order dated 13.8.2012 rejecting the petitioner’s request for

recognition on the ground that no reply was received from the petitioner showing the

compliance of the deficiencies within 21 days from the date of show-cause notice.

Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed.

One of the main contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the

petitioner has complied with the deficiencies and sent a reply by courier on 2.6.2012

itself to the first respondent. The learned counsel has also produced a copy of the reply

containing acknowledgement of the first respondent having received the said reply on

21.6.2012 and according to him, reply of the petitioner was available with the first

respondent when the impugned order was passed.

Mr. K. Ramakanth Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondents 1 and 2, on

instructions, submits that no further orders were passed after receipt of the reply from

the petitioner on 21.6.2012 and according to the petitioner, the reply was available with

the first respondent within 21 days of the show-cause notice. In the circumstances,

therefore, the impugned order is set aside, the matter is remitted to the first

respondent to consider the petitioner’s reply, as stated above, and pass

appropriate orders on the said application after considering the facts and

circumstances of the case, in accordance with law.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any,

shall stand closed.

No order as to costs.”

On 24.12.2014, the institution has submitted a request to accord permission for

inspection and further processing of their application.. A copy of the Court order dated

17.12.2014 is also enclosed along with the letter.

On 05.01.2015 ,based on information available in the website, the institution has

submitted a an affidavit on Rs.100/- stamp paper expressing their willingness for the

application to be processed as per Regulations,2014.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

103

SRC in its 276th meeting held during 7th – 9th January, 2015 considered the matter and

decided that

“ In compliance to the Court order, let us process the case. Put up in the next

meeting.”

As per the Court order the petitioners reply to the show cause notice is to be

considered ,

The documents submitted by the institution as on 05.01.2015 :-

The documents submitted by the institution before issuance of the show Cause notice

detailed above were examined and placed before 277th meeting of SRC held during

20th – 22nd January, 2015.The committee decided as under :-

Issue Show Cause Notice for

(1) Discrepancy in title to land, some where it is ‘ Sale deed ‘ somewhere it is

‘Lease’.

(2) Inadequacies of built-up area and earmarking of area for B.Ed & D.Ed

(3) Latest Encumbrance Certificate

(4) Valid FDRs

Now , on 30/01/2015, before issuance of Show Cause Notice , the institution has

submitted a reply to the , based on website information, which is as under :-

The Committee considered the matter, reply from the institution vide letter dated 30.01.2015, affidavit vide letter dated 05.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Office to:


2.Cause composite inspection for B.Ed and D.Ed

SRCAPP1182

D.El.Ed

Mother

Theresa

College of

Elementary

Education,

Medak,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Mother Theresa College of Elementary Education, No. 772, 773, 774 & 775,

Patancheru Village, Post & Taluk, Medak District-500039, Andhra Pradesh

Code/Course SRCAPP1182/D.EI.Ed

Name of the Institution Mother Theresa College of

Elementary Education, No. 772, 773,

774 & 775, Patancheru Village, Post

& Taluk, Medak District-500039, Letter as per NCTE Hqrs


---


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

104



29.01.2015



institution

None

Mother Theresa Educational Society, No. 4-1-78, St. no 4, Troop Bazar Road,

Hyderabad Village, Abids Post, Hyderabad Taluk & District-5000001, Andhra

Pradesh has applied for grant of recognition to Mother Theresa College of

Elementary Education, No. 772, 773, 774 & 775, Patancheru Village, Post & Taluk,

Medak District-500039, Andhra Pradesh for D.El.Ed course online on 29/09/2011 for

two years duration under section 14(1) of the NCTE Act. 1993 and received in the

Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 07/10/2011.



follows:-



circumstances:

a. The processing fee, as provided under Rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application.

b. Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

c. Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society. Institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of online application.

The SRC considered the matter in its 213th meeting held on 06th-07th November, 2011

and careful perusal of the original file of the institution and other related documents,

NCTE Act 1993. Regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table. the

Regional Committee decided to reject the application on the following grounds.

• Submitted hard copy after the stipulated period of 7 days from the date of online application submission.

Accordingly, a rejection letter was issued to the institution vide no. F.No.

SRCAPP1182 (2012-13)/D.El.Ed/AP/2011-12/36226 dated 23/01/2012


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

105

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order no. F.No.89-117/2012 Appeal/4th Meeting-

2012 A 51660 dated 11/05/2012 state that “the council concluded that there was

adequate ground to remand the case to the SRC for further processing of the

application on merit as per regulations”.

The SRC in its 223rd meeting held on 29-31 May, 2012 considered the Appellate authority order dt. 11/05/2012 and decided to process the application on submission of original application and related supporting documents as per the regulations.

The institution submitted documents on 02/08/2012.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 230th meeting held during 16th – 17th August, 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 10.05.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, for the following:

• Approved blue print of the building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted. In the building plan copy submitted, total earmarked built up area for the proposed course is not mentioned.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted.

• Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions towards any existing courses which are already run by the institution from the affiliating body/State Govt/examining body is to be submitted.

It is seen from records that the Final Show Cause notice has not been sent to

the institution

Now, on 29/01/2015, after a gap of two and half years, the institution has

submitted a written representation along with an affidavit expressing their

willingness for the application to be processed as per Regulations, 2014 (as per

information available in the website). The institution has not submitted any

documents along with the letter.

The documents available in the file.

The Committee Considered the matter, letter from the institution dated

29.01.2015 along with the affidavit, and all the relevant documentary evidence

and decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE act. For

the following deficiencies.

• Certified copy of the land documents issued by the competent authority.

• Building Plan issued by the competent Govt. authority with all details.

• Building Completion Certificate in NCTE format issued by Govt. Engineer.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

106

• Notarised cop of change ofland use certificate issued by the competent authority, saying that the land is excusively for Education purposes only.

• Latest Encumbrance Certificate issued by competent authority.


• Fixed deposits in joint name towards Endowment fund & Reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank is to be produced.

• Bye-Laws of the Society are to be submitted by the management.

• Certificate of Registration. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the




matter including rejection of the application for recogntion, based on the

records available, with no further notice.

31

SRCAPP320

B.Ed

St Xaviers

Educational

Society

Vishakhapatn

am, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

St Xaviers Educational Society, Sy No. 92/1, Plot No-14-163, Lakshmi Nagar,

Chinamusidivada Village and Post Office, Pendurthy Taluka, Vishakhapatnam

District - 530051, Andhra Pradesh.


Name of the Institution St. Xaviers College of Education, Sy

No. 92/1, Plot no. 14-163,

Chinamudidivada Village,

Chinamusidivada Post Office, Letter as per NCTE Hqrs


---



28.01.2015



institution

None

St Xaviers Educational Society, Plot No-14-163, Lakshmi Nagar, Chinamusidivada

Village and Post Office, Pendurthy Taluka, Vishakhapatnam District - 530051,

Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to St. Xaviers College of

Education, Sy No. 92/1, Plot no. 14-163, Chinamudidivada Village,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

107

Chinamusidivada Post Office, Pendurthy Taluka, Visakhapatnam District -

530051, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed Course of One year duration under Section 14(1)

of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on line 29.09.2010.

In first instance as per scrutiny the applicant has submitted application for seeking

recognition for teacher education course without any date mentioned on their covering

letters which has been received in the office of SRC after 12.10.10. In this regard a

letter was issued on 25.10.10 to the Member Secretary, NCTE HQ with request to

suggest direction under clause 7 (1-A) of the Regulation 2009 wherein it is stipulated

as follows.

“The application submitted online but not followed by dispatch through registered post

or by hand with the documents mentioned at (I) to (VII) above within 7 days shall be

considered as incomplete and shall be summarily rejected with reasons recorded in

writing and returned to the applicant along with the processing fees within 30 days of

the receipt of the application”

In response to this office letter dated the NCTE HQ has directed vide letter no. F.No.

49-1/2010/NCTE/N&S/A28083 dated 24.11.2010 directed that the hard copies of these

documents have to be dispatched within 7 days of the last date of receiving

applications which 01.10.2010 this year. In this regard a clarification letter was issued

to applicant institution on 10.01.11 with request to submit proof of dispatch.

The SRC considered the matter in its 200th meeting held on 20th-21st January, 2011 and

on careful perusal of the original file of the institution and other related documents,

NCTE Act 1993, Regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table, written

representation from the institution, the Regional Committee decided to reject the

application on the following grounds:-

The institution has not replied in respect of proof of dispatch after a lapse of stipulated

time and hence it is decided that no further action is necessary and that the

applications are to be rejected in terms of clause 7(1-A) of Regulation 2009.

As per the direction of SRC the application was rejected and returned on 28.01.2011

The institution has approached to Hon’ble High court in WP. MP no. 8248/2011 in writ

petition no. 6629/2011 without approaching the Appellate authority. The Hon’ble High

court has passed an order as under:-

“Petition under section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the

affidavit filed in W.P the High Court may be please to direct the 2nd respondent to

process the application for the B.Ed course for the year 2011-12 submitted by the

petitioner society without reference to rejection order dated 28-01.2011 vide F.S

RO/NCTE/NEW/ Andhra Pradesh / 23636 of the 2nd respondent, pending WP NO.

6629 of 2011 on the file of the High Court. The Court while directing issue of notice to

the Respondents herein to show cause as to why this application should not be


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

108

complied with made the following order (The receipt of this order will be deemed to be

the receipt of notice in the case.) Order Interim direction”.

Order of the Hon’ble High Court along with original file was placed before SRC for

direction.

The SRC considered the Hon’ble High Court of A.P order and decided to process the

Application (SRCAPP320) B.Ed course of the institution on resubmission of original

application, and related supporting documents within four weeks from the date of

confirmation of the Minutes.

As per direction of SRC, a letter was issued to the applicant institution on 24.05.2011.

In response to this office letter dated 24.05.2011 the institution has submitted reply vide

letter dated 06.06.2011. The Committee in its 208th meeting held on 13-14th July 2011,

considered the reply of the institution and all the relevant documentary evidences and it

was decided to issue the Show cause Notice. Accordingly, show cause notice was

issued to the institution on 29.08.2011. The institution submitted the written

representation on 14.09.2011.

The committee in its 211th Meeting of SRC held on 21st - 23rd September, 2011

considered the written reply of the institution dt. 14.09.2011 and other documents

submitted by the institution and decided to cause inspection for B.Ed (SRCAPP320)

course at the premises.

Accordingly inspection of the institution was fixed between 02nd- 07 November, 2012,

The same was intimated to institution on 17/10/2011 the inspection of the institution

conducted on 03.11.2011 & VT Report was received to the SRC-NCTE on 08.11.2011.

The SRC in its 214th Meeting of SRC held on 28th November, 2011 considered the VT

Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve

Show Cause Notice.

Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 30.01.2012. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 17.02.2012

The SRC in its 219th Meeting of SRC held on 15th – 16th March, 2012 considered the

reply of the institution dt. 17.02.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it

was decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act, for the

following:

1) In the land documents submitted, Schedule of the property, i.e, Sy.No, total area

& location etc. is not clear. 2) Copy of sale deed dt. 6.5.1998 is not notarized in original nor it is certified by

Sub-registrar. 3) Notarized land usage certificate from Revenue Divisional Office of the Govt, is

not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

109

conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes. 4) Certified copy of land documents issued by the sub-registrar for survey number

92/1, where the institution is stated to be located is not submitted. 5) Encumbrance certificate reflects Lease in transaction. Which is not permissible

as per NCTE regulations. 6) No proof of bills towards purchasing of materials to strengthen Psychology lab is

not submitted.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 10.04.2012. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 02.05.2012 and 07.05.2012

The institution has submitted reply for Show Cause Notice after the expiry of stipulated

time of 21 days period.

The committee in its 223rd Meeting held on 29th – 31st May 2012, considered the reply

of the institution, which is received on 07/05/2012, i.e., after 27 (Twenty Seven) days

from the date of issue of show cause notice dt. 10/04/2012 and with reference to the

totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the

committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application

of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 06.07.2012. Aggrieved by the order of SRC, the institution has approached to Hon’ble High Court in

W.P.No.24978/2012.

Now, the Hon’ble High Court has passed an order dated 14.08.2012 vide

W.P.No.24978 of 2012 reads as hereunder:

“Having regard to the ratio of this Court, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction

to the respondent to reconsider the petitioner’s application in the light of the above legal

position, and pass a fresh order on the merits of the petitioner’s application treating the

reply furnished by the petitioner as having been sent within the stipulated time. The

respondent shall communicate its decision to the petitioner within a period of two

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.”

The SRC in its 231st meeting held on 22nd – 23rd August 2012, considered the Court

order and decided to process the application.

Accordingly the reply to Show Cause Notice was verified.

The SRC in its 232nd meeting held on 29th-31st August., 2012 decided to issue Letter of

Intent for grant of recognition to D.El.Ed course of two year duration with an annual

intake of 50(Fifty only)(one unit) for the academic year 2013-14.

Accordingly, a letter of intent was issued to the institution on 05/09/2012. The institution


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

110

has submitted its written representation on 28.09.2012 along with a copy of the Court

order dated 17.09.2012 in W.P.No. 28619 of 2012.

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 17.09.2012 in W.P.No. 28619 of 2012 is as under

:-

This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of Respondent

No.1 in not permitting the petitioner to commence B.Ed. Course for the academic year

2013-2014 instead of the academic year 2012-2013, as arbitrary and illegal.

The petitioner had applied for recognition for running B.Ed. Course to

respondent No.1 well within the prescribed time. However, its application was rejected

on 06.07.2012 by respondent No.1 on the sole ground that the petitioner’s reply to the

show cause notice was received beyond 21 days from the date of its receipt. Assailing

the said order, the petitioner filed W.P.No.24978 of 2012 which was allowed by this

Court on 14.08.2012, by holding that since the date of receipt of the show cause notice

shall be reckoned for the purpose of computing 21 days, the rejection order dated

06.07.2012, was illegal. A direction was accordingly issued to respondent No.1 to

reconsider the petitioner’s application on merits and to pass a fresh order on its

application. Accordingly, purporting to comply with the said order, respondent No.1 has

passed the impugned order. A perusal of the said order would show that on 29 th – 31

st of August, 2012, respondent No.1 has considered the petitioner’s application and

decided to issue a Letter of Intent for grant of recognition to B.Ed. Course of one year

duration with an annual intake of 100 students only for the academic year 2013-2014,

subject to the conditions stipulated therein.

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that when the

petitioner’s application was found in order, it cannot be penalized by denying it one

valuable academic year due to the illegal rejection of its application earlier by its order

dated 06.07.2012. He has relied upon a notification dated 31.07.2012 of respondent

No.2 wherein it has stipulated that all the applications which are complete in all

respects and pending on the date of commencement of the National Council for

Teacher Education (Regulation Norms and Procedure) Regulations 2009, with the

Regional Committees, shall be processed for the academic Session 2012-2013 and a

final decision, either granting recognition or refusing recognition, shall be

communicated on or before 31.08.2012. Learned counsel submitted that when

respondent No.1 has taken a decision to grant recognition to the petitioner at least one

week prior to the cut off date prescribed by respondent No.2, there was absolutely no

justification for respondent No.1 not to permit the petitioner to start the Course for the

academic year 2012-2013.

When the case has come up, the learned counsel representing Sri D.Madhava

Rao, learned Standing Counsel for N.C.T.E. appearing for respondent No.1, tried to

defend the decision of respondent No.1. On the admitted facts of this case,

consideration of the petitioner’s application was delayed only by wrong application of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

111

legal position regarding computation of time for submitting reply of the petitioner. As a

consequence of intervention of this Court, by correcting the illegality committed by

respondent No.1 in holding that the petitioner did not submit its reply within the

stipulated time, respondent No.1 was made to reconsider the petitioner’s application.

Therefore, the valuable right of the petitioner for commencing the Course for the

academic year 2012-2013 could not be denied to it only for the reason of the delayed

consideration of its application. Even otherwise, as rightly submitted by the learned

counsel for the petitioner, the notification dated 31.07.2012 prescribes that all the

pending applications before the Regional Committees shall be processed and a final

decision shall be taken for the academic Session 2012-2013 on or before 31.08.2012.

The impugned decision was taken by respondent No.1 in its 232nd Meeting held on 29

th – 31 st August, 2012, which was much prior to the cut off date of 31.08.2012, which

was stipulated by respondent No.2. Therefore, I do not find any justification whatsoever

in respondent No.1 not permitting the petitioner to commence the B.Ed. Course for the

academic year 2012- 2013 itself, more so when it was found to have complied with all

the conditions for commencement of such Course. It is submitted that the counseling

for B.Ed. Course is scheduled to be commenced from today and it is expected to

continue up to 30.09.2012. In this view of the matter, respondent No.1 is directed to

issue a revised order by permitting the petitioner to commence B.Ed. Course for the

academic year 2012-2013 forthwith including the same in the list of Colleges permitted

for counseling.

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is allowed. As a sequel to the disposal

of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.36497 of 2012 is also disposed of. “

SRC in its 233rd meeting held during 27th to 28th September , 2012 , while approving the

minutes of the last meeting i.e 232nd meeting held during 29th to 31st August, 2012

noted that the decision applied to other similar cases decided before 31st august

2012.To remove the inconsistency, the Committee resolved to issue a Corrigendum to

the effect that, in all such cases in which it was decided to issue LOIs ( on or before

31st August 2012) for 2013-14 session, the applicable academic year should be read

as 2012-13

As per the decision of SRC, on 08/10/2012 , a corrigendum was issued to the institution

with a correction that the words

“LOI for the academic year 2013-14 may be read as LOI for the academic year 2012-

13.”

On 05/11/2012, a letter dated 29.10.2012 from the Shri.J.P.Dwivedi,Under Secretary,

NCTE (HQ) is received by this office regarding the W.P.No. 6629 of 2011 filed by

St.Xaviers Educational Society.

A letter was addressed to the then, advocate ,Shri. Madhav Rao on 06.11.2012 with a

request to appear before the court and defend the case. Brief of the case was also

enclosed.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

112

The SRC in its 234th meeting held during 17th to 18th October, 2012 considered the

matter and decided to apply for the stay and file an Appeal in High Court of Andhra

Pradesh.

“As per the Gazette of India Notification dt. 31/07/2012, “In the National Council

for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2009, in

regulation 5, in sub-regulation (5), the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:

Provided that all application, complete in all respect, pending on the date of

commencement of the National Council for Teacher Education ( Recognition

Norms and Procedure) Amendment Regulation, 2012, with the Regional Committees

shall be processed for the academic session 2012-13 and final decision, either

recognition granted or refused, shall be communicated on or before 31st August day

of 2012”.

Further, As per NCTE guide lines, vide letter NO. F-48-7/2012/NCTE/N & S (Pt)

dt. 28/09/2012, the Committee after taking into account the time limit for processing

of applications stipulated under the Regulations, the judgment of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal No. 1125-1128 of 2011, and the legal advice

received on the subject had decided that, the Regional Committees may

complete the processing of the application expeditiously; however, recognition

may be granted only for the subsequent academic session, viz 2013-14

Further, the Committee decided to issue Notice under section 14(1) of NCTE

act for the f following:

• Staff list is not approved by the Registrar, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, as per NCTE norms.

• Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalized Bank in Joint Account name is not given.

• Website needs up dation.

Further, the Committee decided that in all such cases,

The Committee noted the above Gazette of India notifications and decided that “a general

authorization to the Regional Director to apply for stay and to file an appeal citing Supreme

Court Order for strictly adhering to the cut-off dates.

Further, RD is authorized for similar action in all such cases for granting recognition for

session 2012-13 instead of 2013-14, without waiting for SRC meetings”.

As per the decision of SRC, a LOI notice was issued to the institution on

20/11/2012.

Meantime, Hon’ble High Court order received from Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 24978


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

113

of 2012 dated 21/01/2013 stated that

“… the court, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to

reconsider the petitioners application in the light of the above legal position, and pass a

fresh order on the merits of the petitioners application treating the reply furnished by

the petitioners as having been sent within the stipulated time. the respondent shall

communicate its decision to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order.

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

As a sequel to the disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P. No. 31871 of 2012 is also

disposed of”.

The show cause notice was issued on 20/11/2012. The institution has not submitted its

reply.

(The stipulated time period is over i.e., 76 days)

The Southern Regional Committee in its 240th Meeting held during 9th to 11th

March , 2012 considered the Hon’ble High Court order dt. 21/01/2012 and also the

deficiencies have been removed by the institution, decided to further process as

directed by the High Court. Since already Letter of Intent is being issued to the

institution for the session 2013-14, submit to the High Court the Supreme Court order

dt. 13.12.2012, stating that this case can not be considered for 2012-13 session or

(even) for 2013-14 and seek further orders from the Hon’ble High Court.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the advocate

,Shri.Madhava Rao on 28/03/2013 seeking further directions in the matter.

Now , on 28.01.2015 the institution has submitted a written representation along with

the

affidavit for the application to be processed as per Regulations, 2014

The application has been examined.

Note :-

1. It is observed from the records that the Court order dated 14.08.2012 in

W.P.No. 24978 of 2012 was considered by SRC in its 231st meeting held during

21st to 22nd August , 2012 and the Committee decided to process .SRC in its 232nd

considered the Show Cause Notice Reply as per the Court order and decided to

issue LOI to the institution.

It is seen that the same court order is once again placed before 240th meeting of

SRC held during 9th to 11th March , 2012 and the Committee decided as under :-


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

114

“to further process as directed by the High Court. Since already Letter of Intent is

being issued to the institution for the session 2013-14, submit to the High Court the

Supreme Court order dt. 13.12.2012, stating that this case can not be considered for

2012-13 session or (even) for 2013-14 and seek further orders from the Hon’ble High

Court.”

2.It is seen that the institution has filed another writ petition ,W.P.No.28619 of

2012 which was disposed of on 17-09-2012.The order is as under:-

“It is submitted that the counseling for B.Ed. Course is scheduled to be commenced

from today and it is expected to continue up to 30.09.2012. In this view of the matter,

respondent No.1 is directed to issue a revised order by permitting the petitioner to

commence B.Ed. Course for the academic year 2012-2013 forthwith including the

same in the list of Colleges permitted for counseling. Subject to the above directions,

the writ petition is allowed”

3. The Court order dated 17.09.2012 in W.P.No. 28516 of 2012 was not placed before

SRC.

The Committee considered the matter, letter dated 28.01.2015 along with the affidavit submitted by the institution, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to:

1.Issue Formal Recogntiion for 2 basic units of 50 each w.e.f. 2015-16

2. As per NCTE (H'qrs) Guidelines they must comply with the new norms/standards by 31.10.2015.

32

SRCAPP800

D.El.Ed

M.R.R College

of Diploma in

Education,

Krishna,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

M.R.R. College of Diploma in Education, Plot/Khasara No. 2-94D, Street No. 1,

Nandigama Village & Post, Nandigam Taluk, Krishna District-521185, Andhra

Pradesh

Code/Course SRCAPP800/D.El.Ed.


M.R.R. College of Diploma in Education,

Plot/Khasara No. 2-94D, Street No. 1,

Nandigama Village & Post, Nandigam

Taluk, Krishna District-521185, Andhra

Pradesh Letter as per NCTE


19.12.2014.


to regulations 2014 received

on

29.12.2014


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

115

Intake Requested Not Mentioned


institution.

B.Ed

Andhra Pradesh Girijana Sevak Sangh, Plot No. 2-94D, Street/Road. Madhira

Road, Nandigama Village & Post, Nandigam Taluk, Krishna District-521185,

Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to M.R.R. College of Diploma in

Education, Plot/Khasara No. 2-94D, Street No. 1, Nandigama Village & Post,

Nandigam Taluk, Krishna District-521185, Andhra Pradesh for D.Ed Course of two

years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional

Committee, NCTE online on 27.09.2011 and physical application has been received in

the office of SRC on 30.09.2011.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 17/10.2011/07.12.2011 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 28.12.2011. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 29.02.2012. The SRC in its 220th Meeting held on 30th and 31st March 2012considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 29.02.2012 and all the relevant Documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued on 26.04.2012. The institution has submitted its written representations on 16.05.2012.

The reply of the institution to the show cause notice was duly considered by SRC in its

223rd Meeting held on 29th-31st May, 2012 and the reply is unconvincing and not

satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:-

The institution is already running B.Ed course (recognized granted on 28.07.2010).

Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions towards the existing course B.Ed, from

Affiliating University is not given. As per NCTE Regulations 2009, an institution which

is already running any other teacher course recognized by NCTE has to complete 3

academic sessions before applying for new course as per NCTE Regulations.



Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of

D.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution vide . F.No. SRCAPP800/ D.Ed /AP/

2012-13/43303 dated 29/06/2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs vide


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

116

order no. F.No.89-507/2013/Appeal/15th Meeting/2013A77916 dated 12.11.2013 stating that

“…the council decided not to condone the delay and therefore, the appeal is not

admitted.”

The Southern Regional Committee in its 256th Meeting during 4

th- 5

th December, 2013 has noted

the matter.

On, 19/03/2014, a copy of the Court Order from Hon’ble High Court of Judicature

Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in W.P.4767 of 2014 is received by this office which is

as under:-

"The Hon'ble High Court has directed to show cause as to why in the circumstances

set out in the petition and the affidavit filed therewith this wirt petition should not be

admitted. The court made the following.

Order: Notice before admission returnable in four weeks.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out notice to the respondents by

registered post with acknowledgement due by supplying the entire paper book in the

writ petition and file proof of service into the Registry".

A letter was addressed to the advocate, Sri. Ramakanth Reddy on 24/03.2014

requesting him to defend the case including on behalf of NCTE, HQ, with a copy

mentioned to Sri. B,P Pandey, Under Secretary, NCTE. In the mean time, a letter from

Sri. B.P.Pandey, Under Secretary, NCTE (HQ) has been received on 07/04/2014

requesting to defend the case including on behalf of NCTE (HQ).

On 04.06.2014 , the institution has submitted a written representation stating as under

:-

"We had applied for D.El.Ed Course in the name and style of M.R.R. College of

Diploma in Education to SRC NCTE, Bangalore on 07.05.2008.

As per the reference 2nd cited above, (SRC letter No. 758 dated 23.05.2008) the NCTE

Bangalore was returned the application stating that an Institution can apply for one

basic unit of an additional course from subsequent academic session.

As per the reference 3rd cited above, (SRC letter No. F.SRCAPP800/D.EI.Ed dated:

21.11.2011) SRC, Bangalore stating that the institution has not completed three year

period after recognition of B.Ed course, which was granted on 28.07.2010 for M.R.R.

