O R D E R. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations:

Transcription

1 F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth Shiksha Samiti's Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth, Bina Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 16/04/2009 is against the Order No. NCTE/WRC/MP/APWO1799/223332/2009/R-4075 dated 31/03/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds The institution did not shift to own building within stipulated time. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth Shiksha Samiti's Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21/04/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Shri Pradeep Shah, Chairman and Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, Principal, Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth Shiksha Samiti's Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth, Bina Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the institution had been running in a leased building for 30 years, with a built up area of 697 sq.mt. and lease deed was executed from a private party and hence this might end the compulsion of shifting to own building. It was further submitted that at the time of inspection, its own building was under construction and now it was completed. It was also submitted that it applied to WRC for inspection of the new building, with a demand draft of Rs. 40,000/-. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council observed that Nagar Palika issued a completion certificate on whereas the institution applied for inspection of the new building on , that is much before the completion of the building itself; On the day of inspection i.e B.Ed course was being run in a rented building with a built up area of 697 sq.mt; From the building plan it was noted that the old building was having 697 sq.mt. and new building was having 9073 sq.mt. So it was neither having adequate built-up area in the leased building nor the new building was completed by the time of inspection and also within stipulated period. The Council, therefore, came to a conclusion there was no justification to accept the appeal that it should be rejected. (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate action against the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Recognised upto and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC

2 issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court of M.P. in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a conditional recognition order on followed by formal recognition order on under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC should not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution, rather WRC should have withdrawn the recognition under Section 17 of NCTE Act 1993, with prospective effect. Also the institution needed to be permitted to continue its recognition during the academic session , as the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. the Council reasoned out that the order of the refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) be modified to that of withdrawal of recognition under Section 17 of the NCTE Act as per the provisions of the Act. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report Written submission and after hearing oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt the orders issued by WRC for refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) needed modification to the extent that recognition of the institution be withdrawn under Section 17 of the NCTE Act. with prospective effect subject to the following conditions: (a). The student already admitted, with due observance of affiliation norms/conditions, be allowed to complete the programme. (b). No fresh admission, either backdated or post dated (with reference to any backlog whatsoever), shall be made in the institution subsequent to the date of the withdrawal of NCTE recognition. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Principal, Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth Shiksha Samiti's Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth, Virag Bhawan, Pushp Vihar Colony, Bina Dist , Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

3 F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi O R D E R 30/07/2009 WHEREAS the appeal of Bhagwan Shri Jhulelal Science College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh dated 12/02/2009 is against the Order No. No.NCTE/WRC/MP/Legal/APWO0104/223112/115th/2009/63657 dated 11/04/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds 1) Reply not received within stipulated time. Deficiency: (a) At the time of inspection, the details about land, built up area and instructional facilities were not provided by the institution. (b) The institution has only land with 10 years lease and the built up area was only 3024 sq.ft. which was thoroughly inadequate. (c) The inspection report is totally negative and institution failed to provide any document during inspection. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Bhagwan Shri Jhulelal Science College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 13/02/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Shri Gurudev Jeswani, Secretary and Shri Geetesh Ahuja, Society Member, Bhagwan Shri Jhulelal Science College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant institution did not submit the required documents to the inspection team, to avoid contempt of the Court on the institution part as the institution was a party under SLP No. Civil/CC/349/09, wherein an interim stay was granted by the Hon ble Court. However, the stay was subsequently vacated. The institution however presented the details which indicated that the institution originally executed a lease deed for 3024 sq. ft. of land for 10 years but later it executed another lease deed for 30 years on for college building area measuring 5024 sq. ft. In addition to this, the institution was having playground on sharing basis. The institution was having sq. ft. of builtup area, on four floors of the building and to this effect it submitted building plan & building completion certificate, Staff (1+7) appointed by the institution were as per NCTE norms, Labs & Library facilities were as per NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Council noted the following observations: (a) The Council noted that 8248 Sq. ft. ( Sq. ft.) of land and sq. ft. of building was taken on lease. It had taken 5024 Sq. ft. of land along with building on from private party in the name of the trust and 3024 sq. ft. of land with building on , for 10 years lease: Building Plan dated approved by competent authority indicated 1500 sq. mts. of three storey building. The Council however noted that the report of the inspection conducted under Section 13 of the NCTE Act was incomplete as the institution had not provided any documentary evidence. The Council therefore came to the conclusion that the case may be remanded back to WRC, for the causing the inspection of the institution to ascertain the availability of adequate infrastructural & other instructional facilities and thereafter issue appropriate orders as deemed fit for an already existing recognized institution.

