Case Note & Summary
The case involved writ appeals filed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) against a common order of a learned single Judge of the Madras High Court dated 10.04.2023, passed in W.P. Nos. 34228 & 34233 of 2018. The respondent-institute, Saveetha Institute of Technical and Medical Sciences, had originally filed writ petitions seeking approval for teacher education courses (M.P.Ed. and B.Ed.). The single Judge, without interfering with the impugned orders, permitted the institute to make an appropriate application for approval for the academic year 2024-2025 and directed the NCTE to open its web portal, receive the application, and process it in accordance with NCTE Regulations. The NCTE challenged this direction in the present writ appeals. During the pendency of the appeals, the institute submitted applications for the academic year 2024-25. However, the academic year 2024-25 was drawing to a close at the time of the appellate hearing. The NCTE referred to a Delhi High Court judgment in W.P.(C) Nos. 12983 of 2022 etc. dated 22.04.2024, which held, with reference to Section 12(c) of the NCTE Act, that the NCTE had the implied power to return pending applications. An interim order by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in connected LPAs directed the NCTE to open its portal and process applications without taking a final decision. The NCTE contended that it had received the institute's applications but had not decided them because the matter was sub judice before the Delhi High Court, and that all 430 applications, including the institute's, had been returned to the respective institutions. The institute argued that the applications should at least be processed. The Court focused on the fact that the academic year 2024-25 was ending, which rendered the applications for that specific year infructuous. The Court noted that the relief granted by the single Judge had lost its relevance because the academic year for which the direction was issued had nearly expired. The Court held that the direction to receive and process those applications could not be sustained. It set aside the single Judge’s order and allowed the writ appeals. The Court clarified that for the ensuing academic year, the institute was at liberty to submit fresh applications if the committee was constituted and the web portal was opened, and that any processing would be subject to the interim order of the Delhi High Court Division Bench. The appeals were allowed without costs.
Headnote
A) Education Law - Recognition of Teacher Education Courses - Expiry of Academic Year Renders Applications Infructuous - National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993, Sections 12(c) and 14 - The writ Court had directed the NCTE to receive applications from the institution for M.P.Ed. and B.Ed. courses for the academic year 2024-25; however, that academic year was coming to an end, and the NCTE had returned applications as per an interim order of the Delhi High Court. The Madras High Court held that the applications for the expired year lost relevance, and the direction of the writ Court became infructuous. The institution can submit fresh applications for the ensuing academic year. The writ appeals were allowed and the impugned order was set aside. Held that the writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. (Paras 3, 9, 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the direction of the writ Court to receive and process applications for the academic year 2024-25 should be sustained after the expiry of that academic year.
Final Decision
The writ appeals are allowed. The impugned order of the writ Court is set aside. The respondent is at liberty to submit fresh applications for the ensuing academic year if the web portal is opened and there is no impediment. No costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Relief sought for a specific academic year becomes infructuous upon that year's conclusion
- applications for recognition must be submitted for the ensuing academic year
- NCTE may return applications as per interim order of Division Bench of Delhi High Court