College of , Education, Nandigama, Krishna Dist., A.P. run by the same management

Andhra Pradesh Girijana Sevak Sangh, Krishna Dist., Andhra Pradesh. Further, since

3 year period has not been elapsed, the application for recognition of D.Ed course is

therefore rejected as per NCTE regulations Act.

As per reference 4th cited above, (The Hon'ble High Court of A.P.W.P. No.33208/2010

dated:30.12.2010) has given the direction to respondent to consider the application of

the petitioner for grant of permission for D.Ed course for the Academic Year 2011-2012


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

117

within the period of Eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

As per reference 5th cited above, (The Hon'ble High Court of A.P. Contempt Case No.

1209 of 2011 dated 21/11/2011 ) have approached for justification and condoned

the delay process for more than 8 weeks. Finally, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P

has given the liberty to us to renew the application for grant of permission to run

the D. Ed Course after expiry of the stipulated period of 3 years. As per reference 6th

cited above, (SRC letter No. F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2010/20060 dated 28.07.2010)

Bangalore has issued grant of recognition for conducting B.Ed course in the name of

M.R.R. College of Education at Nandigama, Krishna Dist., A.P., for the Academic

Year 2010 - 2011. Since three academic session have been completed by 2012 -

2013. Necessary three years affiliation orders issued by the University and

enclosed herewith for your ready reference.

In the direction of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. we request you to kindly renew our

application of D.Ed Course for grant of recognition for the academic year 2014-

2015."

SRC in its 270th meeting held on 13th July, 2014 considered the matter and decided as

under :

‘The institution is entitled to apply for D.Ed after successful completion of 3 academic

years for the B.Ed course. Advise them to apply afresh. Accordingly with due fees and

documentary support as and when NCTE invites applications.

Now on 11.08.2014, before issuance of letter to the institution (i.e. on 21.08.2014)

conveying the decision of 270th meeting of SRC, the institution has submitted a written

representation along with a copy of the Hon’ble High Court order dated 06.08.2014 in

W.P.M.P.No. 26671 of 2014 in W.P.No. 21264 of 2014 which is as under :-

‘With reference 3rd cited above (Our request letter dated 04.06.2014 for consideration

of D.Ed course for the academic year 2014-15), we have requested to NCTE, SRC for

consideration of D.Ed course based on the Hon’ble High court of A.P order in the

contempt case.

In reference 5th (The Hon’ble High court of A.P writ petition No. 21264 of 2014 dated

06.08.2014 ), SRC, NCTE, Bangalore rejected the file and given the advise in 270th

meeting to apply afresh , when NCTE invites applications and not obliging the orders

of the Hon’ble Court of A.P.

Based on 270th meeting of SRC ,NCTE, Bangalore , the Hon’ble High Court A.P had

given the order vide writ petition No. 21264 of 2014 , dated 06.08.2014 to renew the

application for grant of permission to start the D.Ed course for the academic year 2014-

15 without waiting for fresh notification.

Hence , it is requested that please oblige the Hon’ble Court of A.P. order and send the

inspection and permit us to start D.Ed course for the academic year 2014-15 for which


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

118

act of kindness, we shall be ever grateful to you. ‘

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 16.08.2014 in W.P.M.P.No. 26671 of 2014 in

W.P.No. 21264 of 2014 from the High court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of

Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh is as under :

The institution has prayed that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in the

W.P., the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to consider the request

of the Petitioner made in its letter dated 04.06.2014 for renewal of application filed for

grant of recognition to commence the D.El.Ed course , for the academic year 2014-15,

pending disposal of W.P.No. 21264/2014 on the file of the High Court.

The court while directing issue of notice to the Respondent herein to show cause why

this petition should not be complied with , made the following order. (The receipt of this

order will be deemed to the receipt of notice in the case)

ORDER :“ There shall be an interim direction as prayed for.’


meeting held during 01st

and 02nd

September,

2014 considered the letter from the institution dated 11.08.2014 and also the order of the

Hon’ble High Court of Hyderabad dated 06.08.2014, decided and advised Southern Regional

Office to ask our Lawyer to move for vacation of ‘stay’ and dismissal of the petition filed by the

petitioner.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to Shri. Ramakanth Reddy on

04.09.2014, with a request to defend the case along with the brief of the case communicating

the decision of SRC.

On 10.09.2014 an email has been received from Shri. Ramakanth Reddy enclosing Vacate

Petition in WPMP 26671 of 2014 in WP 21264 of 2014.On 10.10.2014 a letter was addressed

to Shri. Ramakanth Reddy with a duly signed Vacate Petition in WPMP 26671 in WP 21264 of

2014.On 23.09.2014 an email has been received from Shri. Ramakanth Reddy stating that

counter is filed in the subject cited case in the Hon’ble High Court on 16th

September, 2014.

Note:- The application of the institution is rejected on 29.06.2012, Appellate Authority has not

admitted the appeal(not to condone the delay) on 12.11.2013, and the matter is pending

before the Hon’ble High Court of AP in WP No.26671/2014.

On 29.12.2014 a letter was received by this office from the M.K. Thirupathi Rao Secretary &

Correspondent of Andhra Pradesh Girijana Sevak Sangh stating as under:-

“I M.K. Thirupathi Rao, the secretary cum correspondent of M.R.R. college of diploma

in education, would like to submit few lines for your kind consideration and necessary action


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

119

as regards implementation of the order made in WPMPNO. 26671 of 2014, in WPNO.21264 of

2014, by considering the request contained in my letter dated 04.06.2014, whereby, I prayed

to renew my application for grant of recognition to run D.Ed., course since completed three

years gap from the date of grant of recognition for B.Ed., Course dated 28.07.2010.

I say and submit that your good selves was kind enough to grant recognition to run

B.Ed., course vide order baring F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed.,/2010/20060, dated 28.07.2010. Science

then I have been running the B.Ed., course without any compliant of whatsoever nature and

while adhere to the conditions imposed by the authority.

I say and submit that I applied for grant of recognition for D.Ed., course in accordance with the

procedure prescribed under the regulations. The said application when placed in 270th

meeting

held on 13th

July, 2014, the SRC NCTE, has decided to the effect that “ the institution is entitled

to apply for D.Ed., after successful completion of 3 years for the acadamic years for the B.Ed

course. Advise them to apply afresh accordingly with due fees and documentary support as

and when NCTE invites application. Though three years have elapsed, my application has not

been considered as a result, I was constrained to approach the Hon’ble High Court for

redressal. Accordingly, the Hon’ble court upon hearing the respective parties, was pleased to

pass an order dated 06.08.2014. the copy of the order is enclosed herewith for your kind

perusal and implementation forthwith. I further submit that I came to know that my request

has been placed in the 272nd

meeting of SRC held on 01st

– 2nd

September, 2014 and

accordingly taken a decision to the effect that “to entrust the matter to the counsel to move

for vacation of stay and dismissal of the petition filed by the petitioner”.

I say and submit that as per the regulations of 2014, there is no provision for maintaining three

years gap as contemplated under the repealed regulations of 2009. therefore, I request your

good selves to consider my application which has been pending are quiet some times in terms

of the orders of the Hon’ble high court as well as the regulations 2014, forewith.I respectfully

submit that I express my willingness to process my application as per NCTE Regulations of

2014, and a separate affidavit as prescribed by the authority is enclosed herewith.

I, therefore, request your good selves to consider my application filed for grant of recognition

to run D.Ed., course in terms of the order of the Hon’ble High Court as referred to the above

and in accordance with regulations, 2014, for with and for which act of kindness, I shall ever be

grateful to your good selves.”

The Soutern Regional Committee in its 277th

meeting held during 20th

– 22nd

January , 2015

considered the letter from the institution dated 29.12.2014 and decided as under:

• Now that the 3-year gap requirement has been removed, we can consider the case for further attention after the Court-case is withdrawn. Check with the applicant.

On 27.01.2015 a letter dated 28.01.2015 was received office from the M.K. Thirupathi Rao Secretary & Correspondent of Andhra

Pradesh Girijana Sevak Sangh stating as under:-


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

120

“I M.K. Thirupathi Rao, the secretary cum correspondent of M.R.R. college of diploma in

education, would like to submit few lines for your kind consideration and necessary action

as regards grant of recognition to run D.El.Ed Course, for the academic year 2014-2015.

In the reference 1st cited, you have instructed us for withdrawal of Writ petition,

which was pending at the Hon’ble High Court of A.P, then only D.El.Ed course

will be consider, as per your instructions, we have withdrawn the Writ Petition

pending at Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, through our lawyer on 23rd,

January 2015.The withdrawal copy of the same is herewith enclosing for your

kind consideration.

In the light of the above submissions, I request your good selves to issue necessary

orders for causing inspection forthwith in order to avoid further loss of time. It is pertinent here

to mention that in the event of any further delay, it would only result in irreparable lose and

damage. For which act of kindness, I shall be ever great full to your good selves.”

The documents submitted by the institution are processed.

The following documents are also enclosed along with the letter:

• A letter dated 23.01.2015 from G. Anandam, Advocate, Counsel for the petitioner,

addressed to The Registrar Judicial, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad.

• A copy of Hon’ble High Court order dated 6.08.2014 in W.P.M.P.No. 26671 of 2014 in W.P.No. 21264 of 2014 from the High court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh.

The Committee Considered the matter, letter from the institution dated

29.12.2014 along with the affidavit, and all the relevant documentary evidence

and decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE act. For

the following deficiencies.

• The Built up area given is inadequate for the course being proposed by the institution.

• Inconsistency of dates in building plan and Building Completion Certificate.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the institution and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter including rejection of the application for recogntion, based on the records available, with no further notice.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

121

33

SRCAPP2106

D.El.Ed

MJR College

of

Elementary

Education,

Nalgonda ,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

MJR College of Elementary Education, Plot/Khasara No.2-8, Street No.2, Marriguda Village and Post Office, Marriguda City and Taluk, Nalgonda District – 508245, Andhra Pradesh.

Code/Course SRCAPP2106/D.El.Ed


MJR College of Elementary Education, Plot/Khasara No.2-8, Street No.2, Marriguda Village and Post Office, Marriguda City and Taluk, Nalgonda District – 508245, Andhra Pradesh.

Letter as per NCTE guidelines

dated 18.12.2014 sent on

19.12.2014.


regulations 2014 received on

29.12.2014

Intake Requested Not Specified.


institution.

B.Ed(APS07271)

MJR Educational Society, Plot No. 2-8, MDO Office Road, Marriguda Village and

Post Office, Marriguda City and Taluk, Nalgonda District – 508245, Andhra

Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to MJR College of Elementary

Education, Plot/Khasara No.2-8, Street No.2, Marriguda Village and Post Office,

Marriguda City and Taluk, Nalgonda District – 508245, Andhra Pradesh for

D.El.Ed Course of two year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the

Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.12.2012 and physical application

has been received in the office of SRC on 04.01.2013 .

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 31.01.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency

letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013. The institution has replied to the

deficiency letter on 26.04.2013.

The reply of the institution to the deficiency letter was duly considered by SRC in its

245th Meeting held on 19th-21st May, 2013 and the reply is unconvincing and not

satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:-

1. Original certified copy of the land documents from Govt. authority i.e, sub-registrar is not submitted. Notarized English version of the certified copy land documents not submitted.

2. Notarized land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes.

3. Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

122

4. In the building completion certificate submitted, type of roofing at column no. 10 and the name of the proposed course at column no. 9 respectively is not mentioned.

5. Total earmarked built up area shown in building plan 3599 sq.mtrs and in building completion certificate 3087 sq.mtrs both are not matching.

In view of above, the Committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the

application of the institution for recognition of D.EI.Ed course.


An e-mail letter dated 07.08.2013 has been received from the Shri.Amitesh Kumar ,the

then Legal Counsel of NCTE at the Supreme Court of India and Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi ,with a request to depute a person who is well versed with the above matter with

all original records, so that the matter may be discussed and the Hon’ble Supreme

Court may be apprised of the factual position regarding deficiencies noted by the SRC,

on the next date of hearing i.e. 14.08.2013.

Accordingly, the original file was handed over to Sri. Amitesh Kumar, Legal Counsel on

13.08.2013.

On 19.08.2013, an e-mail letter was received from the advocate Shri. Amitesh Kumar in

W.P.(Civil)No. 437 of 2013 along with a counter affidavit

On 19.08.2013, a letter dated 08.08.2013 was received from the Dr. Rakesh Tomar,

(NCTE-Hqrs) stating that

‘the Hon’ble Court has held that the Hon’ble Court itself examine the correctness of the

order dated 19.06.2013 keeping in view of short time available in the academic year

2013-14 and has not agreed at this stage to direct the petitioner to avail the remedy of

appeal under section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993.After examination of the entire record,

it is seen that the recognition of the petitioner institution was refused by the SRC,NCTE

and no appeal was filed under section 18 of the NCTE Act.

Since the Hon’ble Court itself examining the corrections of the orders issued by SRC,

you are requested to immediately take necessary steps as requested by the legal

counsel under intimation to this office.’

Accordingly, a letter was addressed to the Dr. Rakesh Tomar on 19.08.2013 along with

the Counter Affidavit authorizing him to sign the verified affidavit on behalf of SRC-

NCTE.

In the meantime, an appeal memorandum has been received from the NCTE-Hqrs on

16.09.2013 requesting for original file of the institution and comments in the matter.

A letter was sent to the advocate Shri. Amitesh Kumar informed to the Counsel to send

the original file directly to NCTE-Hqrs, since, the institution preferred an appeal.

Accordingly, the brief of the case was sent to the NCTE-Hqrs on 20.09.2013


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

123

On 24.09.2013, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 04.09.2013 in W.P.(civil).No 437 of

2013.was received by this office stating as under

“…direct that if the petitioner files an appeal to the NCTE within a week from today, the

delay if any in filing the appeal will be condoned by the NCTE since the matter was

pending before this court in the present writ petition and the appellate authority will

decide the appeal within one month from the date of its filing and communicate the

orders to the petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly”.

The appellate authority order No. F.No.89-593/2013 Appeal/15th Meeting-2013 A83805

dated 24.02.2014 is as under

“… the council noted that the submission of the appeal is delayed by 20 days beyond

the prescribed time limit of 60 days. The council also noted that the appellant filed a

writ petition no. 437 of 2013 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the Hon’ble

Court in their order dated 04.09.2013 directed that if the petitioner files an appeal to the

NCTE, within a week from 04.09.2013, the delay if any in filing the appeal will be

condoned by the NCTE since the matter was pending before the Hon’ble High Court

and the appellate authority will decided the appeal within one month from the date of

filing. In these circumstances the council decided to condone the delay and took up the

appeal for consideration.

Md. Mohiuddin, President and Md. Jabbar, Secretary, MJR College of Elementary

Education, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution

on 10.10.2013. in the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that “

(i) original certified copy of the gift deed submitted was as per the Mohammadan law

and registration is not required for that gift deed. The Hon’ble Supreme court of India

passed orders and rules, (ii) this is not agricultural land and land usage certificate is

submitted by the Gram Panchayat, changing from agricultural to non agricultural does

not arise as it comes under the Gram Panchayat., (iii) as this is a gift deed

encumbrance does not arise, even though the certified copies are issued by the District

Registrar where in the pages 11 of 14 resolutions are recorded and duly certified by the

District Registrar., (iv) the entire premises of column no.9 and 10 is allocated for both

the courses i.e. B.Ed and D.El.Ed (v) more than 3000 sq. mts completed area; 3087

sq.mts rest of 512 sq.mts to be constructed. As per the NCTE norms 3000 Sq. mts only

is required for the both courses”. In the course of personal presentation, the appellant

enclosed a copy of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India’s judgment dated 05.05.2011 in

Civil Appeal No. 1714 of 2005 in support of his claim that a gift deed under

Mohammaden Law does not require registration.

The Council decided that the NCTE may obtain legal opinion as to whether a gift deed

executed under Mohammaden Law requires any registration and it is a valid document

on its own even without registration. A copy of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India’s

judgment referred to above may also be sent to the legal counsel for expressing his


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

124

opinion. The council in their meeting held on 21.02.2014 was shown the advice

received from the NCTE’s legal counsel. The council noted that the legal counsel has

opined that a gift (Hiba) under Mohamadan Law does not require to be compulsorily

registered in the light of the fact that Section 129 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882

preserves the rule of Mohamadan Law and excludes the applicability of Section 123 of

the said Act to a gift of an immovable property by a Mohamadan. In the light of this

advice and the submissions of the appellant, the Council concluded that the matter

deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to process the matter further as

per the Regulations.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on

records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council

concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process

the matter further as per the Regulations.

NOW THEREFORE, the council hereby remands back the case of MJR College of

Elementary Education, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary

action as indicated above.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 268th Meeting held on 4 – 5 June ,2014

considered the matter, advised Southern Regional Office to process the case after

notification of new Regulations as per NCTE (H.Q) instructions.

On 10.07.2014, M.D.Moinduddin, Chairman of MJR Society has submitted written

representation and a copy of the Court Order dated 05.05.2014 in C.P.(Civil) No. 162 of

2014 in W.P.No. (Civil) No. 437 of 2013 which is as under :

‘Herewith I am enclosing the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India order which is time bound

and in the Telangana State going to start counseling for seeking admission in D.EI.Ed

course.I already submitted original FDRs too. Hence it is request to your esteemed

authority may grant recognition MJR College of Education for D.EI.Ed course by

implementing the contempt orders by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.’

Court Order from the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dated 05.05.2014 in C.P.(Civil)

No. 162 of 2014 in W.P.No. (Civil) No. 437 of 2013 is as under :-

‘We have heard learned counsel for the parties. dThe petitioner filed the writ petition

with a prayer to quash the order dated 19.06.2013 issued by respondent No.

2(SRC,NCTE) and to direct the respondent Nos. 1 (NCTE ,HQ) and 2 (SRC,NCTE) to

grant recognition to the petitioner for its D.El.Ed course for the academic year 2013-14.

The writ petition was disposed of on 04.09.2013 with the direction that if the petitioner

files an appeal, the appellate authority will decide the appeal within one month. The

grievance of the petitioner is that the direction of this Court has not been complied with.

The appeal of the petitioner against the order dated 19.06.2013 has been allowed by


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

125

the Appellate Committee of National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) and by the

appellate order dated 24.02.2014, the case of the petitioner has been remanded to the

Southern Regional Committee of the NCTE for necessary action.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the NCTE that pursuant to the direction of this

Court, the new regulations for grant of recognition will get finalized only by the end of

June, 2014, and the case of the petitioner can be considered afresh only after the

finalization of the regulations.

We dispose of the matter with the direction that the case of the petitioner will be

finalized by the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE by the end of July, 2014, in

accordance with the new regulations.

The contempt petition is disposed of accordingly.’

The Southern Regional Committee in its 271st meeting hekld during 01st August, 2014

considered the matter, Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 05.05.2014, decided that:

1. This case can not be processed now, it can be taken up only after notification of the

new Regulations by 30.11.2014. Further, the Committee advised Southern Regional

Office to report

2. Which case has given rise to the contempt proceedings in Supreme Court? What action is

pending? Ask our Lawyer to report.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to Shri Gourav Sharma, on 14.08.2014

communicating the decision of SRC, with respect to the contempt Petition (Civil) No.162 of

2014 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.437 of 2013 filed by MJR College of Elementary Education.


application as per regulations 2014 was sent to the institution on 19.12.2014.

In response to this office letter dated 19.12.2014, the institution has submitted a reply on

29.12.2014 along with an affidavit on Rs.100/- stamp paper and Court order of (Civil) No.162 of

2014 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.437 of 2013 filed by institution expressing their willingness for

the application to be processed as per Regulation, 2014.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 277th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd, January

2015, considered the matter, and decided as under:-

• Process under New Regulations and put up in the next meeting. The documents submitted by the institution are processed.

The Committee considered the matter, letter dated 29.12.2014 along with the affidavit , decided and advised Southern Regional Office to:

1.Affidavit received.

2.Cause Composite Inspection - B.Ed & D.Ed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

126

34

SRCAPP1636

D.El.Ed

Ambika

D.El.Ed

College,

Mahabubnag

ar, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Ambika D.El.Ed College, Khasara/Plot No. 392/ga, Gadwal Village, Post & Taluk, Mahabubnagar District-509125, Andhra Pradesh. Code/ Course

SRCAPP1636/D.El.Ed

Name of the institution Ambika D.El.Ed College, Khasara/Plot No. 392/ga, Gadwal Village, Post & Taluk, Mahabubnagar District-509125, Andhra Pradesh

Letter as per NCTE guidelines dated 18.12.2014 sent on

19.12.2014

Affidavit affirming adherence to regulations 2014 received on

02.01.2015

Intake Request 100

Other Courses offered in the institution

Stand Alone

Ambika Educational Society, Plot No. 7-5-18/1A, Kuntaveedhi Street, Gadwal Village, Post & Taluk, Mahabubnagar Dicstrict-509125, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition Ambika D.El.Ed College, Khasara/Plot No. 392/ga, Gadwal Village, Post & Taluk, Mahabubnagar District-509125, Andhra Pradesh, for D.El.Ed Course for two years duration under Section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 01.10.2011. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 13.10.2011.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for

recommendation on 08.11.2011. A reminder letter to the State Government was sent on

29.12.2011. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 30.12.2011.

The Committee Considered the reply of the institution dated 28.02.2012 and all the

relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show Cause Notice

under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act, for the following:

• The land as gift deed is registered on 06-02-2012 after the date of on-line application submission, which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009. Earlier, the institution had submitted lease deed at the time of making application, which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations.

• In the approved building plan submitted, total earmarked built up area for the proposed course is not mentioned.

• Building completion certificate submitted is in favour of individual by name K. Ambika W/o Ambusa R/o Gawadwal, Which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009.

• in the affidavit submitted, total built up area is not mentioned.

• Details of the other courses run by the institution in the same building/


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

127

Premises is not Submitted. Reply to the deficiency letter is incomplete and not satisfactory.

In view of the above and with reference to the totality of information collected & based

on a collective application of mind, the Committee decided to issue a Show Cause

notice to the institution as to why the recognition be not refused an thereby providing

an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21 days from

the date of issue of the Notice along with necessary certificates/ documents in order to

take a final decision in the matter failing which action will be taken including the refusal

& Rejection of application for recognition , based on the records available with no

further notice.


Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution has preferred an appeal to

NCTE-Hqrs the appellate authority order vide no. F.No.89-89/2013Appeal / 8th meeting

2013 dated 22/05/2013 stated that

“… the council noted that the SRC vide their order dated 28/06/2012 refused

recognition of D.El.Ed course of the appellant institution on the grounds mentioned

above and against this order the appellant was required to submit the appeal within the

imitation period of sixty days as prescribed in the NCTE Rules. However, the institution

submitted its appeal on 28/02/2013 which is approximately six months late. The

appellant informed the council that the president of the society was sick during that time

so they could not submit the appeal within the stipulated time. the council is of the view

that every society has other office bearers other than the president and who may take

decision about filing of appeal but this has not been done in this case. Moreover, the

limitation period of sixty days provided in the rules is a sufficient period for filing the

appeal. Therefore, the council decided not to condone the delay in the submission of

appeal and not to admit the appeal.

After perusal of the documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, and after considering

the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the council decided not to condone

the delay and therefore, not to admit the appeal.”

The Appellant authority order was placed before SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th

-22nd June, 2013 and the committee has noted the matter”.

A Court order has been received from the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in

.P.No.28817/ on 01.04.2014 stating that.

“There appears to be some justifiable reason behind the claim . perhaps ,the ends of

justice could have been better served by directing the petitioner society to pay to the

Council as fine for condonation of delay of six months a sum of Rs.20.000/- which is

double the amount of the proceedings fee prescribed for the application. Further the

impugned order was


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

128

passed by the council is bald, It has not preferred to assign any reasons. The

impugned order is therefore, set aside and the petitioner society is directed to pay a

penalty of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) to the National Council for

Teacher Education and time is granted for payment of the said fine up 28.03.2014

and upon receipt of the said fine amount, the Council shall re-examine the appeal of

the Petitioner society on merits as expeditiously as is possible with this the Writ

Petition stands disposed of at the admission stage, But however. Without costs.

Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions if any stand disposed of”

As per the order of the Hon’ble Court the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE –

Hqrs the appellate authority vide order No. F.No.89/2013 Appeal/7th meeting 2013

dated 07.05.2014 stated that

“The Council noted that the name of the appellant institution is figuring at S.No. 6 of the

list of institutions enclosed to the letter dated 14.08.2012 from the special chief

Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh recommending acceptance of their

proposals for recognition of D.Ed courses for the academic year 2012-13, who could

register their lands after 25.10.2011 i.e. after completion of strike in Telangana Region.

The appellant institution registered the land on 06.02.2012 and got encumbrance

certificate. The appellant also submitted a fresh building completion certificate

indicating the type of roofing. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that the

matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to process the application

as per the Regulations.

after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit the documents available on

records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing the council

concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to

Process the application as per Regulations.

NOW therefore, the council hereby remands back the case of Ambika D.Ed College

Mahabubnagar, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE for necessary action as instructed

above.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 276th meeting held during 7th to 9th

January,2015 considered the Appeal Remanded back case and decided as:-

“They have asked for an intake of 100 which, under the 2014 Regulations, will fall

into two units of 50 each, this is therefore, treated as an application for 2 units.

But, further action to process the case can not be taken because this is a case of

stand-alone institution which, in terms of Regulation 3, is not eligible to make

this application. Keep this case pending and ask for clarification from NCTE

(H'qrs).”

As per the decision of SRC, A letter was addressed to the NCTE Hqrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

129

On 16.01.2015, an e-mail from Shri. Shrikanth Chauhan, Under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this office providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:-


The SRC, in its 277th meeting held during 20th to 22nd January,2015 considered matter

and decided as “Process w.r.t. new Regulations and put up in the next meeting”

The Committee Considered the matter, letter (E-mail) from the NCTE (H'qrs)

dated 16.01.2015, and all the relevant documentary evidence and decided to

serve Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE act. For the following

deficiencies.

The Affidavit received.

• The built up area shown is inadequate for the course proposed. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the institution and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter including rejection of the application for recogntion, based on the records available, with no further notice.

35

APS00049

B.Ed

Hannamma

Christian

College of

Education,

Cuddapah,

Andhra

Pradesh.