4 (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate the process of withdrawal of recognition of the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Not Recognised and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken to withdraw the recognition. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court of M.P. in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a conditional Recognition order on and unconditional Recognition order on under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC would not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution, rather WRC should have withdrawn the recognition under Section 17 of NCTE Act 1993, with a prospective effect. Also the institution needed to be permitted to continue its recognition during the academic session , as the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. the Council therefore came to the conclusion that the case may be remanded back to WRC, for the causing re- inspection of the institution to ascertain the availability of adequate infrastructural & other instructional facilities and thereafter issue appropriate orders as deemed fit for an already existing recognized institution, as the present was incomplete. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report, and after hearing oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt that the institution should be re-inspected to ascertain availability of necessary infrastructure, instructional and other facilities in accordance with the norms prescribed by the NCTE to become eligible for recognition by NCTE. Accordingly, the Council remanded back the case to the WRC for re-inspection of the Institution immediately and thereafter, issuance of the appropriate order. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Bhagwan Shri Jhulelal Science College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh to the WRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Bhagwan Shri Jhulelal Science College, Taraganj, Gol Pahadia Road, Near Samadia Colony, Laskar, Gwalior , Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

5 F.No.89-96/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of Bhawani Prasad Shukla Mahavidyalaya, Jabalpur Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 03/01/2009 is against the Order No. No.NCTE/WRC/MP/APWO1805/223335/2009/R-4081 dated 31/03/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds Building construction of the college is not as per NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Bhawani Prasad Shukla Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 03/02/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Shri Sunil Shukla, Secretary & Shri Sanjay Dubey, Member, Bhawani Prasad Shukla Mahavidyalaya, Jabalpur Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the appellant was in possession of 07acres of land and 41,000 sq.ft of built up area, out of which sq. ft. was with RCC roof and sq. ft. was with ACC roof. The trust had been running B.Ed, B.A. and B.Com. in the same campus. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council noted from the building completion certificate issued on by Nagar Palika that total built up area available was Sq.ft., out of which Sq.ft. was with RCC roof and Sq.ft. was with ACC roof. It also noted from the lease deed dated that ( Sq.ft.) Sq.ft. of building was on 30 years lease, in the name of the society from a private party. It, however, noted that Sq.ft. RCC roofed building was not sufficient for conducting B.Ed. and other general degree courses, like B.A & B.Com. It further noted from the inspection report dated that The college is housed in a old house and a big shed. For the purpose of classrooms the shed is partition temporarily bite in sheets; Building is shubby and doesn t look like a college building; Library and labs are not as per norms. The Council therefore, came to the conclusion that there was no ground in accepting the appeal and that it should be rejected. (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate action against the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Not Recognised and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under

6 the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court of M.P. in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a conditional recognition order on followed by a formal recognition order on under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC should not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution, rather WRC should have withdrawn the recognition under Section 17 of NCTE Act 1993, with prospective effect. Also the institution needed to be permitted to continue its recognition during the academic session , as the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. The Council reasoned out that the order of the refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) be modified to that of withdrawal of recognition under Section 17 of the NCTE Act as per the provisions of the Act. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report Written submission and after hearing oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt the orders issued by WRC for refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) needed modification to the extent that recognition of the institution be withdrawn under Section 17 of the NCTE Act., with prospective subject to the following conditions: (a). The student already admitted, with due observance of affiliation norms/conditions, be allowed to complete the programme. (b). No fresh admission, either backdated or post dated (with reference to any backlog whatsoever), shall be made in the institution subsequent to the date of the withdrawal of NCTE recognition. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Bhawani Prasad Shukla Mahavidyalaya, Hospital Road, Sihora, Jabalpur Dist. -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

