JUDGMENT
Arun Tandon, J.
1. This bunch of writ petitions has been filed basically for, a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State of Uttar Pradesh to grant ‘No Objection Certificate/affiliation to the petitioners institution for starting Two Years Basic Training Course, as also for quashing the order of the State Government dated 6th September, 2004 and the orders issued in respect of individual institution” of various dates based on the said Government Order dated 6th September, 2004. The State Government has taken a decision that Two Years Basic Training Course shall be permitted to be run in Government institutions only and permission for the said course shall not be granted to any private institutions.
2. In all these writ petitions, “petitioners are institutions, which have bee granted recognition by the National Council for Teachers Education for starting B.Ed. Course. The said institutions are also affiliated to various State Universities situate in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The Universities are the examining bodies in respect of these private and unaided recognised degree colleges, where B.Ed. Course is being taught.
3. Since the basic facts relevant for decision of the disputes qua the aforesaid writ petitions are more or less identical, and legal aspects involved are also identical. Writ Petitions are being decided by this common judgement. The facts recorded in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39124 of 2005 are being stated for the purposes of present judgement treating the same to be the leading case.
4. Heard Sri Ranjit Saxena, Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Neeraj Tripathi, Sri P.S. Baghel and Sri J.P.N. Singh, Sri Anurag Khanna, Sri S.D. Shukla, Sri D.C. Mishra, Sri Yatindra, Sri Anurag Jauhari, Advocates on behalf of petitioners, Sri Rajeev Joshi, Advocate on behalf of National Council for Teachers Education, Sri S.M.A. Kazmi, learned Advocate General, Sri C.B. Yadav, learned Chief Standing Counsel, Sri K.S. Kushwaha, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of State-respondents. The records have also been examined.
5. For planned and coordinated development of teacher education system through out the country,. the Parliament framed the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the “NCTE Act’). In accordance with the provisions of the aforesaid Act, Rules and Regulations framed thereunder, every institution imparting education for teacher’s training for primary, secondary and Higher education is entitled to run such course, only after it has received approval/recognition from the National Council for ‘ Teachers Education. The requirement of the infrastructure, faculty members along with minimum qualifications prescribed, and the intake permitted for such institutions has been regulated under the provisions of the act and Regulations framed thereunder.
6. The Country is committed to “Education for All”. The Government of India has launched the “Serva Shiksha Abhiyan and the State Government is committed under the constitution to ensure that primary education ‘to the students upto age of 14 years is provided free. Such commitment to primary education cannot be fulfilled unless there are requisite number of trained qualified teachers available for the institution imparting education at that level.
7. At this stage reference may be had to the functions of National Council for Teachers Education, as contained in Chapter-Ill of the NCTE Act. It is the duty of the National Council for Teachers Education to take all steps, as it may think proper for ensuring the planned and coordinated development for determination and maintenance of norms and the standard in teacher education system. For the said purpose detail functions have been assigned to the National Council for Teachers Education.
8. In the State of Uttar Pradesh, there are 70 District Institutes of Education and Training (hereinafter referred to as the ‘DIET’) run by the State Government. Such District Institutes of Education and Training impart training for Basic Training Course with an intake capacity, which according to the parties is nearly 200 candidates for each District Institute of Education and Training. Duration of the Basic Training Course is two years. According to the statement made on behalf of State-respondents, at present there are existing vacancies of nearly one lac trained teachers at the primary level qua the institutions established and managed by the Basic Shiksha Parishad as also thereto for the large number of private institutions in the State of Uttar Pradesh granted recognition at Junior High School Level where education from Class-VI to Class-VIII is imparted. The annual intake of students in all District Institutes of Education and Training established by the ‘State Government is 14000 per year only.
9. On the planned estimated, there are 2,75,000 sanctioned posts of trained teachers in Primary School and 63,000 sanctioned posts of trained teachers in Junior High School, while 2,36,000+61,000 trained teachers are working in Primary and Junior High School respectively, therefore, 39,000+2,000 posts of trained teachers are lying vacant. There are 1,17,000 sanctioned posts of Shiksha Mitra while 90,000 Shiksha Mitras are working through the State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, 27,000 posts of Shiksha Mitras are lying vacant. Further nearly 10000 teachers of primary institutions are expected to retire every year.