AP

Hannamma Christian College of Education, Y.M.R. Colony, Proddatur,

Cuddapah-516361, Andhra Pradesh.


Name of the Institution Hannamma Christian College of

Education, Y.M.R. Colony, Proddatur,

Cuddapah-516361, Andhra Pradesh

Affidavit is sent on 19.12.2014

Willingness/ consent to

process the application

as per regulations 2014

received on

29.12.2014 and 02.01.2015


Hannamma Christian College of Education, Y.M.R. Colony, Proddatur,

Cuddapah-516361, Andhra Pradesh was granted recognition for conduct of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

130

B.Ed course from the academic session 2004-05 with annual intake of 120

students ,vide order dated 19.09.2004.

NCTE Hqrs. had forwarded a copy of complaint dated 05.03.2006 received from

Shri.B.S. Lambert, Correspondent of Vijay Vidyodaya Samajam Proddatur-

516361, Cuddapah (Dist.) Andhra Pradesh along with its enclosures against

Hannamma College of Education, Proddatur-Kadapa, Dist., Andhra Pradesh

with request to take appropriate necessary action.

The complainant had raised grievances against the institution as under:-

“Not having approved teaching & non teaching staff. They are managing with

the Govt. Employees in running the college as teaching staff. Filling others

certificates & photos to inspiring authority. Not having their own building

registered in the name of college.

In as much as they do not have any infrastructure for the college it is only

proper to withdrawal the recognition.

The Government of Andhra Pradesh has already declared the trust of this

Hannamma College i.e., Douglas as “Bogus” and with this stigma how the

management can further continue to run the B.Ed., College.”

The SRC in its 195th meeting held during 17-18 August, 2010 considered the

matter and decided to issue Notice under section 17 of NCTE.

Accordingly, a Notice was issued to the institution on 18.11.2010. The institution

submitted its written representation 21.12.2010.

The SRC in its 201st Meeting held on 22nd-23rd February, 2011 considered the

reply to Show Cause Notice, VT Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary

evidences and it was decided to serve Final show cause notice Under Section

17 of NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a final show cause notice was issued to the institution on

18.03.2011. The institution submitted its written representation on 25.04.2011.

In the meantime, a letters dated 15.06.2013 & 03.07.2013 were received from

the institution stating that

“…Hannamma Christian College of Education, Proddatur, Kadapa District,

Andhra Pradesh, humbly submit that we have submitted the original Joint

account F.D’s (i.e. Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund) and obtained receipt

from your office on 28.08.2009. I am herewith enclosing a copy of the said


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

131

receipt for ready reference.

Now I request you Sir, the F.D. of Endowment fund for Rs. 5,00,000-00 due

date is on 06.09.2012 and the said FD has to be renewed for further period of 6

months. Hence kindly arrange to sent it back the said FD for further renewal and

I also request you Sir. I may kindly be permitted to withdraw the INTEREST

amount, so as to enable me to utilize the same for salary purpose of the staff.

Since so for the A.P. Govt. has not sanctioned reimbursement (Scholarships to

the B.Ed., students, I will again re-submit the said FD immediately after done

with.

Inadvertently, the reply for final show cause notice for section 17 submitted by

the institution was not placed before SRC.

It is seen from the file, that after issuance of final show cause notice under

section 17, reply is received and further no action has been taken and the reply

has not been placed before the SRC meeting.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 257th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd

December, 2013 considered the matter on the above subject, reply of the

institution to the show cause notice issued to the institution vide our letter dated

24/04/2011, and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to

withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

The institution has not submitted any documentary proof for the following

documents.

• The institution has not submitted building plan duly approved by the competent civil authority.

• Building completion certificate submitted by the institution is not in proper format.

• Land usage certificate submitted by the Institution is not in proper format.

Based on the above points the Committee decided to withdraw the

recognition of the B.Ed course run by Hannamma Christian College of

Education, Y.M.R. Colony, Proddatur, Cuddapah-516361, Andhra Pradesh from

the academic year 2014-15 in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in

B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.

As per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution

vide F.No. APS00049/B.Ed/AP/2013-14/50542 dated 24.01.2014

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

132

before the Appellate authority ,New Delhi and accordingly, the original file of the

institution along with comments was sent to NCTE –Hqrs on 08.05.2014.

On 02.09.2014, a Court order dated 25.08.2014 issued from the Hon’ble High

Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and Andhra

Pradesh in W.P.No. 24738 of 2014 is received by this office. The writ petition is

filed by Hannamma Christian College of Education , Proddutur,Kadapa wherein

NCTE-Hqrs is the first respondent and SRC,NCTE is the second respondent.

The institution has prayed that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed

herein, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to order

bearing F.No. APS00049 B.Ed / A. P/2013-14 /56542 dated 24.01.2014 wherein

the recognition granted to the petitioner college by the NCTE, Southern Region,

Bangalore is withdrawn with effect from 2014-15 against which the appeal filed

by the petitioner on 21.03.2014 is pending before the 1st respondent (NCTE-

HQ) and consequently issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,

order or direction quashing the same with a consequential direction in continue

the recognition granted by the 2nd (SRC,NCTE) respondent from the academic

year 2001-2002 to the academic year 2013-14 for 2014-15 also.

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 25.08.2014 is as under :-

“By an order passed on 24.01.2014 the Southern Regional Committee,

National Council for Teacher Education , Bangalore has withdrawn the

recognition accorded to the writ petitioner for running B.Ed course from the

academic year 2014-15.

It is not in dispute that the recognition has been accorded during the

academic session 2004- 05 with annual intake of 120 students by an

order passed on 14.09.2004.The reasons for withdrawing the

recognition are recorded as under :(1) Theinstitution has not submitted

building plan duly approved by the competent civil authority.(2) Building

completion certificate submitted by the institution is not in proper

format.(3)Land usage certificate submitted by the institution is not in

proper format.

These reasons appear, prima-facie too technical.

It is the case of the petitioner herein that an appeal has been preferred to

the National Council for Teacher Education , New Delhi against the said order

on 21.03.2014 and the said appeal is still pending with the National Council


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

133

for Teacher Education, New Delhi. Now the new academic session 2014-15 is

likely to be commenced and the admission process to the B.Ed Course will

also commence for the current academic session .Therefore, pending

disposal of the appeal, the decision taken by the Southern Regional

Committee, National Council for Teacher Education, Bangalore, dated

24.01.2014 may not acted upon by the respondent No.3 (Govt. of Andhra

Pradesh)and 4 (Yogi Vemana University) for a period of three months from

today.

Notice before admission returnable in six weeks.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is permitted to take out notice to the

respondents by registered post with acknowledgement due by supplying the

entire paper book in the writ petition and file proof of service into the

Registry.

Post after six weeks.”

On 22.09.2014, as per the Court order dated 25.08.2014 in W.P.No. 24378 the

Counsel for the Petitioner ,Shri. M.N.Narasimha Reddy ,G.Ramachandra Reddy

has issued a personal notice which is as under :-

“ The writ petition referred to above is filed by Hannamma Christian College of

Education, Prodattur,Kadapa District represented by the Chairman and

Correspondent, Vijayakumar Watkins, challenging the order of withdrawal of

recognition granted to the petitioner college by the NCTE, Southern Region,

Bangalore in its order bearing F.No. APS00049/B.Ed./A.P/2013-14/ 56452

dated 24.01.2014 with effect from 2014-15.The Hon’ble Court while ordering

notice before admission on 25-8-2014 returnable in six weeks , was pleased to

permit us to take out personal notice to you and file proof of service .Accordingly

the notice is being sent to you.

The writ petition would be listed for further hearing on 06.10.2014 or on any

other subsequent day. You are requested to appear in person through an

advocate on the date of hearing on 06-10-2014, failing which the matter would

be heard exparte.

The Southern Regional Committee in it 273rd meeting took note of the Court

order to the University for not altering status quo ante.

As per the decision of SRC , a letter was addressed to the advocate

Shri.Ramakanth Reddy on 21.11.2014 requesting to defend the case on behalf

of NCTE..


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

134

On 26.11.2014, an e-mail was received from the advocate,Shri.Ramakanth

Reddy enclosing a draft counter to be filed in W.P.No. 24378 of 2014 by

NCTE.A duly signed Counter affidavit to be filed in W.P.No. 24378 of 2014 was

sent to the advocate on 03.12.2014.

On 05.12.2014, the applleat authority order no. F.No.89-254/2014 Appeal / 12th

Meeting – 2014/A 78885 dated 25.11.2014 is recived by this office which is as

under :-

“The Correspondent, Hannamma Christian College of Education (hereinafter

referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21.05.2014 to the

National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as

the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order.

Hannamma Christian College of Education, Proddatur, Kadapa, Andhra

Pradesh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on

08.09.2014 but nobody appeared. The Council decided to give the appellant

another opportunity i.e. the second opportunity to present their case before the

Council. Sh.Vijay Kumar, Chairman, Trust of Hannamma Christian College of

Education, Kadapa appeared before the Council on 13.10.2014 and submitted

that “the appellant college had constructed the building after obtaining approve

of the Municipality. The construction of the building was in two stages: ground

floor was completed in 1975 and first floor completed in 2009. Land use

certificate was also submitted to SRC”.

Appeal Committee noted that a Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant

institution on 18.03.2011 and the appellant had furnished a point wise reply

dated 15.04.2011 to the SCN. Committee further noted that enclosures stated to

have been enclosed with the reply to SCN. are not found available on the

relevant file. The Regional Committee also did not make any effort to bring this

fact to the notice of appellant institution. Committee further noted that SRC has

failed to take any action for almost three years after issue of the SCN. After

going though the available record, Council observed that SRC started analyzing

the case on receipt of a complaint dated 05.03.2006 raising concerns over the

(i) appellant’s institution not having approved teaching & non-teaching staff: (ii)

managing with government employees in ruining the college as teaching staff:

(iii) filling other certificates & photos to inspire authority: (iv) not having own

building registered in name of college.

The appellant during the course of appeal hearing has furnished land use

certificate dated 8.12.2010 issued by Tahsildar, PRODDATUR MANDAL Y.S.R.

(Dist) certifying that and in Sy. 304/ 2A (0.69 acres )is under possession of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

135

Hannamma College of Educationand conversion from Agriculture to Non

agriculture was allowed vide certificate no .R.D.S.A./597/2008 dated

04.07.2008. Certificate issued by Municipal Administrative Deptt., Proddatur

indicate that Municipal taxes are being collected for building constructed bearing

no.3/418. Committee also noted that the appellant institution was granted

recognition in 2004 and the withdrawal of recognition in 2014 on grounds of

approved building plan, building completion certificate, land use certificate is not

justified unless and until the institute proposes to shift to a new premises or has

inadequate instructional space as per prevalent Regulations. The more relevant

point to be examined by SRC would therefore, have been that whether the

institution is having adequate and professionally qualified faculty to run the

course. Keeping in view the Circumstances of the case, Committee decided to

remand back the case to SRC to examine the building related documents

required and relevant as per NCTE Regulations prevalent at the time of grant of

recognition in 2004.

On perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit, documents on record and

oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded to remand

back the case. The appellant should furnish to SRC within a period of 30 days

copies of the relevant certificate of building completion and land use certificate.

The withdrawal order 24.01.2014 is kept in abeyance till revised orders are

issued.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Hannamma Christian College of

Education, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action

as indicated above.”


application as per Regulations 2014 was sent to the institution on 19.12.2014

In response to this office letter dated 19.12.2014, the institution has submitted

a reply on 29.12.2014 and 02.01.2015 along with an affidavit on Rs.100/-

stamp paper expressing their willingness for the application to be processed

as per Regulations,2014 along with relevant documents

As per the withdrawal order of SRC and the observations of the appellate

authority, the documents submitted by the institution are examined

The Southern Regional Committee in its 276th Meeting held on 07-09

January, 2015 considered the matter, reply of the Institution dated

29.12.2014 & 02.01.2015 along with affidavit expressing their willingness

to process their application as per Regulations 2014, decided to issue


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

136

show cause notice:

The Committee considered the Court order dated 25.08.2014, Appellate Authority order

dated 25.11.2014 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to

serve Show cause Notice Under NCTE Act for the following :

• The Building Plan submitted by the institution is not clear, only class rooms are shown, the institution to submit legible copy of building plan with all details.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to

the institution as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing

an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21 days

from the date of receipt of the show cause notice along with necessary

certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing

which action will be taken including the withdrawal, based on the records

available, with no further notice.

The institution vide letter dated 19.01.2015 regarding:-

“I Mr. W. Vijayakumar presently the chairman and correspondent of Hannamman

Christian College of education running under Douglas Memorial Education trust

Established during the year 1986 under societies registration Act with Reg No.

102/1981. I humbly submit that I personally met the Municipal Commissioner Proddatur

To obtain approved building plan copy of Door No. 3/418, building. He has taken much

time to trace out the plan all his efforts are in vain. I requested him atleast to counter

sign the plan (which was drawn by the same syndicate palanners) but he humbly stated

that unless the plan was not traced in this office I cannot counter sign the same. If the

plan is not approved we could not have levied the property tax, from that date. you are

paying property tax for the building No. 3/418. Basing on this Municipal Commissioner

has furnished a letter in this regard. Now I am herewith submitting the Municipal

Commissioners letter along with municipal Sanitary Certificate, Property Tax Demand

Notice and tax payment receipts for Door No.3/418 in which Hannamma Christian

College of Education is running since 1986.

Therefore I humbly request you madam kindly consider the submitted plan which has

no any deviation. It has certified by the syndicate planners as a chairman &

correspondent I also certified the same. “


website, a reply to the Notice received by this office from The Correspondent

Hannamma Christian College of Education, Y.M.R. Colony, Proddatur, Cuddapah-516

361 Andhra Pradesh .

Building plan is not approved by Government Engineer.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

137

The Committee considered the matter, reply from the institution on 19.01.2015,

decided as under:

1.Affidavit received

2.This is a case of an institution that came into being before NCTE was set up. The Municipality refuses to Building Plan afresh. Let us accept the faint copy of old Building Plan submitted. Other deficiencies have been corrected.

3.Advised Southern Regional Office to Restore recognition.

Consideration of Court Case: (Volume- 02).

APS01862

B.Ed

Bhagwan

Buddha College

of Education,

Mandya,

Karnataka

KA

Bhagwan Buddha College of Education, 1706, 5th Cross, 2nd Block, Siddartha Nagar, Malavally – 571430, Mandya District, Karnataka

Bhagwan Budha College of Education, 1706, 5th Cross, 2nd Block,Siddartha Nagar,Malavally – 571430 ,Mandya District, Karnataka was granted recognition for secondary (B.Ed) Course of one year duration from the academic session 2004 –2005 with an annual intake of 100 students with a condition to shift to its own premises / building within three years from the date of recognition( in case the course is started in rented premises) On 24/10/2007, the Secretary, Bhagwan Buddha Social and Educational Society, Malavalii has submitted a written representation which is as under; “Bhagwan Buddha College of Education (B.Ed) is performing very well since 3 years in Malavalli Town, Mandya District, and Karnataka State, the only B.Ed College available in rural Malavalli Taluk. The building and land is situated in the main road and comfortable for the teaching, non teaching and also students. The building has been registered for 10 years lease in the Govt. Sub – Registrar’s Office, Malavalli Town on 03.08.2005(Lease deed copy enclosed).Society has purchased the following lands in the name of the President, Bhagwan Buddha Social and Educational Society, Malavalli, Mandya District.

Sy.No.8, Devalinganapura Village, Malavalli Taluk measuring area total 3 acres. Sy.No. 7/2A and 7/2B the total measuring area 2.18 guntas at Devalinganapura, Malavalli Taluk. Sy.No. 551/A2 the total area is 40 guntas (1 acre/3000 sq.mts) at Malavalli Town adjacent to the existing college building. Existing plan which is already submitted to you by our Society, the land is very far to the Malavalli Town. Therefore, the management has decided to construct the college building in the Sy.No. 551/A2, the said site is adjacent to existing B.Ed College building at Malavalli Town. Since we are not shifting the existing premises to new place. The remittance of Rs. 40,000/- will not arise. In the meanwhile we have already engaged an Engineer to prepare suitable plan for the said college to construct the building.”

A ltter dated 25/05/2009 was sent to the institution with a request to pay the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

138

inspection fee along with the necessary documents .The institution has not submitted any reply to the letter regarding shifting of premises, so far.

The institution has sent a letter dated 06/05/2013 as follows:

“We have two deposit receipts for Rs. 5,00,000/- each for D.Ed and B.Ed

College. It has matured on 05.05.2013.And it has to be renewed and the same

has to be deposited in the Canara Bank, Malavalli Branch instead of Syndicate

Bank, Mandya Branch. Therefore, kindly request you to duly sign on the back

side of the deposit receipts with office seal and oblige .And also we are

enclosing herewith 2 Nos. Deposit receipts.”

As per the VT report, Reserve fund was not deposited in the form of FDR. It is in the

S.B A/c of the Society.

From the above explanation and records it is observed that the institution has not

submitted the FDRs of Rs. 3 Lakhs each (Reserve Fund) maintained in joint account

with the Regional Director, SRC.

The SRC in its 246th meeting held on 02nd –0 4th of June, 2013 has considered the written reply of the institution on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

• The Institution was granted recognition in temporary premises to run B.Ed course from academic session 2004-2005 with a condition that it should shift to its own permanent premises in 3 years. i.e., on or before 29.11.2007. The Institution is still running in temporary premises and not shifted to new premises even after a lapse of stipulated 3 years and after lapse of time period of more than 8 years.

• The management has not shown any seriousness and not cared to reply to this office letter 25/05/2009 regarding shifting and payment of inspection fee.

• The institution has not submitted the FDRs of Rs. 3 lakh (reserve fund for B.Ed) maintained in joint account with the Regional Director, SRC.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed course run by the Bhagwan Buddha College of Education No. 1706, 5th Cross, II Block, Siddharthanagar, Malavalli Town, Mandya District, Karnataka, from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course. But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly. Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any, after ensuring settlement of all faculty/staff claims.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

139

Accordingly withdrawl order was issued to the institution on 10.07.2013. Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs the appellate authority order no. F.No.89-599/2013 Appeal/18th Meeting 2013 dated 10.01.2014 stating that: “…the council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC is confirmed.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against The SRC in its 260th meeting held on 29th- 31st January 2014, considered the matter and the committee has noted the matter. The institution has submitted its written representation on 28.01.2015 along with

copy of Hon’ble High Court order in W.P.(C) 8711/2014 dated 09.12.2014.

The court order stated as follows:

Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:

A. “issue an appropriate writ[s]/direction[s] or order[s] quashing and setting aside the impugned orders dated 10.07.2013 passed by the Southern Regional Committee and Order dated 10.01.2014 passed by the National Council for Teacher Education as contained in Annexure P-1 “colly”, and/or;

B. issue an appropriate writ [s]/direction[s] or orders [s] remanding back the case to the SRC for further processing of the application and grant of the Formal Recognition Order for running the D.El.Ed. Course from academic year 2015-2016, and/or;

C. Pass any such other orders/directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit

and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

Both the Southern Regional Committee (SRC) and National Council

Teacher Education (NCTE) have rejected the petitioner-institute’s application

on the ground that petitioner- institute had not shifted to its new premises

within three years as stipulated in the recognition granted to the petitioner-

institute during the academic session 2004-2005.

Mr. Mayank Manish, learned counsel for petitioner states that

respondents had failed to appreciate that petitioner had already requested for

change of site to SRC.

Mr.T.Singhdev, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 relies upon the

order dated 30th July, 2014 passed by this Court in similar facts in George

College Department of Education Vs. National Council for Teacher Education


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

140

and Anr., W.P.(C) 3371/2014.

Consequently, in view of the order dated 10th September, 2013 passed

by the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4247-4248/2009 directing that all pending

applications shall be decided in accordance with new regulations, the present

writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall apply

afresh in accordance with new regulations, if required and same shall be

considered by respondents-NCTE/SRC for the academic year 2015-2016 in

accordance with new regulations which shall be notified in compliance with

the directions of the Supreme Court.

If any deficiency is found, the same shall be conveyed to the petitioner, who

shall be given an opportunity to remove the said deficiency, in a time bound manner.

In case the deficiencies are removed within the given time, the application shall be

processed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations. If the deficiencies

are not removed, the application shall stand rejected.

Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. ”

The Committee considered the matter, Court order, decided and advised

Southern Regional Office to:

1.Obtain affidavit

2.Obtain the fee first.

3.Ask them to submit all documents including FDRs

37

APS03745

B.Ed

Siddartha

College of

Education,

Bagalkot,

Karnataka

KA

Siddartha College of Education, Kale Complex, Bus stand Road, Jamkhandi,

Bagalkot District, Karnataka

Siddartha College of Education, Kale Complex, Bus stand Road, Jamkhandi,

Bagalkot District, Karnatakahad submitted application on 30.12.2004. The institution

was granted recognition for offering B.Ed course with an intake of 50 students vide order

dated 26.12.2005 with the condition to shift to its own premises within 3 years from date

of recognition.

The institution vide letter dated 6.10.2009 submitted a proposal for shifting of premises

along with Rs.40,000/- towards shifting of premises. The inspection was carried out on

17th October, 2010.

The inspection report along with VCD was placed before the SRC in its 198th meeting

held on 24-26 November, 2010 wherein it was decided to issue Show Cause Notice

under section 17 of NCTE Act for the following:-

1. The institution was granted recognition in temporary premises to run B.Ed. course on 26.12.2005 with a condition that it should shift to its own permanent premises in three years. I.e., on or before 25.12.2008. The institution is still


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

141

running in temporary premises and not shifted to new premises even after a lapse of stipulated 3 years i.e., after a lapse of more than 4 years and 11 months now.

2. As per VT report and VCD, the building is still in the initial stage of construction only.

3. Land documents with survey Nos. of the land where the institution is to be shifted are not submitted.

Accordingly, a Show cause Notice was issued to the institution on 11.01.2011. The

institution submitted its written representation on 10.2.2011.

The matter was placed before 201st meeting of SRC held on 22-23 February, 2011 and it

was decided to cause re-inspection to the institution along with inspection fee of

Rs.40,000/-.

Accordingly, inspection was carried out on 30-31 March, 2011. The inspection report

was considered by SRC in its 204th meeting held on 27-28th April, 2011 wherein it was

decided to issue Show Cause Notice for the following :-

1. As per VT/VCD the new building is still under construction and incomplete & it is still run in a rented premises.

2. The management has not submitted the land documents, Building plan, BCC, land usage certificate to verify actual location of new premises and to ascertain whether the land is in the name of Society/institution as per regulation.

3. The Ground floor of the new building is incomplete. The management has not submitted the Re-inspection fee of Rest. 40000/-.

4. Land documents with survey Nos. of the land where the institution is to be shifted are not submitted.

5. Bye-Laws of the Society are to be submitted by the management. 6. The Affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper in the prescribed format with notary

attestation to be submitted. 7. The institute has not submitted the approved Building plan from a competent

Govt. authority. 8. The latest Building Completion Certificate from the competent Government

Engineer is not submitted. 9. Notarised copy of Land usage certificate issued by competent authority is to be

submitted. 10. Original Fixed deposits in joint name towards Endowment fund & Reserve fund

from a Nationalised Bank is to be produced. 11. Non- Encumbrance Certificate from the competent Government Authorised

person / Authorities to be submitted. 12. The Toilets in the new building is not in a position to use. 13. As per VT report, the institution is still functioning in the old building and the

infrastructural facilities are inadequate. 14. The books available in the library is only 2254, which is inadequate for B.Ed

course. 15. Furniture for the new building is inadequate.

Accordingly, Show cause Notice was issued to the institution on 01.06.2011. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

142

institution submitted its written representation on 26.06.2011. The institution also

submitted proposal for shifting of premises on 26.06.2011 along with Rs.40,000/- vide

DD No.363392 dated 27.06.2011 towards inspection fee for shifting of Premises.

The SRC in its 210th meeting held on 22-23 August, 2011 considered the reply and all

other relevant documents and decided to cause re-inspection at the premises Under

Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, re-inspection of the institution was conducted on

6.10.2011.

The SRC in its 215th meeting held on 12th – 13th December, 2011 considered the VT

Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve

Show cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 14.2.2012. The

Chairman of the institution submitted written representation on 5.3.2012.

The SRC in its 224th meeting held on 14th – 17th June, 2012 considered the written reply

of the institution dt. 05-03-2012 to the show cause notice and also the relevant

documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following

reasons:-

• The Sy.No. 257/1 measuring 3 acres mentioned in the land document not reflected in any of the documents viz. Affidavit, Building plan, building completion certificate and encumbrance certificate.

• In the building plan submitted, Sy.Nos. are not mentioned, land area is building plan is not tallying with land area mentioned in affidavit. Land area in building plan is overwritten, without any attestation from competent authority.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted. BCC submitted is in individual name.

• Encumbrance certificate is in individual name, notarized English version of encumbrance, and up-to-date encumbrance certificate not submitted, further submitted encumbrance is only up to 01.06.2011.

• Staff approval from affiliating university is not submitted.

• Lecturer in Fine Arts and Physical Education are not available/appointed. Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the

B.Ed course run by the Siddartha College of Education, Kale Complex, Bus Stand Road,

Jamkhandi, Bagalkot District, Karnataka, from the academic year 2012-13 in order to

enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.

It was made clear that the institution was debarred from making any further admission

subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board /

body were informed accordingly. It was also decided to return Endowment funds and

Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore.

Accordingly, withdrawal order was issued to the institution vide No. APS03745-B.Ed./KA/ 2012-2013/43632 dated 09.07.2012.

A letter was received from the Advocate Sri. Ashok Harnahalli on 1.11.2012 regarding W.P.No.43989 of 2012 filed by Siddartha College of Education, Jamkhandi, Karnataka. He has stated that the above writ petition came up for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

143

consideration before the Court today for preliminary hearing on 10.10.2012. The petition was heard at length. The court observed that recognition is withdrawn on technical grounds and without considering the documents produced by the petitioner. However, the court was pleased to observe that the SRC is at liberty to conduct inspection to find out whether there are any other deficiencies.

Further, on 19.11.2012, an order passed in W.P.No.43989/2012(EDN-RES) dated

30.10.2012 is received by this office from the Principal of the institution along with a

certified copy of the Order dated 30.10.2012. A letter dated 17.11.2012 issued by the

Special Officer, Govt. of Karnataka, Centralised Admission Cell, K.G. Road, Bangalore

addressed to this office requesting permission to admit candidates to the B.Ed. course

for the year 2012-13 is also enclosed along with the letter.