7 F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of Bhimrao Ramrao Ambedkar College of Education, Betul Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 15/04/2009 is against the Order No. NCTE/WRC/MP/Legal/APWO0616/223158/2009/R-4027 dated 31/03/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds 1) WRC considered the reply alongwith original file and all relevant document and considered writ petitions numbers of 2007, 6146 of 2008, of 2008, of 2008 and of 2008 with the legal opinion in its 115th meeting held on March 2009 and found that the said institution falls under the principle of Jan Seva Shiksha Samiti and decided that the recognition of the said institution be refused under section 14(3) (b) of NCTE Act. Deficiency: (a) As per the land document hq. is available in the name of the individual and only sq.mt. is in the name of the institution. (b) Only four staff are continuing since 2004 and 2005, while remaining four were appointed in January and February AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Bhimrao Ramrao Ambedkar College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 27/04/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Dr. M.P. Agarwal, President & Shri. G.D. Deshmukh, Principal, Bhimrao Ramrao Ambedkar College of Education, Betul Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that Section of 14(3) (b) does not apply to the Appellant Ambedkar College because this Appellant College had already been granted recognition by the Respondent WRC Under Section 14(3)(a) of the NCTE Act 93 from the academic session The Appellant College had got the affiliation Orders also from Barkatulla University, Bhopal since to for every year; The Institution was inspected U/s 17 and based on this report WRC decided to continue recognition in its 108th meeting held on September 2008; The Institution had been inspected u/s 13 and the report also indicated availability of adequate infrastructure and instructional facilities. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council noted that Hect. of land was transferred from individual to the society vide Order of court of Tahsiladar,Betul bearing No. 2A-06(A) year dated and based on this order land revenue record was also corrected. It further noted that the institution was having Principal and seven Lecturers, qualified as per NCTE norms; The appellant institution was given recognition for conducting B.Ed. course with a basic unit of 100 in the year 2004 and further it was sanctioned an additional unit of 100 vide WRC order It, however noted the institution was having Sq.ft. of built-up area and this was sufficient only for running a basic unit of 100, but not for running both basic unit and additional unit of 100. The Council, therefore, decided to restore the recognition of the

8 institution only for the basic unit of 100 students for conducting B.Ed. course, as the infrastructure was not sufficient for conducting both basic and additional units. (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate action against the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Not Recognised and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court of M.P. in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a unconditional recognition order on for a basic unit and on for an additional unit of B.Ed. course. under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC should not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution. As the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. The Council therefore came to conclusion that there was enough ground to accept the appeal for conducting B.Ed. with a basic unit of 100 in take only. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report, Written submission and after hearing oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt while there was enough ground to accept the appeal and that it be accepted. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and WRC s order dated was set aside with the direction to the WRC to restore the recognition to the institution immediately, but for a basic unit of 100 intake only. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Principal, Bhimrao Ramrao Ambedkar College of Education, 51, Civil Lines, Tagore Ward, Betul Dist , Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

9 F.No.89-45/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Bundelkhand Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Chhattarpur Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 13/01/2009 is against the Order No. WRC/APWO0513/223150/111th/2008/48270 dated 18/12/2008 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds 1) The College was given permission to function from with stipulation that the college will shift to its own premises within three years. The College should have shifted by But College has not shifted to its own premises. 2) The land and built up areas are insufficient in the existing college as per NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Bundelkhand Shiksha Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 14/01/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Shri R.K. Arjariya, Principal, Bundelkhand Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Chhattarpur Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the society has already started construction of new building and that would be completed within six months and it requested WRC to grant additional time of 6 months for shifting to its own premises from rented one; The delay in construction of the building within the stipulated time frame was owing to an order passed by the District Magistrate, Chattarpur, wherein it was mentioned that underground water may not be bored out for other than drinking purpose. With regard to point 2, it was stated that the institution was having 0.9 acre of (6854 Sq. mts.) land in the name of the Society, on ownership basis and Sq. ft. of built-up area, in addition to this it had taken on rent 6587 sq. ft. of building to make the total built up area upto Sq. ft. It

