IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.1430 of 2011
S.M.SHOIB HASHMI EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE
TRUST, PLOT NO. 204, PATHANPATTI ROAD AT
PATHAN PATTI (CHOWA DANO) P.O. NARKATIYA
BAZAR, DARPA, MOTIHARI THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
Versus
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY,
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVT. OF
INDIA, NEW DELHI.
2. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION
THROUGH ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, NEW DELHI.
3. VICE CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR
TEACHERS EDUCATION, NEW DELHI.
4. EASTERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE, NATIONAL
EDUCATION FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION, 15
NILKANTH NAGAR, NAYA PATTI, BHUBANESHWAR
5. REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EASTERN REGIONAL
COMMITTEE, NATIONAL EDUCATIN FOR
TEACHERS EDUCATION.
-----------
For the Petitioner :- Mr. Narendra Kumar Jha.
For the N.C.T.E. :- Mr. S. N. Pathak, S.C.C.G.
—–
3 21/06/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the National Council for Teachers
Education.
Court has gone through the initial objection
letter/ deficiency pointed out in the letter dated
21.12.2009 which is annexure-1 to the writ application
and the appropriate response of the petitioner. In the
final order of rejection, no doubt, there is long list of
reasons why permission or recognition has been rejected
-2-
but majority of such objections are hyper technical in
nature and could have been taken care of provided the
petitioner could have been given suitable indulgence and
time in this regard.
Since the basic grounding is already there, given
in the order of rejection, the Appellate Authority seems
to have been more impressed by such findings rather than
looking at the issue in a holistic manner.
It is not to suggest that what is required to be
done by an Institution in terms of the Act is to be ignored
but the respondents authorities have also a duty to see
that an Institution which is serious in setting up facilities
which meet the standards in terms of the Act, are not
unnecessarily harassed by taking a hyper technical view
or objections, as seems to have been done in the present
case atleast with regard to some of the objections.
In the totality, therefore, petitioner is permitted
to approach respondent no. 4, the Eastern Regional
Committee of National Education for Teachers
Education with the details of deficiencies already taken
care of and the requirements as such and thereafter the
authorities must look into the matter and take a fresh
-3-
decision preferably within a period of six months from
the date of filing of such application, if not earlier.
This writ application is disposed of with the
observation aforesaid that the respondents will take a
holistic view of the matter.
AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)