The order stated that “6.Perused the various annexures produced by the petitioner

in the petition with regard to infrastructure, availability of staff, completion of the

building certificate issued by the Corporation Engineer and extra land is also very

much available. The college has commenced since 205. Surprisingly, the

respondent authority is shown to have withdrawn the recognition in an arbitrary

manner without considering the documents which are produced by the institution-

may be for the reason that without understanding the documents which do

provide the details sought for by the first respondent in a different manner, the

first respondent has passed the impugned order. It is also seen, the State

Government has also allotted 35 students from the CET to be admitted to the

institution of the petitioner. The first respondent ought to have taken care of the

situation by way of correspondence before passing an order withdrawal of

recognition. Prima facie it appears all the requirements are shown to have been

complied with by the petitioner. However, mechanically, the first respondent

proceeded to pass the impugned order at Annexure-J which cannot be sustained,

as the major deficiency as pointed out by the first respondent appears to be not

genuine as the infrastructure like building and extension area and qualified

lecturers are shown to have been complied with. The first respondent can hold

one more inspection for compliance of the deficiency if any. It may not be

appropriate to withdraw the recognition in the manner in which the first

respondent has passed the order after having allowed the institution to run for

seven years from its commencement only pointing out certain irregularities.

7. Hence, the order withdrawing granted to the petitioner institution to run B.Ed.

course is hereby quashed. Further, the first respondent is directed to accord

recognition to the petitioner institution at the earliest. However, in the meanwhile,

minor deficiencies, if any be complied by the petitioner.”

In the above W.P. No.43989/2012, SRC, NCTE is the first respondent and NCTE, New

Delhi is the 2nd respondent.

In the meanwhile, aggrieved by the withdrawal order, the institution had

approached appellate authority and the original file has been sent to the appellate

authority vide this office letter F. No.HQ/APS03745-B.Ed./KA/2012-13/46467 dated


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

144

28.9.2012.

The decision of appellate authority and the original file of the institution has not

been received by this office so far.

Hence, the above matter along with the Court order dated 30.10.2012 and the request of

the institution to accord recognition and to permit/direct the special officer Centralized

Admission Cell, Bangalore to allot remaining 14 students who have been already

admitted to the institution by virtue of the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Karnataka was placed before 235th meeting of SRC held on 21st and 22nd November,

2012 wherein the SRC decided to apply for stay and file an appeal.

As per the decision of 235th meeting of SRC, letters were addressed to the advocate for

filing appeal and apply for stay to the Court order dated 30.10.2012 vide this office

letters dated 29.11.2012, 27.12.2012, 23.1.2013, 23.4.2013 and 1.6.2013.

On 9.7.2013, the advocate has replied that he has filed writ appeal No.2012/2013

questioning the order dated 30.10.2012 passed in w.P.No.43989/2012, has been filed on

8.3.2013 and has enclosed a copy of the acknowledgement for having filed appeal on

8.3.2013. Further, there was no correspondence from the advocate on the decision in

W.A.No.2012/2013.

Further, this office has received a letter from the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at

Bangalore on 2.8.2013 in Writ Petition No.28151/2013 filed by the institution against

NCTE and others. After hearing the Court had made the following order on 29.7.2013:-

“The admission of the students who have been admitted to B.Ed. in the petitioner

institution shall be considered for approval by the authorities. However, they are

permitted to pursue their course and to take up the examinations, pending result

of this writ petition. In so far as fresh admissions are concerned, it is for the

petitioner to approach the University, NCTE which shall take decision in

accordance with law.

Since this matter arises within the jurisdiction of Dharwad Circuit Bench, the

matter be transferred to Dharwad Circuit Bench for disposal.”

The copy of the writ petition along with the letter of advocate is sent to the Advocate, Sri.

M.B. Kanavi for defending the case on behalf of NCTE.

In the meanwhile, on 11th September, 2013 the advocate Vinayaka.B has sent a mail

requesting to send applications and affidavits to be filed in the case of Siddartha College

of Education W.A.2012/2013 and requested to send the same along with duly sworn

affidavit so as to compete the compliance of office objections. The draft statement of

objections duly signed regarding condonation of delay is sent to the advocate on

19.9.2013.

On 30.10.2012, the Hon’ble High Court quashed the withdrawal order of SRC, NCTE

dated 9.7.2012. Further, the SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21-22 November, 2012

decided to apply for stay and file an appeal. Further, the advocate has filed writ appeal


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

145

on 8.3.2013 against the order dated 30.10.2012. Further, application regarding

condonation of delay is requested by advocate on 11.9.2013 which was sent on

19.9.2013.

Further, in pursuance to the Court order dated 29.7.2013 in W.P.No.28151/2013 filed by

the institution received by this office on 6.8.2013, the petitioner has not submitted any

request for grant of recognition to this office so far.

The SRC in its 253rd meeting held during September 30th and 1st October, 2013

considered the matter, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to write to the

Lawyer to report the correct facts.

Further, the Committee advised this office, if the facts, as reported now, are correct,

then, the lawyer to be asked to apprise the Lower Bench of the appeal filed by us and

get the case dismissed.

As per the decision of SRC, letter was sent to the advocate Shri. Ashok Haranahalli and

copy marked to Sri.M.B. Kanavi, advocate at Dharwad bench on October 23,2013.

Further, on 11.12.2013, this office received the Court order dated 18.11.2013 from the

advocate, Sri.M.B.Kanavi regarding the disposal of W.P.No.28151/2013 filed by the

institution in the Hon’ble HC of Karnataka circuit bench at Dharwad

The order is as under:-

“4. The learned counsel for the respondents support the order passed

videannexue L and submit to dismiss the writ petition. It is submitted, the writ

petition was filed before the vacation court of the principal bench and so also the

writ appeal and steps would be taken to transfer the same to this court. 5. In view

of the fact that cancellation of recognition has been quashed by this Court, one

more order should not have been passed by the respondent No.2 unless the said

order in the writ petition is set at naught. In that view of the matter the impugned

order dated 24.11.2012 is liable to be quashed. 6. In the result, this writ petition is

allowed. Impugned order dated 24.11.2012 is hereby quashed. The first and

second respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to admit students for

B.Ed. course and admissions and results are subject to result of the writ appeal.”

In the W.P.No.28151/2013, the SRC, NCTE, Bangalore-1R, Office of the special officer,

Common Admission cell-2R, NCTE-ND-3R, State of Karnataka -4R and Rani

chennamma University.

On 12.11.2013, an email is received from Sri. Ashok Haranahalli., Advocate returning

the pending cases (24 cases) which were filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at

Bangalore along with the original files (5). Thereafter, an email was sent to NCTE, New

Delhi regarding appointment for legal counsel for defending the cases in the Hon’ble

High Court of Karnataka was sent to NCTE, New Delhi on 29.11.2013.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

146

Another letter and an email was sent to NCTE New Delhi, enclosing the resumes of the

advocates received by this office on 17.12.2013 regarding appointment of legal counsel

for defending the cases in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka.

On 19.12.2013, the Chairman, Siddhartha College of Education, Jamakhandi District,

Bagalkot, has submitted a written representation as under;

‘It is submitted that the institution is functioning in the newly constructed building

as per the Norms and guidelines prescribed by your authority an in compliance

with the court directions issued by your authority.

As you are aware, pursuant to the order dated 30.10.2012 passed in W.P.No.

43989/12 by Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, the state government allotted

students to our institution, thereafter we were even given permission to fill up

deficit government seats, accordingly,100 students have completed the academic

year and have written their exams too.

As you are also aware, we had approached the High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.

28151/13 by final order dated 18.11.2013, Hon’ble High Court after hearing all the

parties directed you to consider our case and grant recognition while permitting

us to admit 100 students for the current academic year.

For ready reference, the copy of the above said orders are enclosed herewith

Institution most humbly requests you to kindly take note of the directions issued

by the High Court of Karnataka in both the writ petitions W.P. No. 43989/12 and

28151/13 dated 30.10.2012 and 18.11.2013 and grant recognition to us, forthwith, in

the best interest of the students.’

Since the legal counsel for defending the case in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at

Bangalore is yet to be identified, the above matter is placed before the Committee for

consideration and further direction in the matter.

The SRC in its 257th meeting held on 20th-22nd December 2013 considered the matter,

Hon’ble High Court order dated 18/11/2013 noted that:

1) Our order was quashed by the High Court in July 2013. An appeal was filed on 8/03/2013 against the High Court order, the Committee wanted to know what happened to the appeal and why the stay was not obtained.

2) Southern Regional Office to ask our Lawyer to check on these and advice.

3) If no appeal was filed, the Court to be requested for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and to be filed now.

Further, the Committee decided that,

By way of abundant caution, the case to be reopened for further processing. The institution

to be asked to submit all necessary documents so that the Committee can consider for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

147

causing inspection.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the institution on 25.02.2014. The institution has replied

to the letter and submitted documents on 24.03.2014.

The SRC in its 267th meeting held on 12-13 May 2014 considered the matter, decided

that the staff list submitted by the institution is not in the approved/prescribed format.

Also, subject specializations and qualifying marks have not been detailed. Eligibility

cannot be ascertained. Advised Southern Regional Office to ask the institution to submit

a proper staff list in the prescribed format.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the institution on 04.07.2014.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 04.08.2014 along with

submission of original staff list in the prescribed format approved by Rani Chennamma

University, Vidyasangama, Belagavi and also submission of original affidavits of staffs.

The SRC in its 272nd meeting held on 1-2 September 2014 considered the matter and

decided to remind the appellate authority to return our case file so that we can comply

with the court order.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to Member Secretary, NCTE-Hqrs on 04.12.2014 and

original file was returned to SRC on 15.12.2014 but appellate authority order was not

received. Again a letter was sent to Member Secretary to send a copy of appellate

authority order on 06.01.2015.

As withdrawal order dated 09.07.2012 still deficiencies persists are as follows:-

• The Sy.No. 257/1 measuring 3 acres mentioned in the land document not reflected in any of the documents viz. Affidavit, Building plan, building completion certificate and encumbrance certificate.

• In the building plan submitted, Sy.Nos. are not mentioned, land area is building plan is not tallying with land area mentioned in affidavit. Land area in building plan is overwritten, without any attestation from competent authority.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted. BCC submitted is in individual name.

• Encumbrance certificate is in individual name, notarized English version of encumbrance, and up-to-date encumbrance certificate not submitted, further submitted encumbrance is only up to 01.06.2011.

• Staff approval from affiliating university is not submitted.

• Lecturer in Fine Arts and Physical Education are not available/appointed.

Note:

1. The appellate authority order not received by SRC till today.

2. The court order in W.P.No.43989 of 2012 dated 30.10.2012 quash the SRC’s withdrawal order dated 09.07.2012.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

148

3. The institution has filed a W.P.No.28151 of 2013 dated 18.11.2013 quash the impugned order dated 24.11.2012.The first and second respondents are directed to permit the petitioner and admit students for B.Ed., course and admissions and results are subject to result of the writ appeal.

4. Contempt notice(Civil) No.100023 of 2015 is received from the advocate on 29.01.2015.

The Committee considered the matter, Court order, Staff list submitted by the

institution vide letter dated 04.08.2014, decided and advised Southern

Regional Office to:

1.Obtain Inspection Fee first.

2.Obtain Affidavit.

3.Obtain all documents including FDRs and approved staff list for processing towards inspection

38

APS07324

B.Ed

Nayala College

of Education,

Tumkur,

Karnataka

KA

Nayala College of Education, Kalidasa Nagar, Sira Gate, Tumkur-572101, Karnataka Nayala College of Education, Kalidasa Nagar, Sira Gate, Tumkur-572101, Karnataka was granted recognition on 10.1.2008 with an annual intake of 100 students. This office is in receipt of letter No.TY: VCPS: 2011-12:98 dated 21.05.2011 from the Vice-Chancellor, Tumkur University, Tumkur by enclosing a list of 19 institutions with the committee observations by conducting inspections. The SRC in its 206th meeting held on 9th-10th June, 2011 noted the inspection report of the Vice – Chancellor, Tumkur University, dated 21.05.2011 and the deficiencies in the 19 institutions in Tumkur District and decided to issue show cause notice under section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 08.07.2011. The institution submitted its reply in Kannada on 29.08.2011. A letter was addressed to the institution to submit reply in English on 26.9.2011. Pending submission of the reply by the institution, an inspection to the institution was proposed between 28th October – 2nd November 2011. A letter was addressed to the institution on 19.10.2011. In the meantime, the institution submitted its written reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 4.10.2011 which was received by this office on 19.10.2011. Inspection was conducted to the institution on 28.10.2011. In the meantime, Tumkur University vide their letter received on 17.10.2011 conducted re-visit to the institution during 15-19 and 27th of July, 2011 and made certain observations.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

149

The SRC in its 216th meeting of SRC held on 11-12 January, 2012 considered the VT report,

VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause

Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act for the following:-

1. The institution has not submitted Inspection fee of Rs. 40000/-. 2. Original certified land documents issued by competent civil authority is not

submitted. 3. Approved building plan of the College from competent Govt. authority is not

submitted. 4. The institution has submitted copy of Building plan of H.M.S. English High

School. Which is against the Regulations of NCTE. 5. Building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer is

not submitted. 6. Land usage certificate from the concerned Government authorities stating

that the land is exclusively permitted/sanctioned for educational purpose only is not submitted.

7. Non-Encumbrance Certificate issued by the Sub-Registrar is not submitted by the institution.

8. Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively from Nationalized Bank in joint account is not submitted.

9. Original Affidavit in the prescribed form on Rs. 100/- stamp paper duly attested by oath commissioner or Notary public is not submitted.

10. As per VT report, the land is on lease for 30 years w.e.f 10.07.2006. The building and land are not in the same place. This is a gross violation of NCTE norms.

11. Science lab, Psychology lab, ET lab & other lab/physical Education are to be strengthened.

12. Furniture provided in the Class rooms, Halls & Library are too old and are in damaged conditions. Needs to be strengthened and replaced.

13. Principal is not qualified as per NCTE norms. 14. The institution has not submitted the approved staff list from University with

their experience certificate. 15. Lecturer in Art Education (part time, Fine arts/performing art) and Director of

Physical Education is not available. 16. Consolidated salary is paid in cash to staff members, not through Bank

Cheque. 17. The scale of pay offered to the staff is not as per Central/State Govt/UGC

guidelines. 18. As per VT report, regarding the human resources, the college has only 1+5

teaching faculty, 2 technical and 3 non-teaching staff. All the teaching faculty except one have qualifications as per NCTE norms. Out of 6 staff members, only 2 had high school level teaching experience and one has to complete his PG degree. On interaction with the staff and on VT observation, it is felt that some 2 to 3 teaching and non-teaching staff has been called for the day of inspection. As per the office records, there are 32 students. Among them, it is observed some (nearly 30-50%) are not regular to the College.

A Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 6.3.2012. The institution had not replied to the show cause notice issued on 06-03-2012, for the deficiencies pointed in the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

150

notice.

Hence, the SRC in its 226th meeting held on 9th – 10th July 2012 decided to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed course run by the Nayala College of Education, Kalidasa Nagar, Sira Gate, Tumkur District-572101, Karnataka, from the academic year 2012-13, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course. Accordingly, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution vide order APSO 7324/B.Ed/KA/2012-13/44336 dated 26/07/2012. Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution filed a writ petition No.41662/2012 in the High Court of Karnataka and the Hon’ble Court passed an interim order dated 11/10/2012, staying the operation of the order No. F.No.APSO 7324/B.Ed/KA/2012-13/44336 dated 26/07/2012 and not to give effect to the same and permit to admit the students for B.Ed,course for the year 2012-13 during the pendency of the writ petition. Further, a letter from the advocate Mr.Ashok Haranahalli dated 09/11/2012 received by this office on 27/11/2012 with the contents of the court order dated 05/11/2012 states as under ;

“The Hon’ble Court relying on the order dated 19/10/2012 passed in writ petition No.41463/2012(Bharathi College of Teacher Training Education) allowed the matter with a direction to Southern Regional Committee to inspect the petitioner-college within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and if the petitioner complies with the norms and standards prescribed by NCTE and to pass orders after inspecting the petitioner-institution. With the above direction, the writ petition was disposed off”

A letter from Nayala College of Education Institution enclosing a copy of the court order is received by this office on 03/12/2012 requesting the implementation of the court order. The SRC in its 237th meeting held on 05th – 06th January, 2013 considered the matter

and decided to await court order, on receipt of the same and after collecting Rs.

50000/- towards inspection fee and to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of

NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the

norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if

any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the institution on 14.3.2013 to submit payment of RS.50,000/- towards causing of inspection and also to submit essential documents along with the questionnaire. A visit was scheduled to the institution during 6th May to 10th May, 2013 and a letter was addressed to the institution on 3.5.2013. The letter is returned back on 7.5.2013 which was again resent and received back on 10.5.2013 with a remark that “addressee left & returned to sender”.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

151

Due to unavailability of one of the VT member, the visit was again rescheduled during 20th May to 24th May, 2013. Again, a letter was addressed to the institution regarding the visit proposed during 20th May to 24th May, 2013 on 14.05.2013. The letter is again returned back and received by this office on 20.5.2013 stating that “addressee left and returned to sender”. An e-mail is received from one of the VT Member, Mr. Subbarayan Peri on 18.6.2013 stating that “When I contacted the management they replied that they want to postpone the inspection in view of non-completion of the building and that they had already informed the SRO. On my request they sent a copy of the letter addressed to the Regional Director to my e-mail on 21st May, 2013. We dropped our inspection. Now, through my colleague, I came to know that they are complaining on the non-inspection by the visiting team. A copy of the letter addressed to the Regional Director by the Management is attached.” Remarks of SRO: From the Diary report, it is observed that the letter e-mailed to the Visiting team member dated 20.5.2013 requesting for postponement of inspection is not received by this office so far. The SRC in its 248th meeting held on 13th – 15th July, 2013 considered the matter and all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms, the inspection of the institution should be carried out with another VT members. As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the institution on 22.08.2013 to submit payment of RS.50,000/- towards causing of inspection and also to submit essential documents along with the questionnaire. A visit was scheduled to the institution during 2nd September, 2013 and a letter was addressed to the institution on 22.08.2013. The letter is returned back on 28.08.2013 with a remark that “addressee left & returned to sender”. A VT report is received by this office on 02/09/2013, the VT members has remarked

that the college remained closed and refused the inspection.

As per the Hon’ble High Court Order dated 19/10/2012, the inspection of the institution

was arranged and scheduled:

A VT Inspection schedule to the institution was fixed between 6th May to 10th May, 2013 and a letter was sent to the institution on 3.5.2013. The letter was returned back on 7.5.2013, which was again reposted and received back on 10.5.2013 with a remark that “addressee left & returned to sender”. Again VT inspection of the institution was scheduled during 20th may to 24th May 2013 and a letter was sent to the institution on 14.05.2013. The letter posted to the institution has returned back to this office received on 20.05.2013 stating that “addressee left & returned to sender”.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

152

Once again a letter was sent to the institution on 22.08.2013 to be ready for inspection. The letter was returned back on 28.08.2013 with a remark that “addressee left & retuned to the sender As per the VT report received by this office on 02/09/2013, VT remarked in their letter that “the college remained closed and refused the inspection”. When the VT members visited the institution as per schedule for inspection, the management people refused the inspection and the college was remained closed. This was a deliberate attempt on the part of the management not to allow the visiting team members for inspecting the institution and thereby preventing VT from discharging their official duty. The NCTE has followed the Court direction to inspect the institution and NCTE is well within the powers to inspect any institution to ensure maintenance of standards and quality. Based on the above, it is clear that the management is not willing to get the institution inspected as per the Court order and also not cooperating with VT members for inspection. Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the SRC in its 253rd meeting held on 30th

September & 1st October, 2013 consider the matter and decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, the court asked us to inspect the institution. But they have not been allowing us to do that, so far to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course. Accordingly, as directed a rejection order was issued to the institution on 25.11.2013. A letter from the Institution enclosing a copy of the court order in W.P. No. 41662/2012 dated 05.11.2012 received by this office on 21.10.2014 with regard to continuation of recognition of B.Ed course. The court order stated as follows:-

“ORDER: Petitioner has sought for quashing annexure D dated 26.07.2012 and to direct the respondent to permit it to admit students for B.Ed course for the academic year 2012-13. Heard the counsel representing the parties. In a similar situation, in WP 41463/2012 decided on 19.10.2012 this court having directed the respondent authorities to consider the application of the petitioner for recognition for the academic year 2012-13, has also directed the petitioner to rectify the deficiencies pointed out. In the case on hand, according to the petitioner, they have complied with the requirements. However, it is for the petitioner to meet out the deficiencies, if any pointed out by the respondent authority within a fortnight. The respondent authority is directed to once again visit the petitioner


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

153

institution thereafter and pass appropriate orders considering the fact that the institution is running since 2007-08. Petition is allowed. Order at annexure D be reviewed immediately after conducting as indicated above. In the event there is delay caused for want of inspection being conducted and other decisions to be taken, the delay be condoned by extending some more time for admitting the students.

The SRC in its 274th meeting held on 30-31 October 2014 considered the institution letter 21.10.2014 along with court order in W.P.No.41662 of 2012 dated 05.11.2012 and the committee has decided as follows:-

“This is a case of total recalcitrance by the institution. We should appeal against the court’s order.”

Accordingly, a letter was sent to Advocate on 19.11.2014.

As requested by Advocate, original file was sent to Advocate on 17.12.2014.

In the Mean time, the Institution has submitted its written representation on 24.01.2015 along with photocopy of Court order in W.P.No.56229 OF 2014 (EDN-REG-P) dated 19.12.2014. The Court order stating as follows:-

" ORDER: The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated25.11.2013 whereby the application of the petitioner seeking recognition of their institution has been rejected. 2. The facts pleaded need not be adverted to much in detail since the petitioner was before this Court at an earlier instance in W.P.No.41662/2012 disposed of on 05.11.2012. This Court while disposing of the said petition had directed the respondent therein to inspect the premises belonging to the petitioner and thereafter to pass fresh orders since in the meanwhile if there were any deficiencies, the petitioner was required to rectify the same. The grievance of the petitioner is that no such inspection has been conducted and the order impugned has been passed unilaterally by rejecting the application of the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that the procedure as contemplated was followed and notice of inspection was issued to the petitioner-Institution. However, since the Secretary was not available and the premises had been locked, notice had been returned back and therefore, respondent No.2 had no other option, but to proceed to pass orders on the application without inspection.

4. If the nature of the earlier proceedings and the submission as put forth by learned counsel for respondent No.2 is kept in view, there is no much dispute with regard to the fact that the inspection has not been conducted. The only grievance that is being put forth by the rival parties is that the inspection has not been conducted as


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

154

ordered earlier. On this aspect, this Court need not dilate much. In ordering to hold a fresh inspection and pass fresh orders it will meet the ends of justice.

5. To enable the same, the petitioner shall now file fresh e-application with necessary fee and immediately on such application being filed by the petitioner, the second respondent shall hold inspection on intimating the petitioner which shall be done in an expeditious manner so as to enable the petitioner to take benefit of the order for the ensuing academic session 2014-15.

With the said observation, petition stands disposed of.

The Committee considered the matter, written representation by the institution

vide letter dated, 24.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to pursue the earlier decision for filing an appeal.

39

SRCAPP1807

B.Ed

St. Sebastian

Education and

development

Trust,

Kanyakumari,

Tamilnadu.

TN

St. Sebastian Educational and Development Trust, Plot No. 1-125, Madathattuvilai Street, Villukuri Village and Post Office, Kalkulam Taluk, Villukuri City, Kanyakumari District – 629180, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Mother Gnanamma Catholic College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 55/1, 42-3A & 42-3B, Madathattuvilai Main Road, Ward.1, Villukuri Village and Post Office, Villukuri City, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District – 629180, TamilnaduforB.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 12.12.2012and physical copy on20.12.2012. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 02.01.2013 followed by reminder on 26.03.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 22.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 16.05.2013. The reply of the institution to the deficiency letter was duly considered by SRC in its 246th meeting held on 02nd-04th June, 2013 and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

• Building plan is approved in Regional Language.

• Notarized land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted. The certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional office is not really a land usage certificate at all.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the SRC in its 246th meeting held on 02nd–04th June, 2013 has decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course. Accordingly, rejection order was issued to the institution on 18.07.2013. The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

155

vide order no. F.No.89-598/2013 Appeal/17th Meeting- 2013 dated 10.01.2014 received in the office of SRC on 27.01.2014 has stated as follows:

“after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to further process the application as per regulations.

Now therefore, the Council hereby remands back the case of Mother Gnanamma Catholic College of Education, Kanyakumari, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above”. The above matter was placed before SRC in its 260th Meeting held on 29th -31st January, 2014 and the committee has decided to Process. Accordingly, the application was processed and placed before SRC in its 261st meeting held on 09th –10th February, 2014 and the committee considered the Appellate authority order dated 10/01/2014 and all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 of NCTE Act, to examine whether the Institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the University, as per the norms. Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between 20th – 23rd February, 2014 and the same was intimated to the institution on 17.02.2014. The inspection of the institution was conducted on 22.02.2014. The VT report was placed before SRC in its 263rd meeting held on 24th February 2014 and the committee has decided to issue Letter of Intent. Accordingly, letter of intent was issued to the institution on 26.02.2014. The institution has submitted its written representation on 02.03.2014 and the reply was placed before SRC in its 264th meeting held on 1st-3rd March 2014 considered the matter and it has decided to issue notice for approved staff list in the prescribed format, with all relevant details (name, Ph.D., subject and experience) about Principal. Before issuance of Notice, the institution has submitted its written representation on 14.01.2014 (with reference to website decision). In the meantime, a private court notice was received from Sri.Isaac Mohanlal, Advocate on 20.06.2014. A court notice was received from Hon’ble High Court of Madurai Bench at Madras in W.P.No.9469 of 2014 dated 17.06.2014 on 30.06.2014. Court notice stating as follows:- “Take notice that the WP (MD) No.9469 of 2014 is set down for hearing on 07.07.2014 for orders as to admission.