10. It will at least take more than 10 years to wipe out these vacancies by providing requisite number of trained teachers for primary education with the help sanctioned Posts as well as are available in the District Institutes of Education and Training as of date. This period of ten years does not take into consideration the number of new institutions which are to be established and granted recognition as well as primary institutions which are run in the private sector in the State of Uttar Pradesh without the approval of the Basic Shiksha Parishad.
11. It is needless to emphasise that under the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, Rules and Regulations framed thereunder, one of the essential qualifications prescribed for being appointed as Assistant Teacher in a recognised institution including the institution run by the Basic Shiksha Parishad, U.P. is Certificate of Basic Training Course. Although the aforesaid Rules may not be applicable to non-recognised primary institution, still to maintain the uniformity of level of education in respect of primary education, in the State, qualified teachers possessed of Basic Training Course must be available to these unrecognised institutions also.
12. It is in this background that every year the State of Uttar Pradesh initiates Special Basic Training Course, with the prior permission of the : National Council for Teachers Education.
13. The National Council for Teachers Education being aware of the aforesaid prevailing circumstances issued a public notice date 14th September, 2003 inviting applications from institutions like the petitioners institutions, which have already been granted affiliation/recognition for B.Ed. Course, for being granted recognition for starting Primary Elementary Training Teachers’ Facilities also. A copy of the public notice so published by the National Council for Teachers Education has been enclosed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.
14. Under the notice so published and according to the existing Rules and Regulations applicable, No Objection Certificate was required to be obtained from the State Government concerned, before making an application to the National Council for Teachers Education in response to the said course.
15. Petitioners accordingly submitted an application for grant of No Objection Certificate to the State Government for being permitted to apply for recognition for imparting education in respect of Basic Training Course.
16. Some of the petitioners approached this Court, while their applications were still pending. The Principal Secretary, Higher Education, UP. Lucknow, by means of his letter dated on 6 th September, 2004, came out with a policy decision that permission to star! Basic Training Course shall not be granted to private institutions, inasmuch as District Institutes of Education and Training (DIET) run by the State Government in each District of the State of Uttar Pradesh were sufficient to take care of the number of teachers required for primary institutions in the State, it-was noticed that intake in such District Institutes of Education and Training has been increased to 200 students each with the approval of the National Council for Teachers Education. The State Government also pointed out that there is no requirement of more institutions in respect of Basic Training Course. Establishment of new institutions would A only result in unemployed trained teachers being available in the State. This order of the State Government along with orders issued on individual applications rejecting the prayer for grant of No Objection Certificate on the same ground are subject matter of challenge in all these writ petitions.
17. It appears that information of the decision of the State Government so arrived at was also brought to the knowledge of the National Council for Teachers Education. In order to overcome the difficulty of obtaining No Objection Certificate from the State Government and Union Territory, as was earlier necessary, Regulation-6 of the National Council for Teachers Education Act (form of application for recognition, time limit for submission of application, determination of norms, as standard for recognition teachers education programme and permission to start new courses of training) Regulations notified on 14 th September, 2002 was substituted vide Notification dated 1 st January, 2004. It is worthwhile to reproduce the reasons stated for such relaxation under the notification dated 1st January, 2004, which reads as follows:
F. No. 53-3/2003-NCTE (N&S) – As the country is committed to Education for All under the Dekar Framework of action by the World Education forum, the Government of India has launched the “Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan” to attain universalization of primary education by 2007 and universalization of elementary education by 2010. To attain this objective, there is a requirement of huge number of additional teachers level during the 10 thPlan period. To overcome the shortage of trained teachers there is a need to liberalize the policies relating to setting up of institutions for Elementary Teacher Education programme and for preparing teachers for Early Childhood Care and Education/Pre-school Teacher Education/Nursery Teacher Education. In order to facilitate establishment of adequate number of teacher training institutions at these levels, the National Council for Teacher Education has decided to dispense with the requirement of “No Objection Certificate (NOC)” from State/UT Government for a period of three years for those institutions already running B.Ed. Programmes recognised by NCTE and to such other institutions keen to start a course or training in Pre-School Teacher Education/Nursery Teacher Education.