10 was also submitted that the teaching staff appointed in 2004 was duly approved by the University and the same staff had been continuing with replacement of two staff members. The University has been granting temporary affiliation to the institution on yearly basis. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council noted that the institution was running in a rented premises and it was supposed to shift to own premises within three years from the date of recognition i.e and a period of 3 years had already lapsed by November, 2007; The institution was still under the process of construction of its own premises and this was evident as the appellant applied for construction permission to Collectorate office only in It further noted that staff was in position in The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others, the file was scrutinized by NCTE Hqrs. and on the basis of the scrutiny, it directed WRC to initiate action under Section 17 of NCTE Act 1993 and in compliance to this direction WRC caused inspection of the institution under Section 17 of the NCTE Act on On the basis of the Inspection report, WRC served a withdrawal order as the institution lacked adequate land and built up area and failed to shift to own premises by August the Council, therefore, came to the conclusion that there was no ground in accepting the appeal and that be rejected, as the institution failed to shift to its own premises by November, (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate the process of withdrawal of recognition of the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Recognised upto and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken to withdraw the recognition. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court at Jabalpur in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a formal Recognition order on under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC would not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution, rather WRC should have withdrawn the recognition under Section 17 of NCTE Act 1993, with prospective effect. Also the institution needed to be permitted to continue its recognition during the academic session , as it was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. The Council reasoned out that the order of the refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) be modified to that of withdrawal of recognition under Section 17 of the NCTE Act as per the provisions of the Act. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report Written submission and after hearing oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt the orders issued by WRC for refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b)

11 needed modification to the extent that recognition of the institution be withdrawn under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, with prospective effect subject to the following conditions: (a). The student already admitted, with due observance of affiliation norms/conditions, be allowed to complete the programme. (b). No fresh admission, either backdated or post dated (with reference to any backlog whatsoever), shall be made in the institution subsequent to the date of the withdrawal of NCTE recognition. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Principal, Bundelkhand Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Rajmahal, Ta. Prangadh, Chhattarpur Dist , Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

12 F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Career College of Education and Technology, Balaghat Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 15/02/2009 is against the Order No. No.NCTE/WRC/MP/APWO5455/223576/2009/53295 dated 06/04/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition of the institution u/s 14(3)(b) of NCTE Act, 1993 for conducting B.Ed.(Co-Ed) course on the grounds 1) Plot area inadequate. 2) Infrastructural and instructional facilities highly inadequate and not as per NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Career College of Education and Technology (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 17/02/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Shri Niranjan Bisen, Member of Committee and Shri Lok Dongre, Vice President, Career College of Education and Technology, Balaghat Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant was in possession of 2 acre of land on ownership basis and on this land institutions building was constructed as per NCTE norms and to this effect it submitted the building plan approved by the Competent authority; The trust was also running a school in a separate campus and the building of the institution was not shared for running any other course/programme; It was having multipurpose hall Laboratory and other facilities as per NCTE norms AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council noted that the building plan was undated and also the claim of possession of two acres of land by the appellant could not be verified in the absence of original land documents. It noted from the inspection report that the institution was running in a school and no separate area had been earmarked for conducting B.Ed. course. Moreover, the institution lacked other infrastructural facilities as per NCTE norms. The Council, therefore came to the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and that it should be rejected. (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate the process of withdrawal of recognition of the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Not Recognised and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken to withdraw the recognition. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act,