Notice of motion has been ordered on 16.06.2014”. A letters from NCTE-Hqrs dated 09.07.2014 and 11.07.2014 received on 10.07.2014


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

156

and 21.07.2014 regarding authorized to defend the case including on behalf of the NCTE-Hqrs. A letter was sent to Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate on 31.07.2014 along with brief of the case and reply received from Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate on 07.08.2014 stating that “all the papers received by me have been forwarded to Mr.A.Sivaji, Counsel for NCTE Madurai Bench of Madras High Court for necessary action”. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014.the institution has submitted its reply along with affidavit and relevant documents on 01.01.2015. The SRC in its 276th meeting held on 7th, 8th and 9th January, 2015 considered the matter and decided that they have asked for an intake of 100 which, under the 2014 Regulations, will fall into two units of 50 each, this is therefore, treated as an application for 2 units. But, further action to process the case can not be taken because this is a case of stand-alone institution which, in terms of Regulation 3, is not eligible to make this application. Keep this case pending and ask for clarification from NCTE (Hqrs).

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the NCTE Hqrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015.

On 16.01.2015 an e-mail from Shri. Shrikanth Chouhan Under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:-


The SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th -22nd January 2015, considered the matter, and decided to issue Formal Recognition for the academic year 2015-2016. A letter dated 22.01.2015 from Shri A.Sivaji, Advocate, enclosed a certified copy of Hon’ble High Court order in WP.(MD) No.9469 of 2014 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2014 dated 19.01.2015. The court order stated as follows:

“By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the second respondent to

grant forthwith the recognition for the petitioner college namely, Mother

Gnanamma Catholic College of Education, Villukuri, Kanyakumari District to start

Bachelor of Education course (B.Ed course) from the academic year 2014-15.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

157

3. Mr.Isac Mohanlal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

the petitioner made an application on 15.12.2012 seeking for recognition from the

second respondent and even though a letter of intend was issued by the second

respondent as early as on 26.02.2014 and the qualification approval granted by

the concerned University also was furnished to the second respondent as early as

on 14.03.2014, till this date, the petitioner’s application seeking for recognition is

not taken up for consideration and disposed of. The learned counsel submitted

that the said application can be directed to be considered on merits and in

accordance with law.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions,

submitted that the petitioner’s application has to be considered, based on the

2014 Regulation and to that effect, the Honorable Supreme Court has also

passed an order, directing the NCTE to consider the application of all institutions

as per the new Regulation.

Considering the fact that the petitioner has made an application as early as

on 15.12.2012 and the same is pending for more that two years, I am of the view

that it would suffice, is a direction is issued to the first respondent to consider the

said application and pass orders on the same on merits an din accordance with

law. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the next meeting

is to be held on 20.01.2015, 21.01.2015, and 22.01.2015 and therefore, the

petitioner’s application may be directed to be considered on any of those days.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the

respondents have sought for certain clarifications from the Headquarters, NCTE,

Delhi and only after getting such clarification, the second respondent will be in a

position to pass final orders.

5. Considering all these submissions, this writ petition is disposed of directing

the second respondent to consider the petitioner’s application dated 15.12.2012

and pass orders on the same merits and in accordance with law, within a period

of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous are closed”.

The Committee considered the matter, Hon’ble High Court order dated 19.01.2015, decided as under:

As per Law (the categoric Supreme Court prescribed time-table) after 3.3.2014, there could be no recognition for 2014-2015.

Advised Southern Regional Office to ask our Lawyer to inform the Court accordingly, if possible.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

158

40

SRCAPP2054

B.Ed

St. Arokia Annai

College of

Education,

Dharmapuri,

Tamilnadu

TN

St. Arokia Annai College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 135/2A,135/2C,131/3B2, 131/3C2, Selliampatti Village & Post Office, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-636809, Tamilnadu. Aroka Annai Trust, Sellipampatti Village & Post Office, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-636809, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to St. Aroka Annai College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 135/2A, 135/2C, 131/3B2, 131/3C2, Selliampatti Village & Post Office, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-636809, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 29.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 31.12.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 22.01.2013 followed by reminder on

22.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 22.04.2013.

The Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after stipulated

period of 60 days and till date.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 250th Meeting held on 11th – 13th August,

2013 has considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted reply for

deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days from the date of issue of

deficiency letter and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on

a collective application of mind, the committee has decided as per clause 7(1) of

NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of

B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 25.09.2013 along with

the original FDR’s.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE

Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated - 21/5/2014has confirmed

the order of SRC.

“…the Council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC is confirmed.

The SRC in its 269th Meeting held on 1 – 2 July, 2014 considered the Appellate Authority order dated 21.05.2014 and the committee took note of the matter. A Court notice has been received by the office on 18.08.2014 from Hon'ble High Court pof Madras in W.P. No. 21118 of 2014 filed by St. Arokia Annai College of Education, Dharmapuri District, Tamilnadu and also a private notice received from Advocate D. Baskar on 14.08.2014. Accordingly a draft letter along with brief sent to the advocate on 20.08.2014. An e-mail received from Advocate Shri. Ramakrishna Reddy on 26.08.2014 with


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

159

regarding W.P.No. 21118 of 2014, St. Arokia Annai College of Education, Tamilnadu. A letter was sent to the Advocate Shri. Ramakrishna Reddy on 05.09.2014. An e-mail received from Shri. K. Ramakrishna Reddy on 10.09.2014. Reply was sent to Advocate Shri. Ramakrishna Reddy on 10.09.2014 along with the copy of rejection order and Appellate authority order dated 21.05.2014. Forwarded a duly signed counter affidavit in respect of W.P. No. 21118 of 2014 filed by Arokia Annai College of Education, Dharmapuri District, Tamilnadu to Advocate Shri. Ramakrishna Reddy on 16.09.2014. A letter received from NCTE-Hqrs. on 15.09.2014 with regarding W.P. No. 21118 of 2014 filed by Arokia Annai College of Education, Dharmapuri District, Tamilnadu. Now the Court Order in W.P. No. 21118 of 2014 dated 20.11.2014 received from Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Madras on 27.01.2015. stated as follows:

“….the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition challenging the rejection of their application for permission to start a college of education offering one year Degree course in Education. Heard Mr.D. Baskar, learned council for the petitioner and Mr. K. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner filed an application online on 29.12.2012 for recognition to start a college offering B.Ed course. The application was forwarded by NCTE to the State Government on 22.01.2012. After sending a reminder to the State Government on 22.04.2013, the NCTE pointed out certain deficiencies by their letter dated 22.04.2013. Under Rule 7(1) of the NCTE Regulations 2009, the petitioner was obliged to remove the deficiencies within a period of 60 days from the date of communication of the deficiencies. This Rule has also been held to be mandatory by the Supreme Court. But, unfortunately, the petitioner claimed to have complied with the deficiencies, beyond the period of 60 days. Therefore, the second respondent passed an order dated 25.09.2013, rejecting the application for recognition on the ground of non removal of deficiencies within the statutorily prescribed time limit. as against the said order, the petitioner filed a statutory appeal. But, the appeal was dismissed on 21.05.2014. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. There is no dispute about the fact that the petitioner did not inform the respondents about the removal of the deficiencies within 60 days. The petitioner claims to have removed the deficiencies only after the stipulated period. Therefore, the respondents cannot be found fault with. For the academic year 2014-15, even the time for admission is now over.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

160

Therefore, if at all, the petitioner case can be considered only for the next academic year, namely, 2015-16. Therefore, the writ petitioner is disposed of, directing the petitioner to make a fresh application online, within the due date, for consideration of their request for recognition for the academic year 2015-16. The NCTE shall process the application, conduct an inspection and pass orders sufficiently in advance, so that the last minute syndrome is avoided. No costs.

The Committee considered the matter, Court order dated 20.11.2014, decided as under:

The case is considered in compliance of the Court Order.

Advise the party to apply afresh, under the new Regulations, when NCTE (H'qrs) issues a notification inviting applications on-line.

41

SRCAPP9001

B.P.Ed

Sri Vignan

Physical

Education

College,

Anantapur,

Andhra Pradesh

AP

Sri Vignan Physical Education College, Kapalabnada Village, Plot No. 46, R &

B Road, Jagrajupalli Village, Kappalabanda Post, Puttaparthi Taluk & City,

Anantapur District-515134, Andhra Pradesh.

Human Values Educational and Development Trust, Plot No. 46, Bangaloore

High Way Road, Jagrajupalli Village, Kappalabanda Post, Puttaparthi City &

Taluk, Anantapur District-515134, Andhra Pradesh has applied for grant of

recognition to Sri Vignan Physical Education College, Kapalabnada Village, Plot

No. 46, R & B Road, Jagrajupalli Village, Kappalabanda Post, Puttaparthi Taluk

& City, Anantapur District-515134, Andhra Pradesh for B.P.Ed course on

29/12/2012 for one year duration under section 14(1) of the NCTE Act. 1993 and

received in the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 07/01/2013.



follows:-



circumstances:





(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

161

The copy of application was received by SRC without application code. Hence the matter was placed before SRC in its 238th Meeting held on 05th-06th February, 2013 along with original file of the institution and other related documents. The Regional Committee decided to reject the application on the following grounds;

Hard copy in triplicate of the on-line application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application – (as per Regulations 2009 Para 7 [1-A(i)] (b).

Accordingly, rejection order was issued to the institution on 19.04.2013. Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs vide order no. F.No. 89-356/Appeal2013/14th Meeting-2013 dated 30/10/2013 stating that “…the council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of SRC confirmed. The Southern Regional Committee in its 255th Meeting held during 13th to 15th

November, 2014 has noted the matter.

On 13.12.2013, a Court notice dated 06.12.2013 in W.P.No. 35380 of 2013 filed by

Human Values Educational and Development Society has been received by this

office .

A letter was addressed to the advocate, Shri.Ramakanth Reddy on 18.12.2013 to

appear before the Court and defend the case in the interest of SRC,NCTE

On 30.12.2013, a letter no. F.64-243/2013/NCTE/Legal /A79720 dated 27th

December, 2013 was received from Shri. B.P. Pandey, Under Secretary,

NCTE(HQ) requesting to defend the case including on behalf of NCTE(HQ).

Further, no action is seen in the file.

On 19.12.2014 , the President, Human Values Educational and Development Trust ,

Puttaparthi has submitted a written representation as under :-

“We ,human values Educational and Development Trust, Jagarajupalli –

515133,Puttaparthi (M),Anantapur District ,A.P.. applies for grant of

recognition for running in the name of Sri Vignan Physical Education.

As above reason (1) (2) and (3) Ref , the application has been rejected

,Ref(4) Hon’ble High Court New Delhi has given order to process our

application for 2015-16.

Please accept our appeal favourable.”

The institution has also submitted a copy of the court order dated 10.11.2014 in

W.P.( c) 7669/2014 filed by Sri Vignan Physical Education College Vs NCTE in the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

162

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.

The Court order dated 10.11.2014 is as under :-

“ Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers :-

A. Issue an appropriate writ (S)/direction(s) or order(s) quashing and setting

aside the impugned orders dated 19.04.2013 passed by the Southern

Regional Committee and order dated 30.10.2013 passed by the National Council for

Teacher education as contained in Annexure P-1 “Colly” and

‘or”

B Issue an appropriate writ(s) / direction(s) or order (s) remanding back the

case to the SRC for further processing of the application and grant of the Formal

recognition order for running the B.P.Ed course from the academic year 2015-16,

and /or

C Pass any such other orders/directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and

proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Learned counsel for the respondent relies upon the order dated 30th July, 2014

passed by this Court in similar facts in George College Department of Education Vs

National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.W.P.(C) 3371/2014.

Consequently, in view of the order dated 10th September , 2013 passed by the

Supreme Court in SLP No.4247-4248/2009 directing that all pending applications

shall be decided in accordance with new Regulations, which the respondent –

NCTE are yet to notify, present writ petition is disposed of with a direction

that the petitioner shall apply afresh in accordance with new guidelines

which shall be notified in compliance with the directions of the

Supreme Court

If any deficiency is found,the same shall be conveyed to the petitioner ,who

shall be given an opportunity to remove the said deficiency, in a time bound

manner .In case the deficiencies are removed within the given time, the

application shall be processed in accordance with the relevant rules. If the

deficiencies are not removed, the applications.

The impugned orders passed by the respondent shall stand merged in

this order.

Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with no order as to

costs.”

Certified Copy of the Court order has not been received by this office so far.

The institution has submitted hard copy after 10 days of online application. As per


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

163

Regulations, 2014 hard copy should be submitted within 15 days of submission of

online application.

SRC in its 278th meeting held on 25th January, 2015 considered the matter and

decided as under :-

“Allot number and process as per Court Order”

In the meantime on 29/01/2015,the institution has submitted a written representation

as under :-

“We, human values Educational & Development Trust, here with enclosed the

application for grant of recognition for running in the name of Sri Vignan Physical

Education College at Puttparthi, Ananthapur (Dt,)Andhra Pradesh.

Here we submitting the inspection fee DD.No.130769 dated 28.01.2015,Kadiri

branch for the amount of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifity thousand only) and all the

necessary documents .

Expecting an early recognition.”

The institution has submitted three sets of the documents.

Note :

1. The institution has not submitted affidavit expressing their willingness for the

application to be processed as per Regulations, 2014

2. The Institution has submitted a D.D. of Rs,.50,000/- (D.D.No.130769 dated

28.01.2015) towards inspection of the institution

3. The institution has filed a W.P.No.35380 of 2013 in the Hon’ble High Court of

Andhra Pradesh against the rejection order of SRC and the appellate

authority’s order confirming the rejection order of SRC and the matter is

pending before the Court.

The Committee considered the matter, Court order dated 10.11.2014, written representation by the institution vide their letter dated 29.01.2015, decided and advised Southern Regional Office as under:

1.Obtain affidavit

2.Fee has been paid.

3.Obtain FDRs as per new Regulations.

4.Cause Inspection


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

164

42

APS09639

D.Ed

Maheshwari

College of

Elementary

Education,

Kalavarai,

Andhra Pradesh

AP

Maheshwari College of Elementary Education Uma General Technical and

Medical Educational Society Kalavarai, Andhra Pradesh

An application was submitted by Uma General Technical and Medical Educational

Society Kalavarai, Andhra Pradesh for grant of recognition to D.Ed Course in the

office of SRC-NCTE, Bangalore vide dated 24.10.2008.

The file was under process and in the mean while, in view of the recommendations

of the State Government of Andhra Pradesh vide letter dated 07.01.2009 not to

further recognize/permit the institution for conducting B.Ed, D.Ed, Physical

education, language pandit course(s),SRC in its 169th meeting held on 12-13th

January, 2009 considered the letter dated 7.1.2009 of state government of Andhra

Pradesh and decided to give effect to the decision of above decision State

Government of Andhra Pradesh as such, with immediate effect.

A letter dated 07.02.2009.forwarded by the Principal Secretary of Education

requesting not to accord further Recognition/permission to the new college/private

B.Ed, D.Ed, Physical education, language pandit in the state of Andhra Pradesh as

the above colleges exceeding in numbers than required.

A letter dated 17th March, 2009 has been received from NCTE Hqrs informing that

the

“The recommendation of the Government of Andhra Pradesh not to grant

recognition/permission in respect of other courses like D.Ed, B.Ed, and

Physical Education courses have further been considered in NCTE and it has

been decided that no further Recognition/permission to any institute in the State

of Andhra Pradesh be considered by SRC for the academic session 2009-10

for B.Ed, D.Ed, Physical Educational Courses also.

The State Government vide its letter Dated 20.03.2009 informed that it has

been decided not to recommend the name of your institution.”

The letter dated 07.01.2009, 07.2.2009, 17.03.2009, and 20.03.2009 was

considered by SRC in its 172nd meeting held on 25th-26th march 2009 and SRC

decided to accept the recommendation of the State Government of Andhra Pradesh,

not to grant Recognition to any of the teacher training institutions in the State of

Andhra Pradesh for the year 2009-10 and decided to close the application. Now

therefore, the application submitted by Uma General Technical Medical

Educational Society Kalavarai, Andhra Pradesh is here by closed.

As per the decision of SRC , a closure letter was issued to the institution on

18.04.2009.

The institution did not approach the Appellate Authority, NCTE Hqrs .They have

approached the Honorable High Court vide order dated 28.02.2011 in Writ Petition


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

165

no 32806 of 2010 wherein the Honorable High Court passed an order as under.

“The petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It has

challenged the order, dated 18th April 2009, passed by the 1st Respondent in

F.SRO/NCTE/2008-09/11826, rejecting its application for grant of permission to start

Diploma in Education (D.Ed.)course.

Petitioner-Society has made an application on 24.10.2008 to the respondents,

seeking permission to establish a D.Ed. college, by enclosing all necessary

documents as per the norms and standards notified by the National Council for

Teacher Education. The impugned order of rejection is passed, based on the policy

notified by the Government of Andhra Pradesh during the year 2009. It is the case of

the petitioner that its application was to be considered with reference to the policy,

which was in force at the time of its making such application. In this connection, the

learned counsel for petitioner has relied on an order passed by this Court in

W.P.No.6712 of 2009, dated 16.12.2009.

I have perused a copy of the impugned order as well as the order passed by this

Court in W.P.No.6712 of 2009, dated 16.12.2009. By impugned order, the claim of

the petitioner is rejected based on the policy communicated by the 2nd Respondent-

Government in the year 2009. In W.P.No.6712 of 2009, this Court has held as under

:

“It may be true that the State Government as well as the first respondent have

reviewed the situation as to the necessity or otherwise of according permission to

establish new colleges of education in the State in future and that the existing

institutions are found to be adequate. However, the right that is accrued to the

petitioners on the basis of their application and the consideration thereof by the first

respondent cannot be taken away on account of the change of policy. It is settled

principle of law that whenever an application is made, it must be considered and

processed in accordance with the provisions of law that existed as on the date of

presentation. Subsequent changes may apply to the applications that are made

thereafter. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to

take necessary steps as contemplated in its communication dated 24-11-2009 and

pass appropriate orders. There shall be no order as to costs.”

A perusal of the aforesaid order shows that it squarely covers the issue involved in

the present writ petition. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed, by

setting aside the order, dated 18th April 2009,passed by the 1st Respondent in

F.SRO/NCTE/2008-09/11826, with a direction to the 1st Respondent

(RD,SRC,NCTE) to consider the matter afresh by applying the policy, which was in

force at the time of filing of application by the petitioner. However, it is needless to

observe that such consideration shall be in accordance with the Regulations, which

are in force, as notified by the National Council for Teacher Education.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

166

Subject to above directions, this writ petition is allowed. No costs”

The Southern Regional Committee in its 202nd Meeting held during 14th to 15th March, 2011,considered the matter and decided to call for clarification from the institution on the following:-

• The latest Building Completion Certificate from the competent Government Engineer is to be submitted.

• Non- Encumbrance Certificate from the competent Government Authorised person / Authorities to be submitted.


• Fixed deposits in joint name towards Endowment fund & Reserve fund from a Nationalized Bank is to be produced.

• The institute has to submit the approved Building plan from a competent Govt. authority

• Land documents with survey Nos of the land where the institution is existing is to be submitted.

• To submit the documents for having deposited the Endowment Fund and Reserve fund of Rs. 5 lakhs and 3 lakhs.

• Affidavit on Rs. 100/- is to be submitted.

• The management has to pay Rs. 40,000/- towards inspection fee.

• Bye-Laws of the Society are to be submitted by the management and etc. The institution is directed to submit all relevant documents along with original

application within a period of 60 days in order to further processing of the

application, as per the Court orders.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the institution on

18.04.2011.The institution has not submitted any reply so far.

On 07/01/2015, the institution has submitted a request for consideration and has

stated that a processing fee of Rs. 41,000/- was submitted along with the

application .The institution has requested to adjust the amount for the inspection fee

of the college.

On 19.01.2015 and 27/01/2015, the Correspondent ,Maheswari College of

Elementary Education has submitted a written representation as under :-

“ As we are informed that applications was closed due to Government policy,

we approached Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad praying to do

justice to us regarding this matter. Vide reference 2nd cited above Hon’ble

High Court of Andhra Pradesh passed an order to take necessary steps for

processing the application for the establishment of D.Ed college.

Basing on the orders of Hon’ble High Court, the SRC,NCTE Committee took

our application into consideration for further processing in its 202nd meeting .Has


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

167

for the information on the website of NCTE we have submitted a letter on 10-03-

2011 along with necessary enclosures requesting to take steps for processing of

our application for the D.Ed course. But we have not received any

communication from the NCTE.

Once again we submitted a representation on 07/01/2015 requesting you to

examine the matter in the light of the above circumstances and process our

application to Maheshwari College of Elementary Education.

But till this date we have not received any information from the NCTE,

Bangalore in this matter. As per the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India, applications for the new colleges should be processed before

03/03/2015 for issuing recognition for the academic year 2015-16.So,I

request you to process our application for the above said college and cause

inspection immediately so that the college may function from the academic year

2015-16.

Along with our application we submitted processing fee through a Demand

Draft bearing No. 838494 dated 16-10-2008 for Rs. 41,000/- (Forty one thousand

rupees only) drawn on State Bank of India ,Bobbili Branch and it is with you. We

also request you to adjust the amount for the inspection fee of the College.

Hence, we request you to take steps to grant recognition for the D.Ed course

from the academic year 2015-16 as per NCTE-2014 Regulations. We provide

the infrastructural and instructional facilities as per the norms contained in the

NCTE-2014 Regulations.

The institution has submitted a copy of the Court order dated 28th February 2011 in

W.P.No. 32802 of 2010 .

The documents available in the file and the documents submitted by the institution

on 27/01/2015 are examined.

Note :-

1. The application was processed as per the Court order in W.P.No.

32806 of 2010 and a letter was sent to the institution on 18/04/2011 seeking

clarification and submission of documents. The institution has not submitted

any reply to this office letter dated 18/04/2011.

2. The institution is requesting for consideration of the application after a gap of

more than 3 years and as per the Court order dated 28/02/2011.

3. The institution was granted recognition for offering B.Ed course on

25/09/2007.

4. The institution has submitted a Demand draft of Rs.10,000/- as processing


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

168

fee (dated 23.12.2015, issued by State Bank of India.)

The Committee considered the matter, Court order dated 28 February, 2011, Documents submitted by the institution on 27/01/2015, decided as under:

The institution did not respond for 3 years to our letter. They can not suddenly approach us now to invoke a Court order of Feb 2011. The application suffers by this extreme inaction and is to be closed. Their request is rejected. They can apply afresh on-line whenever NCTE (H'qrs) issues a notification inviting applications.

Consideration of Show Cause Notice reply : (Volume- 02).

43

SRCAPP1828

B.Ed

Kongu Trust,

Salem,

Tamilnadu

TN

Kongu Trust, Sarvoy Stop Road, Manivizhundhan South Village and Post, Attur Taluka, Thalaivasal City, Salem District, Pin-636121, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Paavendhar College of Education, Khasara no. 565/3E, 566/1J, 2,3, 585/1A, Street no. Sarvoy Bus, Manivizhundhan South Village and Post, Attur Taluk, Salem District, Pin-636121, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 19.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 24.12.2012 along with processing along with processing fees paid through challan dt.20.12.2012 for Rs.50100/-. Para 7[1-A(i)] and 7[1-A(ii)] of extant NCTE Regulations published in the Gazette of India on 31

st August 2009, as amended from time to time, the application shall be

summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

Para 7[1-A(i)]

a. The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for

Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;

b. Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application;

c. Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

Para 7[1-A(ii)]


In this application the following has been observed:

• On-line application was submitted on 19.12.2012 and challan was remitted on 20.12.2012. Hence, the society has not remitted the processing fee as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

169

Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application, as required under sub-regulation 7(1-A)(i)(a) of NCTE Regulations 2009.

The SRC in its 240

th meeting held on 09

th -11

th March 2013 reviewed the duly

scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per 7 [1–A (i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009.

Accordingly, rejection letter was issued to the institution on 10.05.2013. The institution, preferred appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order no. F.No.89-342/2013 Appeal/15th meeting-2013/A77948/ dated 12.11.2013 has stated as follows:-

“after perusal of the documents, Memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process the application as per Regulations. NOWTHEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Paavendhar College of Education, Salem, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.”

The SRC in its 256th meeting held on 04-06th December, 2013 considered the Appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013, directing SRC to process the application as per the regulation, decided to process and advised Southern Regional Office to put up the case in 258th meeting. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 23/01/2014. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 23.01.2014. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 06/02/2014. The SRC in its 262nd Meeting held on 17th -19th February, 2014 considered the appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013 reply of the institution to the deficiency letter and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Notice under Section 14 of NCTE Act for the following.

• Building Plan submitted by the institution is not approved by the competent authority.

Before issuance of notice as per the information of website, the institution has submitted its written representation on 21.02.2014. The notice reply of the institution was placed before SRC in its 264th meeting held on 01st -03rd March, 2014 and the committee has decided to cause inspection. Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed between 17-22 March, 2014


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

170

the same was intimated to the institution on 13.03.2014 accordingly, the inspection of the institution was conducted on 17.03.2014. The VT report was received in this office of SRC on 20.03.2014. An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE H.qrs Regarding guidelines for processing of pending applications. Accordingly, a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The Institution has submitted its willingness letter on 29.12.2014 along with the affidavit to process their pending application as per Regulations 2014. The institution has submitted FDR of Rs.7 Lakhs as per regulations 2014 (not in joint account). The SRC in its 276th meeting held on 20th -22nd January 2014 considered the matter, all other relevant documentary evidences, decided that the deficiencies still persists as under:

• Building Plan is not approved by the competent authority.

• Reserve Fund not created & Further, advised Southern Regional Office that

• This is a stand - alone institution not eligible to apply because of Regulation 3. Keep this case pending, and, ask for clarification from NCTE (Hqrs).

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the NCTE Hqrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015. On 16.01.2015 an email from Shri.Shrikanth Chouhan under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:

“The pending application have to be processed, and they may be persuaded for making these institutions as composit gradually, preferably by 2016-2017”.

The SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th -22nd January 2015, considered matter and decided to issue Show Cause Notice for Building Plan, CD, and Endowment Fund. Before issuance of show cause notice as per the information of website, the institution has submitted its written representation along with necessary documents on 23.01.2015. The Committee considered the matter, submission of affidavit from the institution vide letter dated 29.12.2015, reply of the institution to the show cause notice vide their letter dated 23.01.2015 decided as under:

1.Affidavit is received.

2. Advised Southern Regional Office to Issue LOI


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

171

3.Request them to give reply, if possible, by 28 Feb 2015 so that this case can be considered for Formal Recognition before 3.3.2015.

