IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT % A
DATED THIS THE 17'"*DAv o1r_s.EPrEMBI3I{ V'
BEFORE V A' L % V' A
THEHON'BLE
RGIITPEHTIONNQILQIZZ' .
Rem B3/its . * *
MsLAyesha.VJart::-.de;i: "fig _ .
R}oBanga10I§--%;29; .V Petitioner.
" lg
' Tofihs Govan:nentofKzirnatakx,
* M.S.Bldgs., Vi&1anaVee&1i,
[ -~Bangalore--560001.
as/2{' .7
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
The petitioner is a registered Trust, which has ii 3 _
to the educational needs of the students it-Q rift 'V J
instIt:' xtions. The petitioner has esta!)Iisl1ed2i'eellege foif'i:ng5ariing¢
instructions in B.Ed. course from theli"i'aiei1den1icii}Oe¥;Otl?.
The petitioner has made an
Committee ofthe Natieiial Co1ir;eil' {the third
respondent herein) course with an
annual intake 052; 2008-2099. The
third Annexure ‘A’ dated
6.3.2008 petitioner for M.Ed. course
with an gimme! if 25 subject to fixlfillment of such
reciutremi mayilllie prescribed by other regulatory bodies
like’ af.ti’iietiiigv.?i;Tnive1*sit3’/bodies, State Govemment etc, as
V applicable. i
i V’ .. ” Siniiiitaneously, fire petitioner made an application to the
V _ the second respondent herein to grant affiliatirm
Kt
of five years for B.Ed course. The petitioner has called ix;
the said eetnxnunication in this writ petition, ._
4. The Un,iversi13,z has filed its objectione; ‘
that the petitioner has started eoui*se_ its 1ee.llege: off;
1.7.2096. Thus, it does not meet the ‘of years of
continuous affiliation of the Uuitrersifi eeurse. Thetefore,
it is not entitled for gran t of afiiliation use game
5. Iliave heaidiififi Jois, learned Senior Counsel
for the petitioiiezgiSxill}’:e§.;.i._Dee?;i,4 learned Counsel for the first
_iSri “Ma:;o_har, learned AGA for the second
H ‘- Counsel appearing for the petitioner
‘ submits tEzz;ti”t_he.itIniversity is not justified in rejecting the request
petitioner for grant of affiliation for M.Ed course. It is
that the National Council for Teachers Education (for
it
N
satisfaction recorded by the NCTE with regard to the a*sraila.l.i_ilvitj§!’l A’
lam
iryfiasmfucture in the aforesaid college as is evident ‘ ” it
(I. m”‘””‘ _ ll
” orderfiis as under: : 4’ ~ ” rd”
“AND WHEREAS on of the. .applifcatiL?tlii
submitted by the institution: “etta_eheei
therewith the aftidavfi the “reeei”v~e¢_:l fiem the
visiting team in the form-lief eigteegraphy,
the Co1mnitteei’is’sats’etieti’tlaet::the’_~institt2tien twins
the t_he_#pm_viS;iei1s Act,
Rules the Norms
ii education
tee instmctional facilities,
measireeenei iiifaeiiitiesf library, accommodation,
eeaeeiai eeeeee, ieeomories, etc. for rumiing the
A V V” ‘and duly qualified teaching
V Vi E norms.”
liintveirer,’ the said order makes it clear that the recognition is
§i,:{ijeeie.t0 the fixlfillment of such other requirements as may be
by the regulatory bodies like affiliating university and
. it I V _ _v i Governrnent as applicable. It is also an admitted feet that
E
13
“62. From the above decisions, in our judgnent, the”:
law appears to be very well settled. So fa_t:..asiA *’
eoordination and determination of standsse-mt; A
institutions for higher education or izhreseatcito iscie1ttific’– _ ‘
and technical institutions are suhje.ct’~is «. ” A
exclusively covered by List”! ‘of.
VII to the Constitution and has no.’ to
encroach upon the legisiatureiiiihrliaxneitt. it
is only when the subject coirerediibgiiefiiitijriiifi of List
111 of Scheda1le’V__’II tothe .:h§i.there is a
concurrent asiiseli-~’es {he State
Legislatiiztjesiéfi made by the
lirrtitéitions and restrictions
the Constitiitiois. n i V,
is in the case, admittedly, Parliament has
A the which is in force. The preamble
V of proxddes for establishment of National
. Education (NCTE) with a View to
V planned and coordinated development of the
.. I e_ tesetiereducafion system throughout the countiy, the
it = ifegixletion and proper maintenance of norms and
standards in the teacher-education systems and for
matters connected therewith. With a View to achieving
‘xx;
x
14
that objection, the National Council for Teacher
Education has been established at four places by the
Central Government. It is thus clear that the field is
fizlly and completely occupied by an Act of Parliament
and covered by Entry 55 of List I of Schedule trite j 2
is, therefoze, not open to the State V’
encroach upon the said field. Parliament’ alcsfliéiieoeld _
have exercised the power by makiiig ~li1t=’e’.ii
In the circumstances, it isezxot openfto the 2
Government to refuse
Act or on “policy ecnsi;1eratiozf’–.—-
It the fibre cannot be deprived
of its authofitg egpowier ‘en appropriate decision under
the Act itrespectitieabéeziee of ‘no objection ceztificate’ by the
Geitregni”i:gy;i§1:t{I§fnioiiiW;lle1’ritoi’3r. The Supreme Court has
granted by the NCTE under Section 14(6) of
it ” ‘ii eire:-jg’ Llniversity is obliged to grant afiiliation to such
The relevant paragraphs in the judgnent are as under:
peinieeie%lieue.[‘gee¢estiper the Scheme of the NOTE Act, once
1%
K
15
“68. In View ofthe fact, however, that according fQ..1l_Si,
the final authority lies with NCTE and we iarel
supported in taking that View by vagjoos V
this Court, NCTE cannot be aepriifed o f’A::s it
or power in taking an appropriate ” it i
Act irrespective of absence _ob_iec’tio__n ‘eeftifioete
by the State Absence
nomproduetion of by -the, therefore?