18. With the change in the legal provisions applicable, the Northern Committee (for short NRC) of National Council for Teachers Education, Jaipur after inspection of the petitioners institutions vide letter 23rd April, 2004 granted recognition, with annual intake of 50 students only in first year and of the same number in the second year of Basic Training course of two years duration w.e.f. Academic session 2004-05 subject to the conditions mentioned in the said letter. Copy of the letter dated 13th April, 2004 Unclosed as Annexure to the writ petition.
19. Even after the recognition so granted, the petitioners institutions Still obliged to obtain affiliation from the Examining Body under Section (6) of the Act which reads as follows:
14. RECOGNITION OF INSTITUTIONS OFFERING COURSE OR TRAINING IN TEACHER EDUCATION
(1) Every institution offering or intending to offer a course or training in teacher education on or after the appointed day, may, for grant of recognition under this Act, make an application to the Regional Committee concerned in such form and in such manner as may be determined by regulations:
Provided that an institution offering a course or training in teacher education immediately before the appointed day, shall be entitled to continue such course or training for a period of six months, if it has made an application for recognition within the said period and until the disposal of the application by the Regional Committee.
(2)…
(3)…
(4) Every order granting or refusing recognition to an institution for a course or training in teacher education under Sub-section (3) shall be published in the Official Gazette and communicated in writing for appropriate action to such institution and to the concerned examining body, the local authority or the State Government and the Central Government.
(5) …
(6) Every examining body shall order under Sub-section (4),-
(a) grant of affiliation to the institution, where recognition has been granted; or
(b) cancel the affiliation of the institution, where recognition has been refused.
20. In the aforesaid legal background, the petitioner institutions now seek illation from the State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow Hereinafter referred to as the SCERT), which is the examining body in respect of Basic Training Course. The relief so prayed for would also Unnecessarily include allotment of students by the State Government for admission to the Basic Training Course to the petitioners institutions.
21. In order to keep the records state, it may be recorded that while the writ petitions were being heard by this Court, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dhyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya held that the final authority with regard to the teachers education is the National Council for Teachers Education. It decision has to be accepted and acted upon by all other authorities concerned.
22. This Court under order dated 14th July, 2006 required the State government to take fresh decision in the matter in light of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India referred to above. The Secretary, Basic Education, U.P. Lucknow vide order dated 21st November, 2006 has stated |at it is not possible to grant affiliation to the petitioner institutions run in the private sector for the Basic Training Course as per the policy decision of the Government. Various short comings in respect of individual institution have also been stated for the purposes of justifying refusal of affiliation by the State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow. The order of the Secretary dated 21st November, 2006 also retreats the decision of the State Government to not to permit the training of teachers for primary education rough Private Institutions.
23. In the aforesaid background, following three issues crop up for consideration before this Court:
(a) Whether the National Council for Teachers Education has competence to grant recognition for starting courses for education of primary teachers to private institution, even if No Objection Certificate has not been obtained from the State Government/Union Territory,
(b) Whether the State Government or its Subordinate Authorities (Examining Body) can refuse to grant affiliation to such institutions in respect of primary education courses as a policy decision, once recognition for the course has been granted by National Council for Teachers Education,
(c) Whether the State Government in the facts of the individual institutions can refuse affiliation, as an examining body, on certain norms/conditions not being fulfilled by individual institutions.
Issue No. (a):
24. So far as the first issue is concerned, the same may not detain the Court for long. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dhyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya (Supra) has dealt in detail, with the intent and all prevailing authority of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, the jurisdiction exercised by the Bodies constituted under the said Act. Suffice is to reproduce the following paragraphs of the judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India:
48. In the instant case, admittedly, Parliament has enacted 1993 Act, which is in force. The Preamble of the Act provides for establishments National Council for Teacher Education (NOTE) with a view to achieving planned and coordinated development of the teacher-education system throughout the country, the regulation and proper maintenance of norms and standards in the teacher-education system and for matters connected therewith. With a view to achieving that object, National Council for Teacher Education has been established at four places by the Central Government. It is thus clear that the field is fully and completely occupied by an Act of Parliament and covered by Entry 66 of List 1 of Schedule VII. It is. therefore, not open to the State Legislature to encroach upon the said field. Parliament alone could have exercised the power by making appropriate law. In the circumstances, it is not open to State Government to refuse permission relying on a State Act or on ‘policy consideration’.