13 on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court at Jabalpur in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a conditional recognition order on followed by a formal recognition order on under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC would not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution, rather WRC should have withdrawn the recognition under Section 17 of NCTE Act 1993, with prospective effect. Also the institution needed to be permitted to continue its recognition during the academic session , as the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. the Council reasoned out that the order of the refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) be modified to that of withdrawal of recognition under Section 17 of the NCTE Act as per the provisions of the Act. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report Written submission and after hearing oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt the orders issued by WRC for refusal of recognition under Section 14(3)(b) needed modification to the extent that recognition of the institution be withdrawn under Section 17 of the NCTE Ac, with prospective effect subject to the following conditions: (a). The student already admitted, with due observance of affiliation norms/conditions, be allowed to complete the programme. (b). No fresh admission, either backdated or post dated (with reference to any backlog whatsoever), shall be made in the institution subsequent to the date of the withdrawal of NCTE recognition. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Career College of Education and Technology, Waraseoni, Teh. - Waraseoni, Balaghat Dist. -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

14 F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, Raisen Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 24/04/2009 is against the Order No. NCTE/WRC/MP/APWO0667/223198/2009/R-4039 dated 31/03/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds that WRC considered the reply alongwith original file and all relevant document, considered writ petitions numbers of 2007, 6164 of 2008, of 2008, of 2008 and of 2008 with the legal opinion in its 115 meeting held on March 2009 and found the said institution falls under the principle of Jan Seva Shiksha Samiti and decided that the recognition of the said institution to be refused under section 14(3)(B) of NCTE Act. Deficiency: (a) The College is running in rented premises. (b) The College has not shifted to new building even after 3 years. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 27/04/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Mohd. Faisal Khan, Director & Syed Sajio Ali, Secretary, Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, Raisen Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that as per the prevailing regulations, at that time, the permission, was given for the rented premises and the college was given three years time to shift to permanent premises i.e. before December 2008; The College had already applied for shifting to permanent premises vide it s letter dated and also submitted fee of Rs. 40,000/- alongwith the documents of land and approved building plan. It was also submitted that WRC caused inspection under section 17 and based on this report WRC decided to continue the recognition in its 109 meeting held on 19-20/10/2008. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council noted that the institution vide its letter dated applied to WRC for shifting to permanent premises alongwith a DD of Rs.40,000 and land documents and approved building plan As per the condition laid in the Recognition Order it ought to shift to its own building within 3 years from the date of recognition i.e ; Now the college had built up a new building with a built up area of 2297 Sq.mt. and also submitted the requisite fee for a shifting to own premises. It also observed from the inspection report dated that human resources, infrastructural resources, instructional resources have been assembled and only the building was under construction. The Council, therefore, came to a conclusion that there is enough ground to accept the appeal and the case may be remanded back to WRC for causing inspection of the new building.

15 (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate action against the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Recognised upto and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court of M.P. in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a unconditional recognition order on under Section 14 of NCTE Act with a condition that the institution would shift to own premises within 3 years. As such, WRC should not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution. As the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. the Council therefore came to conclusion that there was enough ground to accept the appeal and the may be remanded back for inspection of own premises. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report, Written submission and after hearing arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt while there was enough ground to accept the appeal and that it be accepted. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and WRC s order dated was set aside with the direction to the WRC to cause inspection of the new building to ascertain the availability of infrastructure and instructional facilities as per norms and thereafter pass appropriate orders. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, Raisen Dist., Madhya Pradesh to the WRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, Hoshangabad Road, Obedullahganj, Raisen Dist. -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