44

SRCAPP2120

B.Ed

The Nehru

Memorial

College

Committee,,

Tiruchirappalli,

Tamilnadu

TN

The Nehru Memorial College Committee, Plot No. 4, College Road, Abinimangalam Village, Puthanampatti Post, Musiri Taluka and City, Tiruchirappalli District, Pin-621007, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Nehru Memorial College of Education, Khasara No. 314/16, 314/17, 314/12, Plot No. 1/1, College Road, Abinimangalam Village, Puthanampatti Post, Musiri Taluka and City, Tiruchirappalli District, Pin-621007, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 11.01.2013 along with processing along with processing fees of Rs.50050/- vide Demand Draft bearing No.879059 dt.29.11.2012 drawn on Syndicate Bank.

Para 7[1-A(i)] and 7[1-A(ii)] of extant NCTE Regulations published in the Gazette of India on 31

st August 2009, as amended from time to time, the application

shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

Para 7[1-A(i)]

a. The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;

b. Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application;

c. Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

Para 7[1-A(ii)]


Time limit granted by NCTE (HQ),

Due to technical reasons in online application portal of the NCTE website on 30th and 31st December 2012 some applicant institutions faced difficulties in the submission of hardcopies of the online application for the academic session 2013-14 to the concerned Regional Committee in time. Those institutions are allowed to submit hard copies in triplicate to the concerned Regional Committee up to 21st January 2013.

The SRC in its 239

th meeting held on 26

th-27

th February, 2013 reviewed the duly

scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

172

Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [7 1–A (i)].of NCTE Regulations 2009.


• The institution failed to submit valid printout of on-line application on or before 21st Jan 2013 as per NCTE (HQ) direction.

Accordingly, rejection order was issued to the institution on 25.03.2013. The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order no. F.No.89-282/2013 Appeal/13th Meeting-2013 dtd.15.10.2013 has stated as follows:-

“ after perusal of the documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering the oral arguments advance during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserved to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process the application further as per the Regulations. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Nehru Memorial College of Education, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above”.

The SRC in its 255th meeting held on 13th -15th November 2013 considered the Appellate authority order dated 15/10/2013 and decided to process the application further as per the Regulations. The application was scrutinized. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 17.01.2014. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 14.02.2014. The Southern Regional Committee in its 263nd Meeting held during 17 – 19 February,2014 considered Appellate authority order dated 15.10.2013, reply of the institution to the deficiency letter, all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms. As per the decision of SRC, the inspection of the institution was scheduled between 17th to 22nd March, 2014 and the same was intimated to the institution on 14.03.2014. The inspection of the institution was conducted on 20.03.2014. Overall assessment of the institution:


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

173

The availability of instructional and infrastructural facilities of APP -2120 is found to be sufficient and adequate. The management is well prepared to run the proposed B.Ed course. The proposed college of Education is functioning in an education complex under the Trust ‘Nehru Memorial College Committee’ in a four storied RCC structure with a built up area of 25840 sq.ft, exclusively set apart for the proposed B.Ed course. The management is running an Arts and Science College up to Research program in the same complex.

Remarks of VT Members:

Institution is functioning in a multistoried building. Separate wing (Ground+three floors) has been earmarked for proposed course. Nehru Memorial Arts and Science college is functioning in the same educational complex.

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014.the institution has submitted its reply along with affidavit, on 30.12.2014. The SRC in its 276th meeting held on 07th -09th January 2015, considered the matter, reply of the institution dated 30.12.2014 along with affidavit expressing their willingness to process their application as per Regulations 2014, They have asked for an intake of 100 which, under the 2014 Regulations, will fall into two units of 50 each, this is therefore, treated as an application for 2 units. But, further action to process the case can not be taken because this is a case of stand-alone institution which, in terms of Regulation 3, is not eligible to make this application. Keep this case pending and ask for clarification from NCTE (Hqrs). As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to NCTE Hqrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015. On 16.01.2015 an e-mail from Shri. Shrikanth Chouhan Under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:

“The pending applications have to be processed, and they may be persuaded for making these institutions as composite gradually, preferably by 2016-2017”.

The matter was placed before SRC in its 278th meeting held on 20th-22nd January 2015, considered the matter and the committee decided that:


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

174

1. The CD given is empty. 2. Issue Show cause notice for a new CD.

Before issuance of show cause notice as per the information of website, the institution has submitted its written representation along with CD on 29.01.2015. The Committee considered the matter, submission of affidavit from the institution vide letter dated 30.12.2015, reply of the institution to the show cause notice vide their letter dated 29.01.2015 decided as under 1.Affidavit is received. 2.Advised Southern Regional Office to Issue LOI 3.Request them to give reply, if possible, by 28 Feb 2015 so that this case can be considered for Formal Recognition before 3.3.2015.

APS03334

D.Ed

Sri Jagadguru

Fakeera

Channaveeresh

war Teacher

Training

Institute, Gadag,

Karnataka

KA

Sri Jagadguru Fakeera Channaveereshwar Teacher Training Institute, Shirahatti-582120, Gadag Dt., Karnataka. Sri. Jagadguru Fakeer Channaveereshwar Teacher Training Institute, Shirahatti-582120, Gadag Dt., Karnataka was granted recognition vide Order No.F.KR /ELE/78 /SRO/ NCTE/2000 -2001 /2143 dated 09.10.2000 for Elementary course of two years duration with an annual intake of 30 from the academic session 2000-2001 with a condition to shift to its own premises (in case the institution is started in rented premises).

The Chairman of the institution vide letter dated 2.3.2012, recd. by this office on

6.3.2012 has requested for shifting of the building. He has stated that

“….the D.Ed. College building is in dilapidated condition and cracks have

developed on the walls. Due to heavy winds, the tiles of the roofs are weak

and can devastate at any time. Conducting of classes in the present building

has become very difficult for both the staff and the students. Hence, a

building has been taken on rent to shift the building to the rented premises.

A representation has already been addressed to DIET, Gadag on 19.01.2012

for shifting of the premises. For the above said reasons, it is requested to

grant permission to shift the premises temporarily to a new building since

the devastation can happen at any moment. If any untoward incident

happens, then the management/institution/staff of the Teacher Training

Institute are not responsible for the loss occurred. Hence, temporary

permission is requested from your office.”

The SRC in its 221st meeting held on 19th – 20th April, 2012 considered the complaint letter from DSERT Bangalore and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, Notice was issued to the institution on 21.05.2012. The President, S.J.F. Teacher Training Institute has submitted written representation


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

175

on 8.6.2012 and 11.6.2012 The SRC in its 224th meeting held during 14th to 17th June, 2012 considered the written reply of the institution on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

• The building has asbestos sheeted roof in the first floor and toilets , this is against the NCTE norms.

• The Institution was granted recognition in temporary premises to run B.Ed course on 09.10.2000 with a condition that it should shift to its own permanent premises in 3 years. i.e., on or before 09.10.2003. The Institution is still running in temporary premises and has not shifted to new premises even after a lapse of more than 11 years and 08 months. As per NCTE norms and standards and as per regulations, 2009, the institution should have own land and building.

• As admitted by the institution/management, the institution is running in a dilapidated building, which has developed cracks, roofed tiles are weak and building may collapse at any time. Conducting classes in such a building is unsafe and dangerous to the staff & students. The institution in their reply to the show cause notice, sought permission to shift to another temporary building for a stop-gap arrangement for a period of 2-3 years and requested SRC to conduct inspection. There is no provision for stop-gap arrangement for a period of 2-3 years as per regulations, 2009.

• The chairman of the institution vide letter dt. 2.3.2012 has requested this office to give permission to shift to the rented new building, by giving various reasons which are not acceptable, as already more than 10 year and 5 months elapsed since giving recognition. Construction of the new building is not at all started till date.

• The management has violated all the norms and tried to suppress and mislead NCTE.

• The management has admitted in its reply that building is not ready and want time to construct new building, which is not permissible as per NCTE norms.

The reply submitted by the institution on 11.06.2012 for the above queries, has not given any proper and genuine reasons. Based on the above points the committee decided to withdraw the recognition of the D.Ed course run by the Sri. Jagadguru Fakeer Channaveereshwar Teacher Training Institute, Shirhatti-582120, Gadag District, Karnataka, from the academic year 2012.-13 in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course. It was made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board / body were informed accordingly. Further, it was decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore. As per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution on

9.7.2012.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order, the institution had preferred an appeal before


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

176

the NCTE, HQ against the SRCs order of withdrawal of recognition and the

appellate authority at NCTE, HQ vide Order No.F.No.89-416/2012 Appeal/9th

Meeting-2012 dated 10.10.2012 has concluded that there was no ground to accept

the appeal and accordingly, the appeal was rejected and SRC’s order of

withdrawal dated 9.7.2012 was confirmed. The appellate authority order was

placed before 235th meeting of SRC held on 21-22 November, 2012 and the

Committee has noted the matter of confirmation of SRC’s order.

Aggrieved by the order of SRC and appellate authority order, the institution had

filed a writ petition No.75146/2013 in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at

Dharwad.

On 4.11.2013, a Court order dated 27.9.2013 filed by the institution in

W.P.No.75146/2013 is received by this office from the Hon’ble High Court of

Karnataka, Dharwad Bench wherein SRC,NCTE is the 1strespondent , NCTE, New

Delhi is the 2nd respondent.

The order of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad dated 27.9.2013 is as

under:-

“3. It is not in dispute that the respondents granted recognition to the petitioner

institution as per the order dated 9.10.2000 subject to certain conditions.

According to the petitioner, they have complied the conditions specified in the

order of recognition. On the other hand, the respondents contend that petitioner

have not complied the conditions specified in the order of recognition dated

9.10.2000. In such a situation, it is obligatory on the part of the respondents to

conduct inspection under Section 13, of the National Council for Teacher

Education Act, 1993(for short ‘the NCTE Act’). Admittedly, in the instant case, the

respondents have not conducted any such inspection. The Supreme Court in

NCTE and another Vs.Vaishnavi Institute of Technology and Management

reported in (2012) 5 SCC 139 held that it is obligatory on the part of the

respondents to conduct inspection under Section 13 and notify the institute to take

follow-up action pursuant thereto. In the instant case, no such exercise is

undertaken by the respondents. Therefore, the impugned order of withdrawal

dated 9.7.2012 and the consequent order of the Appellate authority dated

10.10.2012 are liable to be quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the

respondents to conduct inspection as per Section 13 of the NCTE Act and to take

appropriate action, in accordance with law against the petitioner. The petitioner to

pay the necessary fee for inspection under section 13 of the NCTE Act.

For the reasons stated above, the following:-

ORDER:

i. Writ petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order at Annexure-G dated 9.7.2012 passed by the 1st

respondent and the impugned order at Annexure – M dated


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

177

10.10.2012 passed by the 2nd respondent-Appellate authority are hereby quashed.

iii. Within four weeks from today, the petitioner to deposit the necessary fee for inspection and on payment of such fee, the respondents to inspect the petitioner institute under Section 13 of the NCTE Act and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.”

The SRC in its 255th meeting held during 13-15 November, 2013 considered the Court order dated 27.9.2013 in W.P.No.75146/2013 and decided that “inspection fee not paid. V.T. inspection cannot be organized. The application for revival of recognition is rejected. Case is closed.” In the meanwhile, a copy of the letter dated 22.10.2013 addressed to the Member Secretary is received by this office on 14.11.2013 along with a fee of Rs.50,000/- submitted to NCTE, New Delhi vide Demand Draft dated 22.10.2013. The Southern Regional Committee in its 256th Meeting held on 4th – 5th December 2013 considered the Hon’ble court orders and all the relevant documents by the institution and decided to cause inspection at the premises Under Section 13 of NCTE Act. The institution is directed to submit Demand Draft of Rs.50, 000/- inspection fee towards the D.Ed course in favour of “The Member Secretary, NCTE” payable at Bangalore. In view of the fact that the conduct of inspection of the institution to be referred to the NCTE Hqrs as it is a case of Section-13, the above matter is placed before SRC in its 259th Meeting held on 17th – 19th January, 2014 for directions. The SRC decided to cause inspection and advised SRO to put up the matter in the 261st Meeting. Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was scheduled between 1st and 5th February,2014 and the same was intimated to the institution vide this office letter F.No.APS03334/D.Ed/KA/2014-15/56278 dated 20.01.2014. On 27.01.2014, the correspondent, S.J.F.C. Teacher Training Institute, (D.Ed), Shirahatti has submitted a written representation requesting for cancellation of inspection as the institution has already been inspected by the NCTE Hqrs 3rd December 2013. The institution has stated as under ; “It is really surprising to see the inspection letter from your office that, we have submitted an application as per the direction of the High Court Order under Section 13 of NCTE Act, along with Rs.50,000/- fees, through demand draft to your office on 21.10.2013.But your office has instructed us to submit the same application to NCTE-New Delhi, Since it is to be inspected under Section 13 of the NCTE Act. As per your office guidance only we have submitted our application to Nb CTE, New Delhi.

After receiving our application the NCTE New Delhi has sent a team of inspection committee as per its letter No.(copy enclosed)

The inspection of our D.Ed course has been done on 3rd December 2013.The detail information through digitalized format for appraisal of 2013-14, with all the necessary documents.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

178

The inspection was done as per your norms through vide-graph and photos.

We are pleased to inform you that, we have complied all the requirements of the NCTE for shifting of premises to new building. The college is now being owned and running with new premises.

The inspection team has already submitted their report to NCTE-New Delhi, for renewal of recognition of the college.

Since, the inspection has been done for the college for renewal of recognition, the same is pending before the NCTE-New Delhi.We are awaiting for the order shortly.

PRAYER; This college recognition has been withdrawn, as per NCTE,.SRC,Bangalore in its order No.F.No.APS03334/D.Ed/KA/2012-13/43630 dated 09.07.2012

The inspection under Section-13 of NCTE Act was done 3rd Dec, 2013, and the same is pending at NCTE,New Delhi for grant of recognition. Since the college is to be recognized legally and the inspection is being already done for shifting of premises to new building, under this circumstance, it is legally feasible to conduct the same inspection from 1st Feb to 5th Feb 2014.

Hence, I request you to kindly cancel the inspection to our D.Ed institution, till we received the renewal grant of recognition from NCTE-New Delhi.”

Note: This Office has not received any information from the NCTE ,Hqrs regarding inspection so far. The SRC in its 261st meeting held on 9-10 February, 2014 considered the matter, decided that, since the case is pertaining to Section 13, advised SRO to obtain the status report from the NCTE (H.Q) and to be reported in the 264th meeting. As per decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to Hq on 26.02.2014. An e-mail received from Hq dated 31.03.2014 requesting to send the original file. The original file was sent to NCTE Hqrs on 24.04.2014. An e-mail received from Hqrs dated 10.06.2014 and 18.06.2014 regarding, once again requested to send the original file of Shri. JagatguruFakeeraChannavereshwara Teacher Training Instt.Shirahatti, GadagDistt. A letter was received from NCTE Hqrs. on 25.07.2014 along with recommendation letter from Shivakumar Udasi, Member of parliament, Haveri dated 02.07.2014. A letter was received from NCTE Hqrs on 25.07.2014. Stating as follows: “…an inspection of your institution was caused by this Council u/s 13 of the NCTE Act.1993. The inspection report submitted by the inspection team has revealed the following deficiencies in respect of your institution:

i. In place of the In charge principal, a Regular Principal needs to be


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

179

engaged. ii. In place of the Lecturer and the librarian presently working on

contractual basis. A lecturer and a librarian on regular basis need to be appointed.

iii. The institution needs to create its website and post the relevant information as prescribed in the NCTE Regulations 20009.

You are requested to submit your reply directly to Regional Director

SRC with intimation to this office after rectifying the above mentioned deficiencies within 3-4 weeks from the date of issue of this letter with all the necessary supporting documents in support of your explanation/ rectification.

The institution has submitted its written representation on10.10.2014 regarding submission of documents and explanation as to the deficiencies as required by NCTE H-qrs.( The original file received from NCTE-Hqrs. on 13.11.2014).

The SRC in its 274th meeting held on 30th -31st October, 2014 considered the matter and decided that Show Cause Notice for

1) Principal not being qualified; and, 2) Lecturers disciplines not being specified. 3) Ask them to send staff list in the prescribed format.

In the meanwhile receiving the decision of SRC uploaded in the official website, the institution has submitted a letter on 28.11.2014, along with some relevant documents which is examined. Further the institution has submitted its written representation on 27.11.2014 along with some relevant documents. Stated as follows:

“….in continuation of my officer letter SJFC D.Ed-2014 dated 26.11.2014 I am herewith submitting the additional documents pertaining to Sri. Jagadguru Fakeereshwara Teacher Training Institute (D.Ed) Shirahatti for continuation of recognition to the college. The additional information as approved by the department is as follows:

1) Sri. H.T. Bijjur principal/ Lecturer science, Psychology. 2) Sri. Somashekharagouda V.Patil lecturer in English, Philosophy of

education. 3) Sri. V.R. Haveri lecturer in Social Science SETF. 4) Sr. S.V. Patil Craft Teacher S.U.P.W 5) Sr. B.A. Mundaragi Librarian 6) Sri. S.Sri. P.B. Hiremath SDA 7) Sr. K.F. Ganjigattimath Peon

The above said employs Sl.No.1 to 7 appointments is approved by

the education department (Xerox copy of the approval orders are enclosed for your kind reference) these employees are drawing salary from the Govt. through HRMS.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

180

Therefore, kindly consider our staff-list were clearly requested and approved by the Govt. education department. Hence, I request you kind self to consider our documents for continuation of recognition to the Aided Institution at on early date.”

The Committee considered the matter, written submission with documents vide letter dated 28.11.2014, decided as under

1.Check on affidavit. 2.Staff list is not approved by affiliating body. However, we can accept the list approved by Karnataka Govt. in 2007. 3.But, the Principal is not qualified according to ANY Regulations of NCTE.

4.Issue notice for appointment of a duly qualified Principal (according to 2014 Regulations.) before 31.10.2015.

46

SRCAPP2081

B.Ed

Bharathi College

of Education,

Salem,

Tamilnadu

TN

Bharathi College of Education, Plot No. T.S.No. 37, Block No. 67, Ward J,

Court Road, Maravaneri Village and Post, Salem Taluka, Salem District,

Pin-636007, Tamilnadu

The Bharathi Vidyalaya Sangam, Plot No. T.S.Nos.37, Block 67 Ward J,

Court Road, Maravaneri Village and Post, Salem Taluka, Salem District,

Pin-636007, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Bharathi

College of Education, Plot No. T.S.No. 37, Block No. 67, Ward J, Court

Road, Maravaneri Village and Post, Salem Taluka, Salem District, Pin-

636007, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for one year duration under Section 14(1)

of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on

30.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on

07.01.2013 along with processing along with processing fees of Rs.50050/-

vide Demand Draft bearing No.844019 dt.29.12.2012 drawn on Indian Bank.


Para 7[1-A(i)]


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

181

(a) The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;



Para 7[1-A(ii)] The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the circumstances

referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the applicant and refund the

processing fees within 30 days of the online submission of the application.

Time limit granted by NCTE (HQ), Due to technical reasons in online application portal of the NCTE website on

30th and 31st December 2012 some applicant institutions faced difficulties in the

submission of hardcopies of the online application for the academic session

2013-14 to the concerned Regional Committee in time. Those institutions are

allowed to submit hard copies in triplicate to the concerned Regional

Committee up to 21st January 2013.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 239th meeting held on 26th – 27th February, 2013 reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [ 7 1–A (i) of NCTE Regulations 2009.


• The institution failed to submit valid printout of on-line application on or before 21st Jan 2013 as per NCTE (HQ) direction.

Accordingly, rejection letter was issued to the institution on 09.04.2013.

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order no. F.No. 89-500/2013 Appeal/15th Meeting- 2013 dated 12.11.2013 has stated as follows:


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

182

“After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process the application as per the Regulations.


The SRC its 256th meeting held on 04th -06th December 2013, considered the

Appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013, directing SRC to process the

application as per the regulation and decided to process and advised Southern

Regional Office to put up the case in 258th meeting.

Accordingly, the application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent

to State Government for recommendation on 23.01.2014.

A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 23.01.2014.The institution

has replied to the deficiency letter on 26.02.2014.

Shri K.Ramakrishnareddy Advocate, in its letter dated 20.10.2014 enclosed a

copy of W.P.No 25967 of 2014. The institution has prayed in the affidavit as

follows:

Hon’ble court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction

more particularly a writ in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any

other appropriate Writ, Order or direction in the nature of writ directing

the 2nd Respondent to issue Formal Recognition order in favour of the

petitioner College for the academic year 2014-2015 and consequently

directing the 3rd Respondent University to issue an order of affiliation to

the petitioner college for the academic year 2014-2015 after due

inspection and verification of infrastructural and instructional facilities as

provided and to pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and

thus render justice.

Counter affidavit was sent to Shri K.Ramakrishnareddy Advocate on

10.11.2014.

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications.

Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014.the institution has submitted its reply along with affidavit and necessary documents on 30.12.2014. The SRC in its 276th meeting held on 7th, 8th and 9th January, 2015 consider the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

183

matter and the committee decided there is no B.Ed (DE). In any case, this is a stand alone institution. They have asked for an intake of 100 which, under the 2014 Regulations, will fall into two units of 50 each, this is therefore, treated as an application for 2 units. But, further action to process the case can not be taken because this is a case of stand-alone institution which, in terms of Regulation 3, is not eligible to make this application. Keep this case pending and ask for clarification from NCTE (H'qrs). As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the NCTE Hqrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015. On 16.01.2015 an e-mail from Shri. Shrikanth Chouhan Under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:-


The SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th to 22nd January, 2015 consider the matter and the committee decided as follows:

• Sy No. in Sale deed and Encumbrance Certificate (dated 12.09.73 relating to Teacher Education No.1242) does not tally with Building plan/Building Completion Certificate/ Land Use Certificate. issue Show Cause Notice for removal of this discrepancy.

Before issuance of show cause notice, the institution has submitted its written representation on 29.01.2015 along with relevant documents. The institution has submitted some relevant documents.

The Committee considered the matter, submission of affidavit vide letter dated 30.12.2014 along with relevant documensts, reply to show cause notice vide letter dated, 29.01.2015, decided as under: 1.Affidavit given.

2.Fee Paid.

3.Cause Inspection

SRCAPP13

B.Ed

A.S. College of

Education,

Dharmuri,

Tamilnadu

TN

A.S.College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 25/1A, Nachinampatti Village,H Dhoddampatti Post, Harur Taluk, Dharmpuri District, Pin-636903, Tamilnadu Arunachalam Saraswathy Charitable Trust, Plot no. S76, 18th Street, Anna Nagar West Villaeg, Anna Nagar Post, Chennai District, Pin-600040, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to A.S.College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 25/1A, Nachinampatti Village, H Dhoddampatti Post,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

184

Harur Taluk, Dharmpuri District, Pin-636903, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 07.01.2013 along with processing along with processing fees paid through ICICI Transaction ID: 1356960967120


Para 7[1-A(i)] (a) The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council

for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;



Para 7[1-A(ii)]

The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the

circumstances referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the

applicant and refund the processing fees within 30 days of the online

submission of the application.

In this application the following has been observed:

1. Land documents submitted although the same is in Regional Language. But institution has not submitted challan so as to ascertain payment is made or not. Hence, the processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application, as required under sub-regulation 7(1-A(i)(a) of NCTE Regulations 2009.

Further, the society has applied another application for starting B.Ed

course in Madurai District (SRCAPP19).

The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 09th –11th March, 2013 reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [ 7 1–A (i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

185

• DD or Challan to support payment of processing fee is not available.

• The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application - (as per Regulations 2009 Para 7[1-A(i)]a).

Accordingly, rejection letter was issued to the institution on 06.05.2013.

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order no. F.No. 89-335/2013 Appeal/13th Meeting- 2013-A75805 dated 15.10.2013 has stated as follows:

“Dr.Chellakumar, chairman, A.S.Colleg of Education, Dharmapuri, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant institution on 28.03.2013.In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that ‘the NCTE had 3 payment options and the ICICI credit card payment gateway was one of them. We chose the ICICI Credit card gateway option. The transaction ID of 1356960967120. Is a proof that the payment was done on time and this was also displayed in the first page of the original application. The proof of payment is attached herewith by way of the bank statement. The processing fee was paid through the ICICI payment gateway option was kept open by NCTE till 4 p.m on 31.12.2012 and we completed the transaction at 1.37 p.m on 31.12.2012.The money was debited from our account on 31.12.2012 and we have attached proof of the same. So, the rejection on grounds of non-payment before the due date does not hold good and should be treated as null and void.

The Council noted that appellant had registered online application on 31.12.2012 and paid the processing fee through the credit card on 31.12.2012. Payement of processing fee through credit card is a valid mode of payment. The appellant institution has paid the processing fee through credit card duly acknowledged on the online application vide transaction ID 1356960967120.

After perusal of the records, memoranda of appeal, affidavit and oral submission of the appellant, committee concluded that the case be remanded back to SRC for further processing of the application as per rules.


The Southern Regional Committee in its 255th Meeting held on 13th to 15th

November 2013 considered the Appellate authority order dated 15/10/2013

and decided to process the application further as per the Rules.

As per the decision of SRC, the application was scrutinized and a copy of

application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 22.01.2014.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

186

A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 23.01.2014.

The institution has submitted reply to the deficiency letter on 14.03.2014 and it

was processed.

An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014.the institution has submitted its reply along with affidavit on 06.01.2015. The institution has submitted original FDR of Rs.7 Lakhs. The SRC in its 276th meeting held on 7th, 8th and 9th January, 2015 consider the matter and the committee decided as follows:

• Stand alone Institution.

• They have asked for an intake of 100 which, under the 2014 Regulations, will fall into two units of 50 each, this is therefore, treated as an application for 2 units. But, further action to process the case can not be taken because this is a case of stand-alone institution which, in terms of Regulation 3, is not eligible to make this application. Keep this case pending and ask for clarification from NCTE (H'qrs).

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the NCTE Hqrs, seeking clarification in the matter on 09.01.2015. On 16.01.2015 an e-mail from Shri. Shrikanth Chouhan Under Secretary, New Delhi, has been received by this providing the clarification in the matter which is as under:-


The SRC in its 277th meeting held on 20th to 22nd January, 2015 consider the matter and the committee decided as follows:

• Show Cause Notice for AC sheet and for discrepancy inland areas shown in building plan and land documents.

