St.Tresa’S Teacher’S Training … vs National Council For Teacher … on 2 July, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18974 of 2008(H)


1. ST.TRESA'S TEACHER'S TRAINING INSTITUTE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,

3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC EDUCATION,

4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

5. THE DIRECTOR SCERT

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RADHAKRISHNAN (1)

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHANDAS,SC,SCER & TRAIN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :02/07/2008

 O R D E R
                       S.SIRI JAGAN, J
                ==================
                W.P (C) .No. 18974 of 2008
                ==================
           Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008.

                      J U D G M E N T

The petitioner obtained recognition from the NCTE for

starting of TTC course in their institute by Ext.P2 order of

the 1st respondent. Based on the same, the petitioner, by

Ext.P3 letter, requested the respondents 2 and 3 to include

the petitioner’s institute also in the list of institutes in the

State to which admissions have to be made in the merit

quota and to allot students in the merit seats for the year

2008-2009. Despite, Ext.P4 reminder, the petitioner’s

request is not being considered is the contention raised by

the petitioner. According to the petitioner, once the NCTE

grants recognition, the respondents 2 to 5 cannot refuse to

include the petitioner’s institute for the purpose of

allotment of students in merit quota. Therefore, the

petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

“a) issue a writ of mandamus, or any other writ,
order or direction directing the respondents 2 to 4

W.P (C) .No. 18974 of 2008 – 2 –

include the name of the Petitioner Institute in the list of
Teacher’s Training Institutes of Kerala State.

b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ order or directing the respondents 2 to 4
to allot students in the government quota to the petitioner
Institute for the academic year 2008-2009.”

2. The learned Government Pleader opposes the

prayers. According to him, if now the petitioner’s institute

is included in the list it would cause difficulties for the

Government as well as the students.

3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

4. It is not because of any fault on the part of the

petitioner that their institute has not been included in the

list. By Ext.P5 judgment, based on the Supreme Court

decision in State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dnyaneshwar

Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and Others 2006(9)

SCC 1, this Court directed the Government to include

similar institutes in the list of institutes for allotment of

students in the merit quota and to allot students pursuant

there to. Therefore, I am satisfied that the petitioner is also

entitled to similar reliefs.

W.P (C) .No. 18974 of 2008 – 3 –

5. Accordingly, I direct the respondents to grant

approval to the petitioner’s institute pursuant to the

recognition granted by the NCTE to conduct the course,

during this academic year itself and to include them in the

list of institutes for allotment of students in the merit quota.

Consequently, the concerned Deputy Director shall allot

students in merit quota for admission to the petitioner’s

institute also from this academic year itself in accordance

with the option made by the students. Allotment of students

shall be made along with allotment to other institutes which

are already in the list.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

rhs