was immaterial and of
74. Vt: is mus. ,CentraI Govermnent has
the iisubjeotgof secondaxy education and
educetioniet the naiionai level. The Act of 1993
. V “eieo to consider teaeheoeduceiion
the country”. NCTE, therefore, in
” . “oer expected to deal with applications for
new B.Ed colleges or allowing increase in
x ; Lixrtake “capacity, keeping in View the 1993 Act and
2 and coordinated development of teacher-
i_j; education system in the country. It is neither open to
the State Government nor to a University to consider
16
the Eocal conditions or apply “State policy” to refime
such permission. In fact, as held by this Court in cases: ” ‘
referred to hereinabove, the State Govemrnent 5
power to reject the prayer of an «
overrule the decision of NOTE. The of’£11e’i ”
Government, therefore, was eont3’a.fyV__to-_1_é1w «. ”
rightly been set aside bythe Hi§rCotu1;”- A
xxxx xxxx XXXX xxxx xxxx _
80. In our opinion, the
of Sections 82 and 83 ofJt.’1e
Actiere not be said to be correct.
To us:,,. it High Court wanted to
convey tvazs that t%__1eA’pfo”iaieions of Sections 82 and 83
1w}§>1tlti~not apfrige to anjnstitution covered by the 1993
;T}jer.__the scheme of the Act, once recognition
by NCTE under Section 14(6) of the
t’ A evezfiuafixremfly (“examining body”) is obliged to
g;i+apt’*gfl§1i3tion to such institution and Sections 82 and
A. , oftixe University Act do not apply to such cases.”
E
is
=.
E
-.
18′
requirement of the said college having five years of ”
aflfiliation for B.Ed. course. The said resolution is as I
“PROVISION TO START M £1). = ” M”
PRIVATE C’0£.LEGES.- _ issue
permitting private colleges to: ~
During the discussion, the
Universities are issuing to.:_oiii{:3te’_’_::olleges
for establisl1ine;f:t.gf it
was decided?’-to to colleges to
start such
as library, etc. with the
recommendation VLTtii’vei*sities only.”
vT£iteliViee-Chene*ellof_ot’the University has participated in the
lseid ‘of’tlié”In_ter-Uxzixrersity Board. The State Government
by dated 25.11.2007 at Annexure-I has sent a
‘ copy eforesaid resolution to the Registrars of all the
‘V V. ilfiixiefsities with a direction to implemem the same. Therefore, the
consideration is whether the University is bound by the
V ‘ ‘ ‘ A p it “said resolution?
ik
20
coerdinatisg agency fer the financial programme of the universities
fimded by the UGC and by the State Gevernrnent respectively, .. V ~ T ~
Sub-section (5) of Section 72 of the Act states .
recommendations: resolutions or the decisieps of i
be subject to the approval of the State
University. It is as under:
“The [.the_ or the
deeisions ofthe_Board Ashaiil subjeeeé,Lte’.ihee§.:p:’evaI of
the Be’i3ii1diii:’g’en”ithe Universities
in thie_AStz.£e aiiiisiiail’ bee forthwith and a
emnplienee report be sent to the Member
taken by the Inter-University Beard dated
i’2._4.9.20fi7 was’ 3 View to regulate proper maintenance of
ii in the teacher education system and the said
i ‘egeisggn iein eonfonnity with the decision ofthe NCTE. The stand
tb_.eiLTnive:-sity is contrary to the aforesaid decision of the Inter-
kg.
u ” . _____ .. n
University Boani. The University is bound to implement the said
decision ofthe Inter-University Board.
17. In the result, writ petition succeeds and u
allowed. The communication of the .1.
‘G’ dated 7.8.2008 is hereby ThéVU_1iiive1’sity» tlléll .
filmish an application form to
afiiliation for M.Ed. course is rtted’ to
file the said application immediately
thereafief; of ‘tfie’ lUm’versity is dimcted to
consider ‘ A ~ in observatitms made in the
course of with law as expedtiously as
Sd/..
Iudge