ADARSH SHIKSHA MAHAVIDYALAYA AND OTHERS versus SUBHASH RAHANGDALE AND OTHERS

Citation: [2012] 2 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 06-01-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.S. SINGHVI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

(2012] 2 S.C.R. 1 
ADARSH SHIKSHA MAHAVIDYALAYA AND OTHERS 
v. 
SUBHASH RAHANGDALE AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 104 of 2012) 
. JANUARY 06, 2012 
[G.S. SINGHVI AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.) 
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION 
ACT, 1993: 
Object of its enactment - Discussed. 
Teachers - Role of, in Education system - Necessity of 
adequate teacher training - Discussed. 
A 
B 
Public Interest Litigation -
Writ petition praying for issue D 
of direction tO the NCTE for ensuring proper maintenance of 
norms and standards in the teacher education system -
Whether High Court committed an error in entertaining writ 
petition filed in the name of public interest litigation without 
making enquiry into the background of petitioner and his 
E 
special interest in the field of teacher education and ordering· 
an inquiry into the allegations of irregularities committed in 
the matter of recognition and affiliation of self-financed private 
institutions and admission of the students by such institutions 
- Held: Writ petitioner was seeking to highlight grave 
F 
irregularities committed by the Western Regional Committee 
of NCTE in granting recognition to private institutions who did 
not fulfill the mandatory conditions relating to financial 
resources, accommodation, library, laboratory and other 
physical infrastructure and qualified staff and admitted G 
students who had either not passed the entrance test or had 
not appeared for the centralised counselling conducted under 
the directions issued by the State Government - Therefore, 
it cannot be said that High Court committed error in 
1 
H 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 2 S.C.R. 
A entertaining the writ petition and in ordering the enquiry -
Directions passed - National Council for Teacher Education 
(Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2005 and 
2007 -
Regulation~ 7(2) and (3). 
8 
ss.14(3), 15(3) - Conditions prescribed ulss.14(3), 15(3) 
-
Grant of recognition -
Held: Regional, Committees 
established u/s. 20 of the Act are duty bound to ensure that 
no private institution offering or intending to offer a course or 
·training in teacher education is granted recognition unless it 
C satisfies the conditions specified in s.14(3)(a) and Regulations 
7 and 8 of the Regulations. Likewise, no recognised institution 
intending to start any new course or training in teacher 
education shall be granted permission unless it satisfies the 
conditions specified in s.15(3)(a) of the 1993 Act and the 
relevant Regulations -
National Council for Teacher 
D Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 
2005 and 2007 - Regulations 7, 8. 
ss.14(3), 15(3) - Recognition - Date of effect -
Held: 
Recognition granted by the Regional Committees uls.14(3)(a} 
E read with Regulations 7 and 8 of the Regulations and 
permission granted u/s. 15(3)(a) read with the relevant 
Regulations shall operate prospectively, i.e., from the date of 
communication of the order of recognition or permission, as 
the case may be - Neither the NCTE nor the University can 
F make it retrospective in nature - National Council for Teacher 
Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 
2005 and 2007 - Regulations 7, 8. 
ss.14(3), 15(3) - Discontinuance of course or training 
when recognition is refused/withdrawn - Held: . If the 
G recognition is refused u/s.14(3)(b) after affording reasonable 
opportunity to the applicant to make a written representation, 
the concerned institution is required to discontinue the course 
or training from the end of the academic session next following 
the date of receipt of the order -
Similarly, withdrawal of 
H recognition becomes effective from the end of the academic 
ADARSH SHIKSHA MAHAVIDYALAYA v. SUBHASH 
3 
RAHANGDALE 
session next following the date of communication of the order A 
of withdrawal . 
s.18 -
Right of appeal - Held: Any institution aggrieved 
by the decision of the Western Regional Committee to reject 
the application for recognition or for permission to start a new 8 
course or training or withdrawal of recognition uls. 17 shall be 
free to avail remedy of appeal uls. 18 of the Act. 
EDUCA TIONIEDUCA T/ONAL INSTITUTIONS: 
Recognised/Unrecognised institutions - Entitlement of c 
students to appear in the examination - Held: The students 
admitted by unrecognised institution and institutions which are 
not affiliated to any examining body are not entitled to appear 
in the examination conducted by the examining body or any 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.