57. It is thus clear that the Central Government has considered the subject of secondary education and higher education at the national level. The Act of 1993 also requires Parliament to consider Teacher Education System ‘throughout the country’. NCTE, therefore, in our opinion, is expected to deal with applications for establishing new B.Ed, colleges or allowing increase in intake capacity, keeping in view 1993 Act and planned and coordinated development of teacher-education system in the country. It is neither open to the State Government not to a University to consider the local conditions or apply ‘State Policy’ to refuse such permission. In fact, as held by this Court in cases referred to hereinabove. State Government has no power to reject the prayer of an institution or to overrule the decision of NCTE. The action of the State Government, therefore, was contrary to law and has rightly be set aside by the High Court.
25. From the aforesaid, it is apparently clear that the National Council for Teachers Education is the best judge for planned and coordinated developments of teachers education/ training through out the country including the requirement of the infrastructure, qualifications of the faculty members, intake of number of students to be permitted for each course as well as for the curriculum to be prescribed for the course concerned.
26. From the records of the present writ petition, if is apparently clear that provision for obtaining of No Objection Certificate from the State Government/Union Territory as required earlier under Regulation-6 of the Regulations framed under the National Council for Teachers Education Act has been relaxed for the period of 3 (three) years i.e. for the period 2004-2007 under the amendment Notification of the National Council for Teachers Education dated 1st January, 2004. The reasons whereof have already been quoted herein above.
27. It may be stated that competence of the National Council for Teachers; Education to issue the notification dated 1st January, 2004, which exempts obtaining of No Objection Certificate by Existing B.Ed. Institutions, has not been questioned by any of the State-respondents.
28. This Court therefore, records that it is not necessary for the petitioner institution as well as ether institutions, which have already been granted recognition for B.Ed. Course by NTCE, to obtain, No Objection Certificate from the State of Uttar Pradesh, before they can move applications for grant of recognition for starting elementary education programme including the Basic Training Course and to that extent the recognition granted by the National Council for Teachers Education under Section 14(4) of the Act to the petitioners institution is in strict conformity with law and all instrumentalities of State and its Officers are required to accept the same and to take all consequential actions. The first issue is decided accordingly.
Issue No. (b):
29. So far as the second issue is concerned, under Sub-section (6) of Section 14 of the National Council for Teachers Education, once the institutions have been granted recognition by the National Council for Teachers Education, on fulfilment of essential conditions for starting the elementary teachers education programme, the examination body is legally obliged to affiliated the institution concerned.
30. Language of Section 14(6) speaks of no exception and there cannot be a policy decision of the State Government to refuse affiliation for starting the Basic Training Course by the private institutions, which have been granted recognition under Section 14(4) of the Act by National Council for Teachers Education. Such policy decision of the State Government, as contained in the letter of the Principal Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh dated 6th September, 2004 and again retreated under the letter of the Secretary Basic Education, U.P. Lucknow dated 21st November, 2006 is declared to be in operative in the eyes of law being contrary to the statutory rules.
31. It is settled law that no policy decision of the State Government can run contrary to the Statutory Provisions of an Act. The Parliament has specifically framed National Council for Teachers Education Act, in respect of subject covered by Entry-66 of the List-III (concurrent list) of the Constitution of India. policy decision of the State Government must necessarily give away to the Statutory provisions of the Act and rules framed thereunder. Accordingly it is held that the State Government/its Institutions, cannot refuse affiliation to the petitioners institutions, which have been granted recognition for starting Basic Training Course by the National Council for Teachers Education under Section 14(4). Such institutions are legally entitled to affiliation by the Examining Body.
32. The grant of affiliation by the Examining Body like State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow (instrumentality of the State) would necessarily result in requisite number of students, within the permissible intake being allotted by the State Government to the said private institutions, and after the said students are admitted to the training course of two years, the State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow will be obliged to hold their examinations after the course is completed. If the student is successful, necessary teaching certificate is to be issued in their favour.