Before issuance of Show Cause Notice the institution has submitted a letter

on 30.01.2015, stated as follows;

“…as per the SRC’s 277th meeting held on 20th, 21st, 22nd January 2015, it is

pointed out that our institution (SRCAPP13) has got ACC roof in the campus.

Regarding this I want to bring your


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

187

kind notice that we has already removed the ACC roof.

The Committee considered the matter, submission of affidavit vide letter dated 06.01.2015 along with relevant documensts, reply to show cause notice vide letter dated, 30.01.2015, decided as under: 1.Check on affidavit

2.Cause Inspection.

3.Ask VT to collect Building Completion Certificate and check especially on roofing.

48

APS00393

B.Ed

Sree Narayana

College of

Education,

Ernakualm,

Kerala

KL

Sree Narayana College of Education, SNDP Campus, Muvattupuzha, Ernakualm -68666, Kerala. Sree Narayana College of Education, SNDP Campus, Muvattupuzha, Ernakualm -68666, Kerala has made an application for B.Ed Course to Southern Regional Committee NCTE Bangalore on 26.12.2001. the application was processed and after consideration the report of the Visiting Team as well as other relevant materials granted recognition to the institution for offering B.Ed course with an intake of 160 students from the session 2003-2004 vide order No.6580 dated 28.03.2003 with a condition the institution shall shift to its own premises within three years from the dated of recognition letters were sent to the institution on 21.08.2007 and 28.05.2009 regarding shifting of premises from temporary to permanent building on completion of 3 years from the date of recognition A letter was sent to the institution regarding inspection of the institution under section 17 of NCTE Act on 17.01.2011 and Inspection was conducted on 24.01.2011 and the VT report was received by this office on 27.01.2011.Further no action is seen in the file. Letters dated 30.10.2012, 14.08.2013, and 08.04.2014 from the Registrar Mahatma Gandhi University Priyadarshini Hills. P.O kottayam-686560, Kerala was received by this office on 07.11.2012, 19.08.2013, and 05.05.2014 respectively regarding verification of staff list. On 16.06.2014, a letter received from the Registrar Mahatma Gandhi University Priyadarshini Hills. P.O kottayam-686560, Kerala dated 23.05.2014 enclosed staff list which is as under:-

“The university informs you that the list of teaching staff of Sree Narayana College of Education, Muvattupuzha has been verified in accordance with the UGC regulations NCTE norms and also in compliance with the direction of the Honorable High Court of Kerala in the Judgment referred above I hereby forward the same for further action.” ( in WPCCS No.31449/2004). As per the decision of SRC, 274th meeting held during 30th and 31st October, 2014 decided to "Process all the documents; examine the VT Inspection report; and put up in the next meeting."


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

188

The Southern Regional Committee in its 275th Meeting held during 1st – 2nd December, 2014 considered the matter, and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show Cause Notice Under of NCTE Act for the following :-

• Certified copy of the registered land documents issued by the office of the Sub-Registrar/issuing authority is not submitted.

• Blue print of the approved building plan is not submitted.

• Original Building Completion Certificate is not submitted. As per coipy of building completion certificate built up area is 15787 sq.ft.

• Original copy of Non-Encumbrance Certificate is not submitted.

• Certificate of Registration of Society/Trust and Bye-Law is not submitted.

• Fixed Deposit Receipt for ₹ 5.00 lakhs & 3 lakhs from a Nationalized Bank towards Endowment fund reserve fund respectively is not submitted.

• Affidavit in the prescribed format is not submitted. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show Cause Notice to the institution as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21 days from the date of receipt of the show cause notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken including the withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available, with no further notice. On 16.01.2015 a letter dated 05.01.2015, is received by this office from the Assistant Registrar, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam is as under:-

"I am to inform you that the list of teaching staff of Sree Narayana College of Education, Muvattupuzha has been verified in accordance with the UGC regulations. NCTE norms and also in compliance with the direction of the Honourable High Court of Kerala in the judgement reffered above." As per the decision of SRC a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution

on 29.01.2015. As per the website information the institution has submitted a

written representation on 21.01.2015.

The Committee considered the matter, reply to show cause notice vide letter dated, 21.01.2015, decided as under: 1.Check on affidavit. 2.Permit shifting 3.Ask the Institution to adhere to new norms and standards latest by 31.10.2015.

49

APS02942

B.Ed

Calicut

Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Holy Cross Buildings, Poomala P.O. Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad District, Kerala.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

189

Univeristy

Teacher

Education

centre,

Wayanad,

Kerala

KL

Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Holy Cross Buildings, Poomala P.O. Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad District, Kerala had submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition for starting Secondary course of one year duration from the academic session 2004-2005 with an annual intake of 120 students and was granted recognition on 13.07.2004. The application was processed as per the provisions contained in Rules and Regulation, Norms and Standards vogue at that point of time and the recognition was granted to the university vide order dt.13.07.2004 with stipulated conditions. One of the conditions stipulated was to submit Performance Appraisal Report at the end of every academic year. The PAR submitted by the University Centre was considered by SRC in its 147th meeting held on 14th-15th November 2007. The Committee decided to request the university to fulfill the Norms and standards of NCTE for taking decision to continue the existing education centres. A letter was issued to the university on 15.11.2007. The University Centre submitted documents, which were considered by SRC in its 161st meeting held on 6th-7th August, 2008 and it was decided to conduct inspection under section 17. The inspection of the university under section 17 was conducted on 17.12.2008. The VTR was placed before SRC in its 170th meeting held on 16th-17th February 2009 and SRC decided to issue notice under Section 17 and accordingly, show cause notice was issued on 03.04.2009 . The University Centre submitted its reply on 05.05.2009. The Visiting Team Report, Video CD, written representation and other related documents from the University Centre were considered and the Committee observed the following:- 1. The University Centre is functioning in rented building with 5234 sq.ft. built-up space which is inadequate to run B.Ed. course. In reply to showcause Notice, the University stated that the permanent building is under construction. The University Centre was accorded recognition on 13.7.2004, with the condition that the University Centre shall be shiftedto its own premises/building within three years (12.7.2007) from the date of recognition order issued. The University Centre has not constructed its own building to shift B.Ed. course as per stipulated conditions of recognition order. Hence, the University Centre is not eligible to continue in the rented premises as per the rules and Regulations, Norms and standards of NCTE. 2. As per Notice reply, the University Centre has not established Science lab., Psychology Labs., Language Learning Labs. which were required as per Norms and standards of B.Ed. course. 3. The University Centre has not submitted registered own land document as per Regulations of 2007 of para 8(7) of NCTE Act. In reply to showcause Notice the University Centre stated that the deed of pattayam Right assignment with an extent of 0.5059 Hectors available for B.Ed. course. 4. The University Centre is running B.Ed. course in self-financing mode as per information provided in its reply given to Notice. But, the University teacher Education Centre has not maintained joint account for Rs.5 lakhs and Rs.3 lakhs FDRs as per para 10(1) of NCTE Regulations,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

190

5. The University Centre has not appointed teaching faculty on regular basis as per Norms and standards of B.Ed. course. In reply to showcause Notice also the University Centre stated that the B.Ed. course is self-financed one and hence the Government has not permitted the University Centre to create permanent teaching posts and appoint them on permanent basis.

The University Centre has violated the provisions contained under various sections of NCTE Act and Regulations there under. Therefore, the Southern Regional Committee in its 178th meeting held during 27th and 28th May 2009 decided to withdraw the Recognition for B.Ed. course of the University Centre from the academic session 2009-2010. However, the ongoing batch of students be permitted to complete their course(the students admitted in 2008-09 be allowed to continue in order to complete the course). The University Centre shall not make any fresh admissions subsequent to the withdrawal order. The University Centre shall not make any fresh admissions subsequent to the withdrawal order. Accordingly a withdrawal order was issued to the institution vide this office order No. F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2009-10/14175 dated 26.06.2009. Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC , the institution filed an appeal before the appellate authority, NCTE, New Delhi. The appellate authority vide order no. F.No.89-774/2009 dated 06.11.2009 has confirmed the withdrawal order of SRC dated 26.06.2009.The University centre has approached the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala. A letter from the Registrar, University of Calicut , dated 06.05.2014 is received by this office on 09.05.2014 stated as under :- ‘University of Calicut is situated in the northern part of Kerala , considering the socio educational backwardness of the area, the University started B.Ed Centres as early as in 1982. At present we have 11 Centres .NCTE had conducted visits to these Centres and had given recognition. when NCTE withdrew the recognition of these Centres we were forced to take up this matter with the High Court. The Hon. High court directed the NCTE to go through the claim of the University in respect of each and every centre with the material furnished by them ,compare the same with the deficiencies noted by them during inspection, and reappraise whether there is any shortcoming that needs to be rectified by the University for continuance of recognition of the Centre. We have been regularly submitting the self appraisal report of all these 11 Centres , but no action has been taken so far by NCTE Hence, I request that necessary action may kindly be taken to grant recognition to the 11 University Teacher Education Centres of the University of Calicut at an early date. A copy (website copy)of the High Court order dated 17.08.2010 is enclosed.’ The order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in W.P.No. 33636


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

191

of 2009 dated 17.08.2010 (copy enclosed)in the 20 writ petitions, ten filed by the Calicut University and remaining ten filed by the Kerala University is as under:- ‘ NCTE should adopt a realistic approach in the whole matter and if the centres have facilities like infrastructure, lab library, teaching staff, and other facilities, they should not decline recognition for the reason of defect in title of the land of a few sq. metres of shortage in the building, which does not stand in the way of course being run. In view of the prima facie case established by the University that those facilities are available which are brought on record in these W.P.Cs and since the University has been running B.Ed courses in all the centres for the last 10 years, and since there is rush of students for admission in the University centres in preference to private and other colleges, we direct the NCTE to treat the University centres as approved centres for the current year 2010-2011, also leaving freedom to the NCTE to recall approval if any centre does not make up facilities pointed out by NCTE in terms of revised orders to be issued in terms of the direction issued above for next academic year (2011-2012) onwards.’ As per available records, the recognition status of the Centers of University of Calicut Kerala available records:- In respect of APS0 2942 , vide letters dated 29.06.2009 and 06.01.2010 ,this office had requested for documents pertaining to shifting of premises and payment of Rs.40,000/- as inspection fee. Further , there is no correspondence seen in the file. In the meantime , on 07.05.2014,the University has submitted the performance appraisal reports of the University Centres of University of Calicut. It is observed from the Performance Appraisal Reports of Calicut University Centres that all the Centres are offering B.Ed courses without the approval of SRC,NCTE which is a violation of NCTE Act and Regulations ,2009. The SRC in its 269th meeting held during 1 – 2 July, 2014 considered the matter, decided that, Southern Regional Committee can not relax any Regulations as already ruled by the Kerala High Court in its recent order. Further, it is decided by the Committee that these 11 centres are to be inspected to ascertain their adherence to norms and standards. Southern Regional Office is advised that before causing inspection, however, SRO should collect all documents for verification. Thereafter, after collecting inspection fee of Rs 50,000/- per centre, cause inspection. As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the Registrar, Calicut University Centres, Sy.No.787/1A, 788, 789 (Old No), New No. 439/1, Block-18, Poomala, Wayanad - 673592, Kerala on 21.08.2014 with a request to submit questionnaire along with essential documents for causing inspection. On 11.09.2014, the Registrar has submitted two written representations dated 10.09.2014 along with duly filled in questionnaire in respect of 11 University Teacher Education Centres and relevant documents. .


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

192

The letter of the Registrar is as under :- “I am forwarding herewith the filled up application in respect of 11 university Teacher Education Centres along with demand drafts towards inspection fee. I request that an early action may kindly be taken to inspect the centres and give recognition. University of Calicut has been running the University Teacher Eduation Centres as early as from 1982 onwards .We have tried our level best to purchase land and construct building investing huge amount for almost all University Teacher Education Centre. Now we are not in a position to deposit 5 lakhs towards endowment fund and 3 lakhs towards reserve funds for each centres. Hence , I request that relaxation may kindly be given from depositing 8 lakhs in fixed deposit for each centres as these Centres are owned and operated by the University. I assure that the Centres will run systematically and effectively with out any financial crisis.” As per the decision of SRC, 273rd meeting held during 30th Sept. and 1st Oct, 2014 decided to examine and put up in the next meeting.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 274th meeting held during 30th &31st October,2014 considered the written representation dated 11.09.2014 from the Registrar of the said University, and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice to the Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Holy cross building, Poomala, Kerala under NCTE Act for the following: 1. Notarised translated version of land document in English is not submitted. 2. In the Photocopy of building plan, submitted, location of the building, Sy.No. and plot area is not motioned. 3. Total Built up area as per building completion certificate is only 6396.38 sq.ft, which is less than the requirement of 16000 sq.ft as per NCTE norms. 4. Total Built up area as per Affidavit is only 8,150 sq.ft, which is less than the requirement of 16000 sq.ft as per NCTE norms. 5. Built up area as per Building plan, Building completion certificate and Affidavit are not matching. 6. Translated version of Encumbrance Certificate (in English) is not submitted. 7. As seen from the questionnaire teaching staff is not appointed on regular basis and are paid consolidated salary, which is against the NCTE Regulations/Norms. 8. As seen from the Questionnaire, Principal has not completed his Ph.D degree and is not eligible for the post of Principal as per NCTE Norms. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to the Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Thrissur, Kerala, as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21 days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

193

take a final decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken including the withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available with no further notice. As per the decision of SRC a show cause notice was issued to the institution

on 05.01.2015. The institution has submitted a written representation on

27.01.2015.

The Committee considered the written reply of the University/institution

vide letter dated 27.01.2015 on the above matter and also the relevant

documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the

following reasons:-

• The Institution has not given FDRs.

• Building Plan is not given.

• Built up area shown in Building Completion Certificate is only 8150 sq.ft, which is inadequate and not as per NCTE norms.

• Teaching staff is not at all according to NCTE norms- Principal does not havePh.D. Others are on consolidated pay and not regular.

Bassed on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the

recognition of the B.Ed course run by the Calicut University Teacher

Education centre, Wayanad, Kerala from the academic year 2015-16, in

order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to

complete their course.

But it is made clear that the University is debarred from making any

further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order.

The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly.

Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, after ensuring payments to all dues of faculty and staff.

50

APS02948

B.Ed

Calicut

University

Teacher

Education

Centre,

Malappuram,

Kerala

KL

Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Kottilangadi P.O, Malappuram-676506, Kerala.

An application was submitted by Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Kottilangadi P.O, Malappuram-676506, Kerala for grant of recognition to B.Ed course in the office of SRC-NCTE, Bangalore on 31.12.2003.

The application was processed as per the provisions contained in Rules and Regulation, Norms and Standards vogue at that point of time and the recognition was granted to the University Centre vide order dt. 13.07.2004 with stipulated conditions. One of the conditions stipulated was to submit


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

194

Performance Appraisal Report at the end of every academic year. The PAR submitted by the University Centre was considered by SRC in its 147th meeting held on 14th-15th November 2007. The Committee decided to request the University Centre to fulfill the Norms and standards of NCTE for taking decision to continue the existing education centres.

A letter was issued to the University Centre on 15.11.2007. The University Centre submitted documents, which were considered by SRC in its 161st

meeting held on 6th-7th August 2008 and it was decided to conduct inspection under section 17. The inspection of the University Centre under section 17 was conducted on 16.12.2008. The VTR was placed before SRC in its 170th meeting held on 16th-17th February 2009 and SRC decided to issue notice under Section 17 and accordingly, show cause notice was issued on 03.04.2009 for the following reasons:-

1. The University Centre has procured 3 acres of land for construction of new building for B.Ed. course. The new permanent building exclusively for B.Ed. course is not yet constructed. 2. The present buildings have built-up space of 7610 sq.ft. and not adequate to run B.Ed. course with 120 intake 3. The books in the Library, 3599, were not adequate as per NCTE Norms . 4. Three teachers were in regular pay scale and remaining working on consolidated pay scale. 5. The University Centre has to submit the registered own land document in the name of the College as per Regulations of NCTE for verification. 6. As per NCTE Regulations 2007, only those institutions which have land and building on ownership basis or lease from Government/Government institutions for a period of not less than 30 years and with the buildings of Institution complete in the form of permanent structure only be continued recognition. The University Centre has to provide own land document registered in the name of the College and original approved building plan, building completion certificate and built up area as per NCTE Norms immediately. 7. The Calicut University Teacher Education Centre has to submit Joint account for Rs. 5 lakhs & Rs. 3 lakhs FDRs as per the 10(1) Regulation 2007 of NCTE. The 10(1) Regulation, 2007 of NCTE reads as under:-

8. “In case of self-financed institutions including Government/Government aided institutions running a course on self-financing basis, there shall be an endowment fund of Rs.5.00 lakh per course per unit and a reserve fund of Rs. 3.00 lakh per course per unit of approved intake, in the form of a Fixed Deposit of a duration of and above 5 years of a nationalized bank. The endowment fund and reserve fund shall be operated jointly by the authorized represntative of the management and an officer of the Regional Committee concerned”. 9. The University Study Centre has to submit details of permanent teaching faculty appointed as per Norms and standards of NCTE in the format prescribed. The supported documentary proofs i.e., mode of appointment, qualifications etc. to be submitted for verification. 10. The University Centre shall provide the registered own land document


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

195

and own building with built-up space and other infrastructural and instructional facilities as per NCTE Regulations before commencement of Academic Session 2009-10; in the absence of which any further admission to the above programme will be suspended till necessary infrastructural and instructional facilities were provided as per Regulations of NCTE. The University Centre submitted its reply on 05.05.2009. The Visiting Team Report, Video CD, written representation and other related documents from the University Centre were considered and the Committee observed the following:-

1. The University Centre was accorded recognition in the temporary building on 13.7.2004, with insufficient built-up space with the condition to shift to its own premises/building within three years time limit from the date of recognition. But, the institution failed to construct its own permanent building as per the conditions of the recognition order. Hence, the University Centre is not eligible to continue in the rented premises as per the rules and Regulations, Norms and standards of NCTE. 2. The University Centre is functioning in temporary building with built-up space of 7610 sq.ft. and not adequate to run B.Ed. course with 120 intake. In the notice reply, the institution stated that with existing building and available facilities, the B.Ed. course will be conducted upto construction of permanent building. 3. The books in the Library were not adequate for 120 intake as per Norms and standards of B.Ed. course. The institution stated in its notice reply, that the funds were allotted to procure the required books. 4. The University Centre is running B.Ed. course in self-financing mode as per information provided in its reply given to Notice. But, the University teacher Education Centre has not maintained joint account for Rs.5 lakhs and Rs.3 lakhs FDRs as per para 10(1) of NCTE Regulations, 2007. 5. The University Centre has not appointed teaching faculty on regular basis as per Norms and standards of B.Ed. course. In reply to Show Cause Notice also the University Centre stated that the B.Ed. course is self-financed one and hence the Government has not permitted the University Centre tocreate permanent teaching posts and appoint them on permanent basis.

The University Centre has violated the provisions contained under various sections of NCTE Act and Regulations there under. Therefore, the Southern Regional Committee in its 176th meeting held during 27th – 28th May, 2009,decided to withdraw the Recognition for B.Ed. course of the University Centre from the academic session 2009-2010. However, the ongoing batch of students be permitted to complete their course(the students admitted in 2008-09 be allowed to continue in order to complete the course). The University Centre shall not make any fresh admissions subsequent to the withdrawal order.

As per the decision of SRC , a withdrawal order was issued to the University Centre vide this office order No. F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed/200910/14182 dated 26.06.09

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the University Centre filed an appeal

before the appellate authority, NCTE, New Delhi. The appellate authority vide


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

196

order dated 06.11.2009 has confirmed the withdrawal order of SRC.

Further, the University has approached the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala .

On 09.05.2014, a letter from the Registrar, University of Calicut , dated 06.05.2014 is received by this office which is as under :-

‘University of Calicut is situated in the northern part of Kerala , considering the socio educational backwardness of the area, the University started B.Ed Centres as early as in 1982. At present we have 11 Centres .NCTE had conducted visits to these Centres and had given recognition. when NCTE withdrew the recognition of these Centres we were forced to take up this matter with the High Court. The Hon. High court directed the NCTE to go through the claim of the University in respect of each and every centre with the material furnished by them ,compare the same with the deficiencies noted by them during inspection, and reappraise whether there is any shortcoming that needs to be rectified by the University for continuance of recognition of the Centre. We have been regularly submitting the self appraisal report of all these 11 Centres , but no action has been taken so far by NCTE Hence, I request that necessary action may kindly be taken to grant recognition to the 11 University Teacher Education Centres of the University of Calicut at an early date.

A copy (website copy)of the High Court order dated 17.08.2010 is enclosed.’

The order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in W.P.No. 33636 of 2009 dated 17.08.2010 (copy enclosed)in the 20 writ petitions, ten filed by the Calicut University and remaining ten filed by the Kerala University is as under ;

‘ NCTE should adopt a realistic approach in the whole matter and if the centres have facilities like infrastructure, lab library, teaching staff, and other facilities, they should not decline recognition for the reason of defect in title of the land of a few

sq. metres of shortage in the building, which does not stand in the way of course being run. In view of the prima facie case established by the University that those facilities are available which are brought on record in these W.P.Cs and since the University has been running B.Ed courses in all the centres for the last 10 years, and since there is rush of students for admission in the University centres in preference to private and other colleges, we direct the NCTE to treat the University centres as approved centres for the current year 2010-2011, also leaving freedom to the NCTE to recall approval if any centre does not make up facilities pointed out by NCTE in terms of revised orders to be issued in terms of the direction issued above for next academic year (2011-2012) onwards.’

As per available records :-

In respect of APS0 2951 , vide letters dated 29.06.2009 and 06.01.2010 ,this office had requested for documents pertaining to shifting of premises and payment of Rs.40,000/- as inspection fee.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

197

Further , there is no correspondence seen in the file.

In the meantime , on 07.05.2014,the University has submitted the performance appraisal reports of the University Centres of University of Calicut. It is observed from the Performance Appraisal Reports of Calicut University Centres that all the Centres are offering B.Ed courses without the approval of SRC,NCTE which is a violation of NCTE Act and Regulations ,2009.

The SRC in its 269th meeting held during 1 – 2 July, 2014 considered the matter, decided that, Southern Regional Committee can not relax any Regulations as already ruled by the Kerala High Court in its recent order. Further, it is decided by the Committee that these 11 centres are to be inspected to ascertain their adherence to norms and standards. Southern Regional Office is advised that before causing inspection, however, SRO should collect all documents for verification. Thereafter, after collecting inspection fee of Rs 50,000/- per centre, cause inspection.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the Registrar, Calicut University on 21.08.2014 with a request to submit questionnaire along with essential documents for causing inspection. On 11.09.2014, the Registrar has submitted two written representations dated 10.09.2014 along with duly filled in questionnaire in respect of 11 University Teacher Education Centres and relevant documents. .

The letter of the Registrar is as under :- “I am forwarding herewith the filled up application in respect of 11 university Teacher Education Centres along with demand drafts towards inspection fee. I request that an early action may kindly be taken to inspect the centres and give recognition. University of Calicut has been running the University Teacher Education Centres as earlyas from 1982 onwards .We have tried our level best to purchase land and construct building investing huge amount for almost all University Teacher Education Centre.

Now we are not in a position to deposit 5 lakhs towards endowment fund and 3 lakhstowards reserve funds for each centres. Hence , I request that relaxation may kindly be given from depositing 8 lakhs in fixed deposit for each centres as these Centres are owned and operated by the University. I assure that the Centres will run systematically and effectively with out any financial crisis.”

The University centre has submitted the following documents :-

1. A brief preview of the functioning of the University Centre(Resume) 2. Details of the University Centre pertaining to instructional and infrastructural facilities of the Centre. 3. Duly filled in questionnaire of the University Centre (APS02948) 4. Original Notarized affidavit dated 10.09.2014. 5. Details of the teaching and non teaching staff of the University centre (educational qualifications and experience details ) 6. Details of the academic activities of the University Centre in the year 2013-14.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

198

7. List of furniture, books in the library, equipments in the ET,SUPW, Psychology/Science and social science labs . 8. A photocopy of the Janmam rights sale deed dated 28th March, 2005 in favour of Dr.P.P.Muhammed ,Registrar of Calicut University, at R.Sy.No. 69,Koottilangadi Village,Malapppuram District is submitted.. 9. Photocopy of the building plan of the University Centre in R.S.No. 69/3 at Koottilangadi Gram Panchayath is submitted.(individual copies of Ground floor, first floor and second floor plans ) 10.Building Completion Certificate dated 19.08.2014 issued by University Engineer , University of Calicut is submitted. 11.A Demand Draft of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of Member Secretary ,NCTE, dated 10.09.2014 issued by State Bank of Tranvancore (D.D.No. 314654) towards inspection fee is submitted. The SRC in its 274th meeting held during 30th & 31st October, 2014, considered the written representation dted 11.09.2014 from the Registrar of the said University, and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show Cause Notice to the Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Kottilangadi P.O. Kerala under NCTE Act for the following:-

1. English version of the land document submitted is not clear. 2. Blue print of the building plan is not submitted. Site area is not mentioned in the photo copy of building plan submitted. 3. Notarised Land usage Certificate is not submitted. 4. Up-date Non-Encumbrance certificate is not submitted. 5. As seen from the Questionnaire, Teaching staff are not appointed on regular basis (appointed on contract basis) and are pain consolidated salary, which is against the NCTE Regulations/Norms. 6. As seen from the Qustionnaire, the Principal has not completed his Ph.D degree and is not eligible for the post of Principal as per NCTE Norms. In view of the above , the committee decided to issue a Show Cause Notice to

the Calicut University Teacher Education Centre, Thrissur, Kerala, as to why

the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an opportunity to the

institution to make a written representation within 21 days from the date of

receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to

take a final decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken

including the withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available

with no further notice.

As per the decision of SRC a show cause notice was issued to the institution

on 05.01.2015. The institution has submitted a written representation on

28.01.2015 .

The Committee considered the written reply of the University/institution

vide letter dated 28.01.2015 on the above matter and also the relevant

documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

199

following reasons:-

• The Institution has not given FDRs.

• Teaching staff is not at all according to NCTE norms- Principal does not have Ph.D.

• Others are on consolidated pay and not regular.

Bassed on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the

recognition of the B.Ed course run by the Calicut University Teacher

Education centre, Malappuram, Kerala from the academic year 2015-16, in

order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to

complete their course.

But it is made clear that the University is debarred from making any

further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order.