16 F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS The appeal of Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh dated 24/04/2009 is against the Order No. NCTE/WRC/MP/213044/Addl./2009/R-4099 dated 31/03/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds Staff list not approved by competent authority. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 27/04/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Mohd. Faisal Khan, Director & Syed Sajio Ali, Secretary, Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that WRC refused recognition on a ground other than the grounds mentioned in the Show Cause Notice. It was also stated that the Barkatullah University, Bhopal vide it s notification dated approved the faculty for the additional division, under College Code no. 28. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a). The Council noted that WRC issued a Show Cause Notice on stating that land and built up area is not adequate for B.Ed. 200; M.Ed. 50 & D.Ed. 100 intake, whereas it issued a Refusal Order on stating a new ground which was not pointed out in the Show Cause notice i.e. staff list not approved by the Competent Authority. It further noted from the notification issued by Barkatullah University, Bhopal on that seven lecturers had been approved by the university and the institution issued appointment orders to the staff on It, however, noted that appellant was also sanctioned on additional unit of 100 in B.Ed.; on for additional unit of 50 for D.Ed. and on for 25 additional intake of M.Ed.; The available 4620 Sq.mt. of built-up area was adequate for conducting D.Ed., B.Ed. and M.Ed. with only basic unit. The Council, therefore, came to a conclusion that there was enough ground to accept the appeal and to restore the recognition of the institution for conducting D.Ed.; B.Ed.; and M.Ed. with only basic units and not with additional units. (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate action against the institution as the institution was placed under the list of institutions Recognised upto and this status was submitted to the Hon ble Court with the stipulation that the formal action would be taken. As a follow up to the NCTE direction WRC issued Show Cause Notice under Section 17 and after considering the institution reply to the

17 show cause notice, WRC issued an Order dated refusing the recognition of the institution under Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act, on the grounds that the said institution was covered under the principle formulated by the Hon ble High Court of M.P. in its judgement in the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. (c). The Council noted that the institutions was issued a unconditional recognition order on for a basic unit and on for an additional unit of B.Ed. course. under Section 14 of NCTE Act. As such, WRC should not have issued an Order for Refusal of recognition to an already existing recognised institution. As the institution was duly recognised and affiliated by the university during the academic session and was therefore not covered by the directions issued under the Jan Sewa Shiksha Samiti case. The Council therefore came to conclusion that there was enough ground to accept the appeal for conducting B.Ed. with a basic unit of 100 intake only. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report, Written submission and after hearing arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council felt while there was enough ground to accept the appeal and that it be accepted. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and WRC s order dated was set aside with the direction to the WRC to restore the recognition to the institution immediately for conducting D.Ed.; B.Ed.; and M.Ed. with only basic units and not with additional units NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against. (Hasib Ahmad) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Chouhan Education Society's Rajeev Gandhi College, E-8, Arera Colony, Trilanga, Bhopal -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

18 F.No.89-94/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Dr. Rawatmajli Dhanrupmalji Sojatia College of Education, Mandsaur Dist., Madhya Pradesh dated 12/01/2009 is against the Order No. No.NCTE/WRC/MP/APWO1777/223324/2009/53059 dated 01/04/2009 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds Reply not received within stipulated time. Deficiency: (a) The institution is functioning in a rented building even after the expiry of 3 years. (b) Land and built-up area is inadequate. (c) Staff is not present on the day of inspection. (d) Classroom size and multipurpose hall size is not adequate. Other courses are being run in the same building. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Dr. Rawatmajli Dhanrupmalji Sojatia College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 23/02/2009 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. AND WHEREAS Smt. Madhulika, Manager and Shri Kataria, Office in-charge, Dr. Rawatmajli Dhanrupmalji Sojatia College of Education, Mandsaur Dist., Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the appellant did not receive any Show Cause Notice so it could not reply to WRC; At the time of inspection the new building was under construction and staff could not be presented before the team as the staff members were on leave; It was further submitted that the institution was in possession of 2.45 hectare of land on which a building with a built up area of Sq. ft. existed and it earmarked space for conducting B.Ed. as per NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: (a) The Council noted that the institution had been conducting B.Ed. course in a rented premises and as per the NCTE norms it was bound to shift to own premises within a stipulated period of 3 years from the date of recognition, i.e.26th Sep 05 (w.e.f session). It was further noted from the report of inspection conducted by the NCTE that the institution was having only 10, 000 sq. ft. of built up area and it was not having multipurpose hall, laboratory etc. The Council, therefore, came to the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and that it should be rejected. (b). The Council observed that as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 6146/2008 filed by Subhash Rahangdale Vs. NCTE & Others the institution was got inspected by the NCTE Hqrs and as a sequel to the report of the inspection, WRC was directed to issue a Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act to initiate the process of withdrawal of recognition of the institution as the institution was placed