Issue No. (c):
33. So far as the last issue before this Court is concerned, various factual aspects of the matter have been stated in the order of the Secretary for the purposes of refusing affiliation to the private individual institution, by the examining body, this Court may record that although under Section 14(6) of the National Council for Teachers Education Act grant of affiliation by the Examining Body is a necessary corollary to the recognition granted under action 14 (4), for the particular training course by the National Council for Teachers Education to an institution, it is not expected that the Examining Body is act as an Post-Office, meaning thereby that once recognition is granted by the National Council for Teachers Education, the Examining Body, namely, the State Council of Educational Research Straining, Lucknow has to grant affiliation in every case without any actual verification of the essential requirements being fulfilled by the institution. The Affiliating Examining Body has to satisfy itself that essential requirements of the Act/Regulation and Conditions for recognition imposed by the National Council for Teachers Education infact stand satisfied by the individual institutions in question. For purpose, spot inspection of the institutions/examination of records etc. has to done. There is no automatic affiliation by Examining Body contemplated by the National Council for Teachers Education Act. This conclusion of the Court is supported from the conditions mentioned in letter of the National Council for Teachers Education dated 13 th April, 2004 granting recognition to the petitioner institutions for the course, the relevant condition Nos. 2,3 and 4 :reads as follows:
2…
(a) Appointment of the faculty members duly qualified and staff as per the norms of NCTE/State Govt./concerned body is to be completed before the commencement of the session.
(b)…
(c) The institution shall adhere to an the other Regulations and Guidelines as framed by NCTE from time to time.
(d) The institution shall within ONE MONTH of the receipt of recognition order, convent the Endowment Fund account into a joint account in the form of FDR for a period of not less than SIXTY MONTHS (Five Years) in a National Bank only (and not any other certificate) to be operated along with an official of the Regional Committee.
(e) …
(f) Non-compliance of above conditions as mentioned vide this Order of Recognition shall invite action under Section 17(1) of NCTE Act, 1993.
3. The Recognition is subject to the condition that the affiliating body shall ensure that, among other things, the institution has appointed required number of faculty members (including Principal/Head of Department), as per the norms of the NCTE/UGC/Concerned Affiliating Body.
(4) Further, the recognition is subject to fulfillment of all such other requirements as may be prescribed by other regulatory bodies like concerned body and State Government. etc.
34. In the same letter of recognition the endorsement made at item No. 4 to the Examining Body/the State of Uttar Pradesh reads as follows:
4. The Director, S.C.E.R.T., Nishant Ganj. Lucknow. U.P. to ensure compliance of the clause 3 of the recognition order. In case the institution is not found to have completed with the said requirements:- the concerned department shall with hold the affiliation and report the same to NRC, NCTE.
35. From the aforesaid clauses of the letter of affiliation itself, it necessarily follows that the State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow has to examine and has to satisfy itself that the requirements/conditions imposed in the recognition letter have been fulfilled by the institution before the affiliation infact is granted in favour of institutions in respect of examination concerned, in case the requirements are not fulfilled, the Director, State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow is entitled to withhold the affiliation and report the same to the Northern Regional Committee of National Council for Teachers Education, Jaipur.
36. Accordingly the Examining Body i.e. State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow, on being satisfied that essential conditions prescribed under order of the recognition/other conditions prescribed by the regulatory bodies including State Government have not been fulfilled by the institution concerned can withhold affiliation and the decision so taken by the State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow has to be reported to the National Council for Teachers Education.
37. In such a case, two consequences follow logically, (a) there has to be an order in writing of the State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow, justifying the withholding of affiliation of the institution in respect of examination or course concerned, (b) the order must necessarily be communicated to the National Council for Teachers Education. Communication of the order of the Examining Body to the National Council for Teachers Education would afford an opportunity to the institution concerned to furnish explanation to the Northern Regional Committee of National Council for Teachers Education, Jaipur qua the reasons assigned for withholding the affiliation being not correct/true. On such explanation being furnished the Northern Regional Committee of National Council for Teachers Education, Jaipur can re-examine the matter and pass a fresh order or it may direct the institution to remove the deficiencies if any, in a time bound manner or else it can revoke the recognition itself. This Court may record that withholding of affiliation can be for non-fulfilment of norms as per the letter of recognition issued by the National Council for Teachers Education dated 13 th April, 2004 or for non-fulfilment of norms fixed by the State Government/Regulatory Authority.
38. At this stage this Court may record that the stand taken in the affidavit brought on record before this Court by the State Government to the effect that there is no requirement of additional trained teachers, possessed of Basic Training Course in the State of Uttar Pradesh vis-a-vis number of teachers, which become available from 70 District Institutes of Education and Training as per paragraph Nos. 8 and 12 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of State- respondents, which read as follows:
8- That 70 District Institutes of Education and Training are running in the state to conduct the training of B.T.C. Course with the present intake capacity of 9400 which is to be increased to 1400 after the approval of N.C.T.E. to all the District Institute’s of Education and Training with 200 in take capacity in each DIET while the number of teachers retiring per year is about 10000 and also after raising the superannuating age to 62 years from 60 years, there is no retirement of Assistant Teachers in the year 2004-05 and in the year 2005-06 and thus there is comfortable match between the need and the availability of the man power.
12- That the State Government does not require extra teachers other than the teachers available from DIETs.
is totally incorrect and unacceptable for two reasons:
(a) number of existing vacancies in the State of Uttar Pradesh in the Recognised institutions and in the institutions run by the Basic Shiksha Parishad is neatly one lakh. The District Institutes of Education and Training with annual intake of 14000/candidates per year will take decades to wipe out the vacancies. Such conclusion is further fortified from the fact that every ear nearly 10,000 teachers already working would retire. State of Uttar Pradesh has been initiating Special Basic Training Course every year in order to overcome the paucity of trained Teachers for appointment in recognised institution as well as institution established by the Basic Shiksha Parishad, wherein Statutory minimum qualifications prescribed is Basic Training Course. This includes the number of Shiksha Mitras to be appointed every year in the ate.
(b) trained teachers being available in the State of Uttar Pradesh would necessarily result in their appointments in the institutions imparting education from Class-I to Class-V, though not recognised by the Basic Education Board. The Court fails to see any justification as to why such private unrecognised institutions be deprived of availability of trained teachers by the State on the pretext that for recognised institution and institutions established by the Basic Education Board, the number of teachers provided by the District Institutes of Education and Training each year is sufficient to cater for their needs.
39. In any civilized country a qualified unemployed youth is much better than a non-qualified unemployed youth. The State Government is, therefore, not justified in the stand so taken. The State and its Officers have only shown unawareness to the need of qualified teachers for primary education in the Institutions both established/aided by the State Government as well as those run privately without aid/recognition. Qualified youth is an asset for the country there should be no attempt on part of the State to obstruct achievement of qualification on the plea that the number of unemployed qualified youth would Increase in the State. Such an argument defeats the very purpose for which education is imparted, and which is the backbone of any civilized country.
40. In view of the aforesaid, the conclusions arrived at, it is directed that the State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow shall individually re-examine the institutions, which have been ranted recognition by ‘ the National Council for Teachers Education for Basic training Course and in case certain requirements, as per the norms/ law of the recognition are still wanted, appropriate orders for removing the deficiencies in manner be issued. If even thereafter the deficiencies are removed, it may withhold the affiliation and communicate the order in that time bound regard to the National Council for Teachers Education within reasonable time, so that the Interest of the institution is not jeopardized unnecessarily. [The aforesaid exercise may be completed by the State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Director, State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow. In case essential conditions stand satisfied, the State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow shall grant affiliation to the individual institution concerned and then the State Government shall also ensure that necessary number of students within the permitted intake are allotted to the institution for admission in the course. In case the affiliation is refused, the petitioner institutions, who inturn will be at liberty to approach the National Council for Teachers Education or to challenge the orders of State Council of Educational Research &Training, Lucknow, before appropriate authority, as may be permissible under law.
41. In view of the aforesaid all the writ petitions are allowed subject to the observations made above.