The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly.

Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, after ensuring payments to all dues of faculty and staff.

51

APS06174

D.Ed

Seema

Educational

Charitable Trust,

Kolar,

Karnataka,

KA

Seema Educational Charitable Trust, Kolar District, Karnataka had submitted an application to the SRC, NCTE for grant on recognition to Seema D.Ed College, S.N.M school Road, Anderson Pet, K.G.F – 563113, Kolar District, Karnataka and was granted recognition on 12.04.2007 for Elementary courses of two years duration with an annual intake of fifty students subject to the condition to shift its own premises/building with in 3 years from the date of recognition ( in case the course is started in rented premises). Hence, the institution should have shifted to its own premises with in 12.04.2010. In the mean while SRC has received a telephonic and oral complaint about admitting the students by taking heavy donations in Andaman and Nicobar islands. Accordingly, a letter dated F.SRO/APS06174-D.Ed/43589 dt. 06.07.2012 was issued to the institution seeking explanation regarding shifting of the premises to its own premises and also regarding collection of heavy donation. The institution submitted a letter dated 24.07.2012 states as follows:- “Our Seema Education Charitable Trust clarifies that, the land had already been registered for the premises in favour of Seema Education Charitable Trust and hence seema D.Ed college will shift its premises within 6 months to the Registered land, as the college humbly request to grant 6 months of time for shifting of the premises.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

200

Whereas collection of heavy donation for admission in our college is been fixed not more than Rs. 25000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) for 2 years, hence the rumors are complete false and baseless.”

The SRC in its 236th meeting held during 16-17 December, 2012 considered the matter,

reply of the institution dt. 24.07.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it

was decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act, for the following:-

• The Institution was granted recognition in temporary premises to run D.Ed course on 14.04.2007 with a condition that it should shift to its own permanent premises in 3 years. i.e., on or before 14.04.2010. The Institution is still running in temporary premises and not shifted to new premises even after a lapse of stipulated 3 years and after lapse of time period of more than 5 years and 08 months. The request of the institution to permit 6 months time to shift to new premises in registered land cannot be permissible, already 5 years and 08 months time period is elapsed for shifting. The institution has violated the condition of shifting to new building/premises as per NCTE norms of 2009.

As decided in the 236th meeting of SRC, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution to submit reply within 21 days from the date of receipt of the along with necessary certificate/documents vide this office letter No.APS06174/D.Ed./KA/2013-2014/48755 dated 5.2.2013. From the Center Diary report it is found that the institution has submitted reply for the Show cause Notice on 26.2.2013 vide Inward No.124988. But, the reply dated 26.2.2013 submitted by the institution is not found to be traceable file or in the office, even after long search. Hence, under the above circumstances, the above matter was placed before SRC for further guidance and instructions in the matter in order to process the file. The SRC in its 254th Meeting held on 25th – 27th October, 2013 considered the matter and advised Southern Regional Office to request the institution to send a copy of their reply to our show cause notice dated 05/02/2013. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 05.11.2013 with directions to submit the copies of the reply submitted earlier. The institution has submitted its reply on 11.11.2013. The SRC in its 257th meeting held on 20-22nd December 2013 had considered the matter on the above subject, reply of the institution to the show cause notice issued to the institution vide our letter dated 11/11/2013, and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

• The institution has not submitted, building completion certificate


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

201

approved by competent authority.

• The institution has not submitted, original FDRs for Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively in joint account for 5 years.

• In the building completion certificate submitted, Survey number is differing from other documents.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the D.Ed course run by Seema D.Ed College, Society N.M. School Road, Andersonpet, K.G.F – 563113, Kolar District, Karnataka from the academic year 2014-15, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course. But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly. Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any, after ensuring payments to all dues of faculty and staff. Accordingly, a withdrawal order was issued to the Institution on 11.02.2014 Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 02.07.2014 remanded as follows: “……Sh. SS. Riyaz Ahmed, Secretary, Seema D.Ed. College, Kolar District, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 28-05-2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that "the institution has submitted the building completion certificate approved by the private civil engineer and certified by the secretary, gram Panchayat. Since the institution is located in rural area and therefore governed by the gram Panchayat, hence countersigned by the Panchayat authority. And where as approval of government engineer it has been verified and done thereby now. The copy of building completion certificate approved by the Government engineer and certified by the Secretary. the original FDR's are concerned, the Institution had submitted the FDR's to SRC, NCTE dated 23/09/09 vide acknowledgement letter ref. nO.2040, Dairy No. 85827, APSO No. 6174, Course D.Ed., for both Endowment Fund FDRNo. 414782 for 5lacs and Reserve fund FDRt.No. 414781 for 3 lacs. And in the year 2011 SRC, NCTE Intimated the institution to collect the original FDR's there by institution collected the FDR's by person. The copies of both FDR's for Rs. 5 & 3 lacs have been enclosed. And survey numbers in building completion certificate have been rectified and mentioned by now."

Council noted that the appellant institution was granted recognition for DEI Ed. Course in 2007 with a condition that institution will shift to its own premises building within 3 years. A Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 5/02/2013 was


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

202

issued to the appellant institution for not complying with the above condition of shifting to new building/premises. On getting reply from the appellant institution the recognition of the appellant institution was withdrawn vide SRC order dated 11.02.2014 on the following grounds: (i) The institution has not submitted, building completion certificate approved by competent authority. (ii) The institution has not submitted, original FDRs for Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively in joint account for 5 years. (iii) In the building completion certificate submitted, survey number is differing from other documents." Council observed that the appellant institution was not given opportunity to furnish explanation on the above grounds of withdrawal. Show Cause Notice was on a different ground i.e. the appellant institution has not shifted to new building/premises. The relevant file also does not contain any evidence that the new address of the appellant institution was physically verified by conducting inspection. Committee concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to do thorough scrutiny of documents and extending a reasonable opportunity to the appellant institution for making a written representation.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to do thorough scrutiny of documents and extending a reasonable opportunity to the appellant institution for making a written representation. In the meantime, the order of withdrawal may be kept in abeyance.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Seema D.Ed. College, The SRC in its 271st Meeting held on 01st August, 2014 considered the matter, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to process the case after notification of new Regulations. As per the Appellate Authority direction the application is processed An email dated 18.12.2014 received from NCTE Hqrs Regarding guidance for processing of pending applications. Accordingly, a willingness letter was issued to the institution on 19.12.2014. The institution has submitted reply on 02.01.2015 along with affidavit and relevant documents. Note: The institution has submitted FDRs of Rs. 4 Lakhs and DD of Rs. 50,000/- processing fee in favor of the Member Secretary.

The Institution has submitted its willingness letter on 02.01.2015 to process their pending application as per Regulations 2014.

The SRC in its 276th meeting held on 07

th-09

th January 2015, considered Appellate

Authority order dated 02.07.2014 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it

was decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act for the following:

• Building Completion Certificate is not approved by Competent


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

203

Authority. The institution has submitted its written representation on 21.01.2015 (with reference to website in the decision of 276th meeting of SRC) along with relevant documents.

The Committee considered the written reply of the institution to the show

cause notice issued vide letter dated 21.01.2015, submission of reply on

02.01.2015 along with affidavit and relevant documents. and decided as

under:

1.Restore recognition.

2.Cause Inspection,

3.Ask VT to collect approved staff list

52

APS07290

M.Ed

Indian M.Ed

College , Bidar,

Karnataka

KA

Indian M.Ed College, Chidri Road, Bidar District – 585403, Karnataka was granted recognition for M.Ed course vide order No. F.SRO/NCTE/M.Ed/2008/5123 dated 22/09/2008 with an annual intake of 25 students. A letter dated 15/06/2013 is received by this office on 24/06/2013 from the Principal regarding change of the Indian M.Ed P.G.Centre, Chidri, Bidar to Roohi M.Ed P.G.Centre, Bidar. He stated that “the Gulbarga University, Gulbarga change of our college name Indian College P.G.Centre Chidri, Bidar instead of new name Roohi M.Ed P.G.Centre, Chidri, Bidar. Please request change in the NCTE website our College name. Therefore kindly information to you. Please any letter corresponding Roohi M.Ed P.G. Centre Chidri, Bidar”. A copy of letter of Gulbarga University dated 29.05.2013 addressed to Roohi M.Ed PG Centre sanctioning of intake of 35 students for M.Ed(Edn) is enclosed for information. The Southern Regional Committee in its 253rd Meeting held during 30th September 2013 to 1st October 2013 considered the matter, letter dated 15/06/2013 from the Principal of Roohi M.Ed P.G. Centre, Bidar and decided that the “institution should pay Rs. 50000/- as fee as per the NCTE Act towards inspection fee and usual condition, towards change of name of the institution from Roohi M.Ed P.G. Centre, Bidar to The Indian M.Ed P.G. Centre, Chidri, Bidar. The Committee also advised Sothern Regional Office to check for Law forbidding use by private parties of expressions like ‘Indian’ & ‘National’ and report.”


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

204

It is noticed from the records that the institution has requested for change of name of the college from the existing ‘Indian M.Ed College, Chidri Road, Bidar District – 585403, Karnataka’ to ‘Roohi M.Ed P.G.Centre, Chidri, Bidar.’ Hence, the above matter is once again placed before SRC for necessary direction regarding the request of the institution. The SRC in its 258th meeting held on 03-05th January, 2014 considered the matter, advised Southern Regional Office to report action taken on the earlier decision as per 253rd meeting held on 30th Sept, 2013 & 1st Oct, 2013, A letter was sent to the advocate on 11.01.2014 regarding advise on the law forbidding use of expressions like ‘National’ and ‘Indian’ by private parties. An e-mail dated 17.10.2014 has been received from Dr. Sujata P. Shanbhag Assistant Adviser, (NAAC) with request to clarification regarding many colleges running single course under Gulbarga University. Again an e-mail dated 24.10.2014 received by SRC on 27.10.2014 from Dr. Sujata P. Assistant Adviser, Shanbhag (NAAC) and stating as follows: “…. I would like to know that norms for starting M.Ed course in a college. Can a college have M.Ed course alone without having B.Ed course in their college. There are many colleges running single course under Gulbarga University. The list is given below. I would like to know whether they are stand alone instructions and have NCTE recognition. I need these clarifications urgently”.

Sl.no Institution Name Place

1 Sri Murugha Rajendra Swamiji M.Ed .P.G

College

Gulbarga

2 Sri Murugha Rajendra Swamiji B.Ed

.College

Gulbarga

3 Noor M.Ed College Bidar

4 Noor College of Education Bidar

5 Deccan M.Ed College Gulbarga

6 National College of Education Gulbarga

7 National P.G Centre for M.Ed Course Gulbarga

8 Indian M.Ed College Bidar

9 Mohammadi Post Graduate College in

Master of Education

Gulbarga


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

205

10 Mohammadi College of Education Gulbarga

11 KRE M.Ed PG Centre Bidar

12 Al-badar M.Ed PG College Gulbarga

13 M.Ed PG Course Bidar

14 Taj M.Ed College Gulbarga

The institution has submitted its written representation on 13.11.2014 along with relevant documents, and stating as follows:

“….principal of Indian M.Ed College Bidar requesting your kindself to please issue a direction to the university to provide affiliation continuation and admission as the college has already been applied for NAAC 8 months back. Last year the college has at the verge completion of all the academic activities suddenly the university refused issuing eligibilities to the students admitted for M.Ed for the year 2013-14,sir the college faced a big problem and we moved to the court the students were made to sit for the exam. This year also the university denaied affiliation continuation and admission. Hence I am here by requesting you to please provide direction to the university to give affiliation continuation and admission until the NAAC visits the college”.

The SRC in its 275th meeting held on 01st -02nd December 2014, considered the matter, e-mail dated 17.10.2014 from NAAC, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to send a copy of the NCTE (H.Q) letter on the subject to Gulbarga University. Accordingly, a letter was sent to NCTE Hqrs on 03.12.2014. A reply has been received from NCTE Hqrs on 15.12.2014, with the request to take action as per NCTE regulation. The institution has submitted its written representation dated 28.01.2015 along with documents received by SRC on 28.01.2015, stated as follows:

“Gulbarga University Gulbarga returned our affiliation proposed of 2014-15 mentioning the reason that our college should get NAAC accreditation with B+ Grade.

Mean time our college & management are sincerely trying to get NAAC accreditation and it is process and we got LOI from NAAC Bangalore & submitted the hard copy along with a DD of Rs.28,090/- along with other documents & the same is submitted to the Director NAAC Bangalore & SRC


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

206

NCTE Bangalore for the process of the file which is in Que.

Now our management and college want a clear direction from your office to Gulbarga University Gulbarga regarding continuation of affiliation & approval of admission for the academic year 2014-15 and onwards till we get NAAC accreditation”.

The Committee considered the matter, written representationfrom the

institutio dated 28.01.2015 along with relevant, and decided as under:

1.Accept their request. 2.Advise the University of Gulbarga to consider their affiliation.

53

APS07294

M.Ed

Deccan

Educational

Society,

Gulbarga ,

Karnataka

KA

Deccan Educational Society, Gulbarga District, Karnataka has submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition to Deccan M.Ed College, NooraniMohalla, Ring Road, Gulbarga District, Karnataka for M.Ed course of one year duration with an annual intake of 25(Twenty five) Students. The institution was granted recognition for M.Ed course with an annual intake of 25 Students on 14.08.2007. Enhancement of intake of 10 seats from existing 25 to 35 was granted on 20.08.2010. An e-mail dated 17.10.2014 has been received from Dr. Sujata P. Shanbhag Assistant Adviser, (NAAC) with request to clarification regarding many colleges running single course under Gulbarga University. Again an e-mail dated 24.10.2014 received by SRC on 27.10.2014 from Dr. Sujata P. Assistant Adviser, Shanbhag (NAAC) and stating as follows:

“…. I would like to know that norms for starting M.Ed course in a college. Can a college have M.Ed course alone without having B.Ed course in their college. There are many colleges running single course under Gulbarga University. The list is given below. I would like to know whether they are stand alone instructions and have NCTE recognition. I need these clarifications urgently”.


1 Sri Murugha Rajendra Swamiji M.Ed

.P.G College

Gulbarga

2 Sri Murugha Rajendra Swamiji B.Ed Gulbarga


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

207

.College








Master of Education

Gulbarga






The institution has submitted its written representation dated 13.11.2014 received by SRC on 13.11.2014 along with relevant documents, and stating as follows: “….The Gulbarga University Gulbarga has refused admission process and also with hold the process of affiliation stating that the college has not accrediated by NAAC, this information they brought in to the notice in May 2013. The university had put the college under big problem for not issuing eligibility for the students admitted for 2013-14. At last we went to the court and some how we were able to make the students to sit for the examinations.

Sir, we have already applied for the NAAC 8months back, it may take 1 or 2 years of time to visit the college, at this junction if affiliation and admission is stopped means is a big course on the part of college and a huge loss for the students. Hence requesting you to please give a direction to the university authorities to provide affiliation continuation and admission until the NAAC visit the college. ”

The SRC in its 275th meeting held on 01st -02nd December 2014, considered the matter, e-mail dated 17.10.2014 from NAAC, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to send a copy of the NCTE (H.Q) letter on the subject to Gulbarga University.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

208

Accordingly, a letter was sent to NCTE Hqrs on 03.12.2014. A reply ha been received from NCTE Hqrs on 15.12.2014, with the request to take action as per NCTE regulation. The institution has submitted its written representation dated 28.01.2015 along with documents received by SRC on 28.01.2015, stated as follows: “Gulbarga University Gulbarga returned our affiliation proposed of 2014-15 mentioning the reason that our college should get NAAC accreditation with B+ Grade.

Mean time our college & management are sincerely trying to get NAAC accreditation and it is process and we got LOI from NAAC Bangalore & submitted the hard copy along with a DD of Rs.28,090/- along with other documents & the same is submitted to the Director NAAC Bangalore & SRC NCTE Bangalore for the process of the file which is in Que.

Now our management and college want a clear direction from your office to Gulbarga University Gulbarga regarding continuation of affiliation & approval of admission for the academic year 2014-15 and onwards till we get NAAC accreditation”.

The Committee considered the matter, written representationfrom the

institutio dated 28.01.2015 along with relevant, and decided as under:


54

APS09350

M.Ed

National PG

Centre for M.Ed

Course,

Gulbarga,

Karnataka

KA

National PG Centre for M.Ed course, Hafth Gumbad,Darga Road, Gulbarga – 585104,Karnataka

National PG Centre for M.Ed. course, Hafth Gumbad, Darga Road, Gulbarga-585104, Karnataka was granted recognition on 22.9.2008 with an annual intake of 25 from the academic session 2008-2009 subject to certain conditions.

A letter No.ED 122 PTI 2008 (B) dated 18.06.2009 was received from the Principal Secretary, Primary and Higher Education, Education Department, Government of Karnataka and has recommended SRC to withdraw the recognition granted to the D.Ed college(APS01490), as the institution is not maintaining Norms and Standards as prescribed by NCTE. The matter was placed before 178th meeting of SRC held on 13-14 July, 2009. The Committee decided to serve Notice which was served to the institution on 12.8.2009. The institution submitted its written representation on 9.9.2009 &


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

209

14.9.2009. SRC in its 183rd meeting held on 22 September 2009 considered the written representation and decided to conduct inspection under Section 17 of NCTE Act and direct the institution to submit filled in Questionnaire along with supporting documents. Accordingly, a notice was issued to the institution on 31.10.2009. The institution submitted its written representation on 24.11.2009 and 07.01.2010. SRC in its 189th meeting held on 25-26 February 2010 considered the written representations and decided to cause inspection under section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, inspection was carried out on 04.06.2010. The Committee in its 193rd meeting held on 21-23 June, 2010 considered the VT report and decided to withdraw recognition for D.Ed. course for the following reasons:-

• As per VT report, the built up area allotted for B.Ed. is only 4000 sq.ft. for M.Ed. course it is 4000 sq.ft. as against the NCTE norms of 16,000 sq.ft. area for B.Ed. and 6000 sq.ft. area for M.Ed. course.

• Apart from D.Ed. course, the institution is running Primary School and other educational programmes in the same campus, sharing the buildings.

• The earmarked area for the D.Ed. course is only 6626 sq.ft. which is very much in short of the NCTE norms and standards.

• As such, none of the courses has adequate space, as per norms.

Under the above grounds, the Committee decides to withdraw the recognition for B.Ed. (APS01830) course and M.Ed. (APS09350) course with immediate effect.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order, the institution preferred an appeal before the appellate authority and the appellate authority vide order dated 27.9.2010 reversed the SRCs order with a direction to the SRC to issue Show Cause Notice to the institution as required and take appropriate action thereafter.

The SRC in its 197th meeting held on 13-14 October, 2010 considered the Appellate authority order and decided to issue show cause notice. Accordingly, show cause notice was issued on 07.12.2010. Further, the institution has submitted written representation on 04.01.2011. The SRC in its 200th meeting held on 20-21 January 2011 considered the written representation of the institution and decided to cause Composite inspection. The institution was also running B.Ed (APS01830) and M.Ed (APS09350) courses. The inspection was carried out on 02.04.2011. The inspection report was received along with VCD.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

210

The SRC in its 204th meeting held on 27th – 28th April, 2011 considered the VT report, VCD and the relevant documentary evidences decided to issue Show Cause notice. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 01.06.2011. The institution submitted its written representation on 02.06.2011 seeing Show Cause Notice appeared on website. The SRC in its 206th meeting held on 9-10 of June, 2011, considered the written representation and decided to issue Final Show Cause Notice. Final Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 07.07.2011. The institution submitted written representation on 21.07.2011 for all the three courses i.e., D.Ed (APS01490), B.Ed. (APS01830) and M.Ed. (APS09350). The SRC in its 210

th meeting held on 22-23 August, 2011 considered the reply of the

institution dated 21.07.2011 and decided to restore recognition of the institution. Accordingly, the order restoring recognition was issued to the institution to all the three courses D.Ed., B.Ed. and also for M.Ed. course on 29.09.2011. A letter was received from HQ forwarding the complaint against the institution on 9

th

July, 2012. The complaint is received through e-mail from Shri. Rajaram, [email protected] regarding demand of donation fee by the institute for admissions in M.Ed. course. The HQ has informed SRC to examine the matter and take necessary action against the institution as per the NCTE Act, 1993 by placing the complaint before the Regional Committee.

The complaint matter was placed before SRC in its 231st meeting held on 22nd and 23rd August, 2012 wherein the committee decided to call for remarks from the institution against complaint received. Accordingly, a letter was sent to the institution vide F.SRO/APSO9350/M.ED /2012/46341 dated 21/09/2012 asking the institution to send its remarks with reference to the complaint of Shri. Raja ram. The Principal of the institution submitted a reply dated 10/10/2012 which is received by this office on 19/10/2012 as under:-

1. “The complaint alleged that the institution demands Rs.5000/- as donation fee from one girl student in the year 2011 Comments: The allegation is not correct; the complaint has not shown whether the girl is his daughter, sister, or what relation he have? Interesting there is no name given of the said girl, whether the girl is a student of this institution. Therefore it is baseless and false. 2. The complaint alleged that if he filed complaint with University, then, the institution shall blackmail with the girl student through out the year. Comments: The allegation is totally false, the complaint failed to show what and which type of blackmailing will done by institution with the girl student. There is no corroborative evidence found in the allegation. Therefore, it is fabricated and baseless.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

211

3. The complaint alleged that, every student who has come through University counseling have paid Rs.5000/- towards donation. Comments: The allegation is baseless, the institution is ready to show account register as and when required by the NCTE. The intention of complainant is to defame the minority institution 4. The complainant requested to authority that, check through admission letter with phone or personally and give website details Comments: The issue is concerned with SRC, NCTE. The authority has power to inspect the matter. The institution has always opened its door for inspection. 5. The Complaint stated that donation issue disclose on website in the income Expenditure format. Comments: The website detail is before the authority and authority has power to examine the case with the inquisitive mind. 6. The complainant stated that National PG Centre is located within 200 meters of area from Hafth Gumbaz which is declared protected monument as per ASI of India. Therefore take necessary action against the institution. The complaint also produced references of letter no. ED/122/PTI dated 2008 and requested to de recognize the institution Comments: The complaint is put before incorrect forum. NCTE, SRC is no way concerned in the subject matter. However, it is the responsibility of the institution to convince the NCTE, SRC. That the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains Act 1958 is amended as “The Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains (Amendment and Validation) Act 2010.” This Act is not applicable to those buildings built and completed before 2010.The institution was established in 1956 and all its buildings completed before 2010, therefore the complaint is baseless and false. In further institute clarifies that the proposed case of reference letter no.ED/122/PTI/2008 dated 18/06/2009 is closed; the authority is well versed with the fact. The complainant is raking up the old issue and disturbing the institution with willful intention.

Institution submits its contention as under:-

a. The institution has taken a serious note of this familiar ring complaint. There are wheels within wheel in this complaint.

b. It seems motive of the complaint is to tarnish the image of the minority institution for wrongful gain.

c. It is also doubtful that some vested interests, miscreants may be involved in the subject matter.

d. It also submits that, the complainant is of Shri. Rajaram and in the end of complaint the name appears as Shri Mouzam with mobile no.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

212

+919860440856. e. It is revealed after confirming that, the mobile number is not correct and

is not functioning. f. All these factual grounds indicate some ulterior motive behind the

complaint. g. This is reason to believe that the complaint is not bonafide and it is

false. Therefore such complaint is not maintainable as there are shadows of doubt in it.

In view of the above factual grounds, it is earnestly requested to the authority to dismiss the complaint.

1. The authority has power to call for the complainant with solid material and exercise the power conferred under NCTE Act 1993.Inquire as per specified norms and take proper action against complainant.

2. Demand explanation from complainant for false complaint. “ The above reply of the institution to the allegations made against the institution is placed before SRC for decision and direction.

The SRC in its 237th meeting held on 05th-06th January, 2013 considered the complaint matter, reply of the institution and decided to close the file. An e-mail dated 17.10.2014 has been received from Dr. Sujata P. Shanbhag Assistant Adviser, (NAAC) with request to clarification regarding many colleges running single course under Gulbarga University. Again an e-mail dated 24.10.2014 received by SRC on 27.10.2014 from Dr. Sujata P. Assistant Adviser, Shanbhag (NAAC) and stating as follows:

“…. I would like to know that norms for starting M.Ed course in a college. Can a college have M.Ed course alone without having B.Ed course in their college. There are many colleges running single course under Gulbarga University. The list is given below. I would like to know whether they are stand alone instructions and have NCTE recognition. I need these clarifications urgently”.


1 Sri Murugha Rajendra Swamiji M.Ed .P.G

College

Gulbarga

2 Sri Murugha Rajendra Swamiji B.Ed .College Gulbarga





(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

213





Master of Education

Gulbarga






The institution has submitted its written representation on 13.11.2014 and stating as follows:

“I write to state that the Gulbarga University Gulbarga has withdrawn the affiliation of National M.Ed College Gulbarga for want of NAAC accreditation. In this regard we have already applied to the NAAC on dt.14.05.2014. In general course it may take minimum 1-2 years to issue certificate by the NAAC. Therefore I request you kindly direct the said University to restore the affiliation pending NAAC accreditation in the interest of student’s carrier”.

The SRC in its 275th meeting held on 01st -02nd December 2014, considered the matter, e-mail dated 17.10.2014 from NAAC, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to send a copy of the NCTE (H.Q) letter on the subject to Gulbarga University. Accordingly, a letter was sent to NCTE Hqrs on 03.12.2014. A reply has been received from NCTE Hqrs on 15.12.2014, with the request to take action as per NCTE regulation. The institution has submitted its written representation dated 28.01.2015 along with documents received by SRC on 28.01.2015, stated as follows: “Gulbarga University Gulbarga returned our affiliation proposed of 2014-15 mentioning the reason that our college should get NAAC accreditation with B+ Grade. Mean time our college & management are sincerely trying to get NAAC accreditation and it is process and we got LOI from NAAC Bangalore & submitted the hard copy along with a DD of Rs.28,090/- along with other


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

214

documents & the same is submitted to the Director NAAC Bangalore & SRC NCTE Bangalore for the process of the file which is in Que. Now our management and college want a clear direction from your office to Gulbarga University Gulbarga regarding continuation of affiliation & approval of admission for the academic year 2014-15 and onwards till we get NAAC accreditation”.

The Committee considered the matter, written representation from the

institution dated 28.01.2015 along with relevant documents, and decided

as under:
