{"id":8905,"date":"2010-07-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010"},"modified":"2015-09-24T23:55:19","modified_gmt":"2015-09-24T18:25:19","slug":"amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n
Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010<\/div>\n
                                                          A.F.R.\n                                                          Court No. 21\n                                                          Reserved on 11.05.2010\n                                                          Delivered on 03.07.2010\n\n                        Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.677 of 2010\n                           Amrit Bhushan Singh and others\n                                           Vs.\n                                 State of U.P. and others\n\n                                    Connected with\n\n                     Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.17311 of 2010\n                                 Harish Chandra Pandey\n                                            Vs.\n                                State of U.P. and others\n                                            IN\n                      Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.4192 of 2010\n                             Bal Govinfd Patel and others\n                                            Vs.\n                               State of U.P. and others\n                                            In\n                      Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.15915 of 2010\n                                      Rubi Gupta\n                                            Vs.\n                               State of U.P. and others\n                                            In\n                      Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.62549 of 2009\n                               Sachchida Nand Pandey\n                                            Vs.\n                               State of U.P. and others\n\n\nHon'ble V.K. Shukla, J.\n<\/pre>\n
       In this bunch of writ petitions, petitioners have approach this court
\nrequesting therein to admit and grant admission to petitioners in B.Ed. Course and
\nfurther writ in the nature of mandamus be issued by awarding compensation in
\nfavour of the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
       Brief background of the case is that State Government authorized Dr. B.R.
\nAmbedkar University, Agra to conduct Joint Entrance Examination for B.Ed.
\nCourse, 2008-2009. Pursuant to the said authorization given by the State
\nGovernment, Dr.       B.R. Ambedkar      University, Agra on 20.8.2008     issued
\nadvertisement for holding of combined examination. A corrigendum was also
\nissued again on 13.9.2008 wherein date of joint entrance examination was fixed
\nfor 19.10.2008. Each one of the petitioners claim that they undertook
\naforementioned joint entrance test on 19.10.2008 and thereafter, result of
\naforementioned examination was declared and said result was pasted on official
\nwebsite of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra. Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur
\nUniversity, Gorakhpur was assigned as counseling center to all the petitioners and
\n                                            2<\/span><\/p>\n
said University in its turn enabled the petitioners to complete their admission
\nformalities as per their rank from the list of the colleges shown by the authorities.
\nEach and every information of the counseling i.e. center of the counseling, date
\nand admission for counseling was available on the website of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
\nUniversity, Agra. Petitioners appeared at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur
\nUniversity, Gorakhpur for counseling and        out of 30 colleges available on the
\nwebsite, Serial No. 1 to 27 were affiliated with Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur
\nUniversity, Gorakhpur, while colleges of Serial No. 28 to 30 were affiliated with
\nVeer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University, Jaunpur. Petitioners deposited
\nrequisite counseling fee of Rs. 500\/- with the counseling centre whereupon
\nregistration slip was issued in favour of each one of the petitioner. Petitioners of
\nCivil Misc. Writ Petition No. 677 of 2010, Writ Petition No. 62549 of 2009, Writ
\nPetition No. 17311 of 2010 and Writ Petition No. 15915 of 2010 gave choice for
\nDulari Devi Degree College, Bhikhampur, District Deoria, whereas petitioners of
\nCivil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4192 of 2010 gave choice for Lal Bahadur Shastri
\nSmarak Post Graduate college, Anand Nagar, Mahrajganj. Petitioners were
\nallocated institution of their choice and they got admission by provisional allotment
\nof seats and petitioners were asked to report to their respective colleges by
\n27.4.2009 for admission, failing which provisional allotment of seat was to be
\nconsidered as cancelled. Petitioners claim that within the time frame provided for,
\nthey approached their respective institution, joined the same and they have been
\nattending the college and perused the course regularlily. Petitioners while pursuing
\ntheir study, acquired knowledge that institution in question had no authority to take
\nadmission of B.Ed. Course for the academic year 2008-2009 and in view of
\nabsence of recognition by N.C.T.E. under N.C.T.E. Act, 1993 their pursuing of
\nstudies in the institution in question is of no consequence. In this background
\ncomplaining that it is matter of public fraud by statutory body, as in spite of fact that
\ninstitution was not at all accorded recognition by N.C.T.E., said institutions were
\nshown in the list of the institution wherein admissions were to be offered through
\nState Sponsored Joint Entrance Examination of B.Ed. and in unrecognized
\ncolleges, petitioners have been sent for admission and in such a situation request
\nhad been made for justice being done by according relief as has been claimed in
\nthe bunch of writ petitions. At this juncture with the prayer mentioned above,
\npresent bunch of writ petitions have been filed.\n<\/p>\n
       In respect of stand taken by the University, qua Dulari Devi Degree College,
\nBhikhampur, District Deoria, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Deen
\nDayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur and therein, it has been stated
\n                                            3<\/span><\/p>\n
that said institution moved an application for grant of recognition for B.Ed. Course
\nand submitted application form to N.C.T.E. for the year 2006. Communication
\ndated 30.11.2006 was received from N.C.T.E. addressed to Education Secretary,
\nGovernment of U.P. Lucknow and Department of Higher Education wherein
\nrequest was made        that recommendation of the State Government may be
\nfurnished to the Regional Committee within stipulated period. The Manager of the
\ninstitution on 25.8.2009 sent a letter mentioning therein that college has received
\nrecognition from the N.C.T.E. for B.Ed course vide communication dated 16.8.2007
\nand the college has issued advertisement for appointment of Lecturer and Head of
\nthe Department and University may nominate subject expert to facilitate
\nappointment of Head of the Department and teachers in the subject. By another
\ncommunication dated 25.8.2007 Manager of the institution requested that since it
\nhas got recognition from N.C.T.E. for conducting B.Ed. Course for 100 intake vide
\ncommunication dated 16.8.2007 as such an inspection team be constituted for
\nmaking on the spot inspection of the institution for grant of affiliation. On 6.9.2007
\nthe Manager of the institution requested the Vice Chancellor of the University to
\nnominate the subject expert for B.Ed course as the advertisement of teachers had
\nalready been    published. The     University, on 15.9.2007 nominated the subject
\nexpert for B.Ed. Course. The Registrar of the University on 28.9.2007 asked the
\nInspection team constituted by the Vice Chancellor of the University to submit
\nreport after inspection of the institution.     On 28.9.2007 the Registrar of the
\nUniversity also informed the Manager that appointment of teachers have been
\napproved. State Government accorded temporary affiliation under Section 37(2) of
\nthe Act for a period of one year w.e.f. 1.7.2007. The manager of the institution on
\n24.12.2007 informed the Registrar that teachers have been appointed in B.Ed.
\nDepartment according to the norms and the appointment of the Head of the
\nDepartment would be finalized within a period of one month and it was requested
\nthat the permission to run classes be given. University vide communication dated
\n24.12.2007 gave permission to the institution to run classes in the B.Ed. Course
\nby taking admission of the students from the Joint entrance examination conducted
\nin the State of U.P. It was categorically stated that the conditions as mentioned in
\nthe communication dated 20.12.2007 sent by the State Government is to be
\nfulfilled by the institution, otherwise the affiliation of the college would be revoked.
\nLater of the appointment of the Head of the Department was approved by the Vice
\nChancellor of the University in pursuance to the recommendation of the Selection
\nCommittee dated 6.3.2008. Manager of the institution on 23.7.2008 requested for
\nconstitution of the inspection team      for grant of permanent affiliation in B.Ed.\n<\/p>\n
                                           4<\/span><\/p>\n
Course. Inspection team was constituted by the Vice Chancellor in accordance
\nwith the Government Orders dated 27.10.2002 and 21.10.2005. Thereafter,
\nRegistrar of the University vide communication dated 11.8.2008 directed the
\nmember of the inspection team to give report after on the spot inspection of the
\ninstitution. Thereafter, permanent affiliation was accorded by the State Government
\nvide order dated 8.12.2008. Subsequent to the same it was informed that
\ninformation regarding recognition is not being shown on the Internet and in such a
\nsituation it was resolved to get information regarding recognition through special
\nmessenger from the Northern Regional Office of N.C.T.E., Jaipur. While said
\nexercised was on going, Manager of the college produced photo copy of the
\nletter dated 9.11.2009 in the office of the University on 25.11.2009. Said letter was
\nsent to the counsel for the University, and the same was filed alongwith short
\ncounter affidavit on 26.11.2009. The genuinty of the said document was inquired
\nthrough counsel for the N.C.T.E. who after obtaining, inspection informed that
\ndocument dated 9.11.2009 is a forged documents. Thereafter, manager was asked
\nto show cause qua his conduct. Not only this Manager filed affidavit on 18.1.2010
\nwherein he has reiterated that the college had been accorded recognition from
\nN.C.T.E. for conducting B.Ed. Course from the academic Session 2007-2008 vide
\nletter dated 16.8.2007 and as such the admission taken by the college for the
\nacademic session 2007-2008 is completely legal. Thereafter, details have been
\ngiven qua the action taken by the University against the Management of the
\nUniversity.\n<\/p>\n
      In respect of Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak (P.G.) College, Anand Nagar,
\nMahrajganj, University has taken stand, that the Manager of the institution,
\naddressed letter dated 14.6.2007 to the Registrar informing that NCTE has
\naccorded recognition on 11.6.2007 to the institution for starting B.Ed. course after
\nrequired formalities for the purpose, as such inspection panel be constituted.
\nPursuant thereto inspection panel was constituted vide letter dated 27.6.2007; said
\npanel gave report, recommending for temporary affiliation. Appointment of teachers
\nwas approved        on 28.8.2007.Temporary affiliation was granted by State
\nGovernment on 19.11. 2007.Further request was made on 14.5.2008, by the
\nManager, that inspection panel may be constituted for grant of permanent
\naffiliation; as period of affiliation would expire on 30.6.2008. Accordingly inspection
\npanel was constituted vide letter dated 28.7.2008. Inspection was carried out,
\nreport was submitted. The Manager, alongwith inspection report, filed           notary
\naffidavit, that college had been accorded recognition from NCTE w.e.f. 2007-2008
\nacademic session, and all formalities for permanent affiliation stands fulfilled. Said
\n                                            5<\/span><\/p>\n
papers were forwarded to the State Government, and permanent affiliation was
\naccorded on 30.12.2008, w.e.f. 1.7.2008, in exercise of authority vested under
\nSection 37(2) of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973. The Registrar of the University
\non 28.2.2009 granted permission to conduct classes for B.Ed. Course subject to
\ncondition mentioned in letter dated 30.12.2008.On 22.7.2009, communication was
\nreceived wherein it was mentioned that institution was issued letter of intent prior to
\nrecognition on 11.6.2007, and as reply had not been submitted qua fulfillment of
\nterms and conditions,     in term of Section 14(1) order of refusal was passed.
\nAgainst the same appeal has been filed, in term of Section 18 of NCTE Act, same
\nhas been allowed on 11.9.2009 and matter has been remanded back for
\nexamination of staff profile and for passing of appropriate orders. Details have
\nbeen given of issuance of show cause notice, and the reply submitted, and the
\nreiteration of the fact that NCTE had accorded recognition on 11.6.2007 , and there
\nis no illegality in taking of admission. Pursuant to remand order dated 11.9.2009,
\nagain refusal order was passed refusing recognition, and against the same Appeal
\nhad again been filed. Thereafter, details have been furnished that affiliation has
\nbeen obtained by concealment of material facts. Thereafter, reference of allowing
\nof Appeal has been given, with direction to NCTE to issue formal recognition order,
\nin continuation of conditional recognition order.\n<\/p>\n
       Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University,
\nAgra wherein it has been mentioned that common entrance test for B.Ed. Session
\n2008-2009 was conducted by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra. All the
\nUniversities of the State of U.P. submitted the list of their affiliated colleges to Dr.
\nBhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra, as such all those colleges were included in
\nB.Ed. Counseling for the academic session 2008-2009, whose name was find
\nplace in the list of the University. Annexure CA-I and CA-II have been appended to
\nshow and substantiate that institution in question wherein petitioners had been
\naccorded admission was forwarded by the University.\n<\/p>\n
       Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the institution also and therein
\ndetails have been given and the way and manner in which permanent affiliation
\nhave been accorded. Further it has been stated that recognition is there, as order
\ndated 16.8.2007 has been passed in term of Regulation 7(11) of the N.C.T.E. Act
\nand further N.C.T.E. treated the colleges as recognised college, as was reflected
\nfrom the relevant extract of the list of the recognised college, as on 20.10.2007 and
\nin such a situation it has been sought to be stated that there is no deliberate act on
\nthe part of the college. It has been stated that recognition for academic session
\n2009-2010 has been accorded         and request has already been made to grant
\n                                            6<\/span><\/p>\n
recognition for academic session 2008-2009.\n<\/p>\n
       N.C.T.E. has also filed counter affidavit clearly stating therein that
\nrecognition had never been accorded and it was merely letter of intent and nothing
\nbeyond the same further retrospective recognition cannot be accorded.\n<\/p>\n
        Management of Dulari Devi Degree College, Deoria filed affidavit, to show
\nand substantiate that entire action had been bonafidely undertaken, and there has
\nbeen no fraud or mis representation on the part of Management concerned.\n<\/p>\n
       Manager has also filed affidavit in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4192 of 2010
\nand therein it has been stated that appeal was filed against the said order and said
\nappeal had been allowed and order dated 11.12.2009 has been reversed and
\norders have been passed to issue formal recognition order in continuation of the
\nconditional recognition order. As far as institution of Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak
\nPost Graduate College, Anand Nagar, Mahrajganj is concerned               it has to be
\naccepted recognised institution and in view of this request examination can be
\nconducted by the University of the students.\n<\/p>\n
       Apart from the aforementioned pleadings, pleadings in the shape of
\nsupplementary     affidavit, supplementary counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit
\nare also available on record alongwith other affidavits and thereafter with the
\nconsent of the parties, present writ petition is being heard and finally decided.\n<\/p>\n
       Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate appearing with Sri Sidharth Khare,
\nAdvocate contended with vehemence that in the present case students are not at
\nall at fault and as such adequate compensation be awarded to each one of the
\nstudent and further each one of the student is not at all back door entry, rather they
\nare victim of fraud and manipulation made by the college in collusion with State
\nand University authorities as without verifying this fact as to whether said institution
\nhad been accorded recognition by N.T.C.E. as is provided under N.C.T.E. Act,
\n1993 and Regulations framed thereunder or not, said institutions were shown in the
\nlist of recognised affiliated institution and petitioners were accorded admission and
\nas such requisite orders be passed to the save career of the petitioners by
\naccording admission in some other recognised institution or by passing any
\nother suitable order. In respect of Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak (P.G.) College, it
\nhas been additionally canvassed that it can be treated as recognised institution.
\nArguments to the similar effect have been advanced by Sri J.J. Muneer, Advocate,
\nSri V.R. Tiwari, Advocate and Sri S.K. Dwivedi, Advocate.\n<\/p>\n
       Countering the said submission, Sri G.K. Singh, Advocate appearing in Civil
\nMisc. Writ Petition No.17311 of 2010, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 677 of 2010,
\nCivil Misc. Writ Petition No.4192 of 2010, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.15915 of 2010
\n                                             7<\/span><\/p>\n
and Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.62549 of 2009 on the other hand contended that
\nas far as institution in question is concerned, there is no fraud and manipulation on
\nthe part of the institution and under bonafide believe admissions have been
\naccorded and all positive efforts have been taken by them, as such requisite relief
\nbe refused in the present case.\n<\/p>\n
       Sri. Suresh Chandra Dwivedi, Advocate appearing for Management in Civil
\nMisc. Writ Petition No. 4192 of 2010 on the other hand contended that once appeal
\nhas been allowed, institution has to be treated as recognised institution and as
\nsuch there is no legal impediment to get examination held of the students of his
\ninstitution in particulars.\n<\/p>\n
       Smt. Sunita Agarwal, Advocate on the other hand contended that in the
\npresent case inquiry has      revealed that there is no formal recognition by the
\nN.C.T.E.    as per provision of N.C.T.E. Act, 1993 and the relevant regulations
\nframed thereunder, in such a situation unrecognized institution could not have
\naccorded admission and in fact University has been mislead by the Management
\nand as such action is being taken against the erring management in accordance
\nwith law.\n<\/p>\n
       Sri. R.A. Akhtar, Advocate appearing on behalf of the N.C.T.,E. on the other
\nhand contended that fact of the case clearly demonstrate that petitioners have
\nbeen accorded admission in totally unrecognized institution as per parameter of
\nN.C.T.E. Act, 1993 and regulations framed thereunder and qua un-recognised
\ninstitution, no directives can be issued.\n<\/p>\n
       Standing Counsel has contended that State is not at all at fault and on the
\npapers transmitted by University, action has been taken.\n<\/p>\n
        Shri Sanjai Singh, Advocate contended that University proceeded on the
\ninformation furnished by Deen Dayal Upadhaya University, Gorakhpur and except
\nfor holding exams has no role to play.\n<\/p>\n
       After respective arguments have been advanced, undisputed factual
\nposition, on which there is no dispute that each one of the petitioner appeared in
\njoint entrance test of B.Ed. course for academic session 2008-2009 conducted by
\nDr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra, which was duly authorized by the State
\nGovernment to hold and conduct such examination. Each one of the respective
\nUniversity had sent list of the affiliated recognised institution to Dr. Bhim Rao
\nAmbedkar University, Agra, qua which written test were to be conducted and Deen
\nDayal Upadhyay Gorakhjpur University, Gorakhpur also sent list through Prof. S.N.
\nTripathi, who was in-charge of B.Ed. entrance test examination on behalf of Deen
\nDayal Upadhyay Gorakhjpur University, Gorakhpur. List of 47 colleges was sent by
\n                                           8<\/span><\/p>\n
the Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhjpur University, Gorakhpur and therein names of
\nboth the institutions were shown at serial No. 7 and 18 for including in B.Ed.
\nCourse for academic session 2008-2009. Petitioners qualified in written test and
\nDeen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhjpur University, Gorakhpur was assigned as
\ncounseling centre and the list of the institution which was available for taking
\nadmission at the time of counseling, two institutions which are subject matter of
\ndispute being also shown and petitioners as per merit status accepted the said
\ninstitution and thereafter, have been accorded admission and have been pursuing
\ntheir studies. Later on it has been revealed that said institutions are not at all
\nrecognised   under N.C.T.E. Act. N.C.T.E. Act, 1993, as no formal order of
\nrecognition has been issued. With a view to achieve planned and co-ordinated
\ndevelopment of the teacher education system in the whole of the country and for
\nregularization and proper maintenance and the norms and              standards in the
\nteacher education system. N.C.T.E. Act, 1993 came into force on 1.7.1995 and
\nChapter-IV of aforementioned Act deals with recognition of the institution offering
\ncourse or training in teacher education. Relevant regulations are being extracted
\nbelow:-\n<\/p>\n
                    14. Recognition of institutions offering course or
\n             training in teacher education. (1) Every institution offering
\n             or intending to offer a course or training in teacher education
\n             on or after the appointed day, may, for grant of recognition
\n             under this Act, make an application to the Regional
\n             Committee concerned in such form and in such manner as
\n             may be determined by regulations:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    Provided that an institution offering a course or
\n             training in teacher education immediately before the
\n             appointed day, shall be entitled to continue such course or
\n                     training for a period of six months, if it has made an
\n             application for recognition within the said period and until the
\n             disposal of the application by the Regional Committee.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (2) The fee to be paid along with the application under
\n             sub- section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (3) On receipt of an application by the Regional
\n             Committee from any institution under sub-section (1), and
\n             after obtaining from the institution concerned such other
\n             particulars as it may consider necessary, it shall,-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (a) if it is satisfied that such institution has adequate
\n             financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff,
\n             laboratory and that it fulfils such other conditions required for
\n             proper functioning of the institution for a course or training in
\n             teacher education, as may be determined by regulations,
\n             pass an order granting recognition to such institution,
\n             subject to such conditions as may be determined by
\n             regulations; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (b) if it is of the opinion that such institution does not
\n                               9<\/span><\/p>\n
fulfil the requirements laid down in sub-clause (a), pass an
\norder refusing recognition to such institution for reasons to
\nbe recorded in writing: Provided that before passing an order
\nunder sub-clause (b), the Regional Committee shall provide
\na reasonable opportunity to the concerned institution for
\nmaking a written representation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        (4) Every order granting or refusing recognition to an
\ninstitution for a course or training in teacher education under
\nsub- section (3) shall be published in the Official Gazette
\nand communicated in writing for appropriate action to such
\ninstitution and to the concerned examining body, the local
\nauthority or the State Government and the Central
\nGovernment.\n<\/p>\n
      (5) Every institution, in respect of which recognition
\nhas been refused shall discontinue the course or training in
\nteacher education from the end of the academic session
\nnext following the date of receipt of the order refusing
\nrecognition passed under clause (b) of
\nsub-section (3).\n<\/p>\n
       (6) Every examining body shall, on receipt of the
\norder under sub-section (4),–\n<\/p>\n
         (a) grant affiliation, to the institution, where
\nrecognition has been granted; or’       (b)    cancel  the
\naffiliation of the institution, where recognition has been
\nrefused.\n<\/p>\n
        15.Permission for a new course or training by
\nrecognised institution. (1) Where any recognised
\ninstitution intends to start any new course or training in
\nteacher education, it may make an application to seek
\npermission there for to the Regional Committee concerned
\nin such form and in such manner as may be determined by
\nregulations.\n<\/p>\n
      (2) The fees to be paid along with the application
\nunder sub- section (1)shall be such as may be prescribed.\n<\/p>\n
      (3) On receipt of an application from an institution
\nunder sub- section (1), and after obtaining from the
\nrecognised institution such other particulars as may be
\nconsidered necessary, the Regional Committee shall,–\n<\/p>\n
        (a) if it is satisfied that such recognised institution has
\nadequate financial resources, accommodation, library,
\nqualified staff, laboratory, and that it fulfils such other
\nconditions required for proper conduct of the new course or
\ntraining in teacher education, as may be determined by
\nregulations, pass an order granting permission, subject to
\nsuch conditions as may be determined by regulation; or\n<\/p>\n
         (b) if it is of the opinion that such institution does not
\nfulfil the requirements laid down in sub-clause (a), pass an
\norder refusing permission to such institution, for reasons to
\nbe recorded in writing:\n<\/p>\n
       Provided that before passing an order refusing
\n                                           10<\/span><\/p>\n
             permission under sub-clause (b), the Regional Committee
\n             shall provide a reasonable opportunity to the institution
\n             concerned for making a written representation.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (4) Every order granting or refusing permission to a
\n             recognised institution for a new course or training in teacher
\n             education under sub-section (3), shall be published in the
\n             Official Gazette and communicated in writing for appropriate
\n             action to such recognised institution and to the concerned
\n             examining body, the local authority, the State Government
\n             and the Central Government.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                     16. Affiliating body to grant affiliation after
\n             recognition      or    permission    by    the     Council.
\n             Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the
\n             time being in force, no examining body shall, on or after the
\n             appointed day,-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (a) grant affiliation, whether provisional or otherwise,
\n             to any institution; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (b) hold examination, whether provisional or
\n             otherwise, for a course or training conducted by a
\n             recognised institution, unless the institution concerned has
\n             obtained recognition from the Regional Committee
\n             concerned, under section 14 or permission for a course or
\n             training under section 15.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      In exercise of authority vested under Section 32(2) of the Act, 1993
\nregulations have been framed known as (National Council for Teacher Education
\n(Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations, 2007. Relevant para 7,8 ,9 and 11
\nare being extracted below.\n<\/p>\n
             Regulation 7 – Processing of Application.\n<\/p>\n
             (1)<\/span>
\n            (2)<\/span>
\n            (3)<\/span>
\n            (4)<\/span>
\n            (5)<\/span>
\n            (6)<\/span><\/p>\n
                  7.The Regional Committee shall decide grant of
\n             recognition or permission to an institution only after
\n             satisfying itself that the institution fulfills all the conditions
\n             prescribed by the N.C.T.E. under the NCTE Act, Rules or
\n             Regulations, including inter-alia, the norms and standards
\n             laid down for the relevant teacher education
\n             programme\/course.\n<\/p>\n
                  (8) In the matter of grant of recognition, the Regional
\n             Committees shall strictly act within the ambit of the National
\n             Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993, the National
\n             Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 as amended
\n                                           11<\/span><\/p>\n
              from time to time and the regulations make under the NCTE
\n              Act, 1993 including the norms and standards for various
\n              teacher education programmes and shall not make any
\n              relaxation thereto. The Regional Director who is the
\n              convener of the Regional Committee, while putting up the
\n              proposal to the Regional Committee, shall ensure that the
\n              correct provisions in the NCTE Act, Rules and Regulations
\n              including Norms and Standards for various teacher
\n              Education programmes are brought to the notice of the
\n              Regional Committee to enable the Regional Committee to
\n              take appropriate decisions.\n<\/p>\n
                     (9) The institution concerned shall be informed,
\n              through a letter, of the decision for grant of recognition or
\n              permission subject to appointment of qualified faculty
\n              members before the commencement of the academic
\n              session. The letter issued under this clause shall not be
\n              notified in the Gazette. The faculty shall be appointed on the
\n              recommendations of the Selection Committee duly
\n              constituted     as    per   the    policy    of   the    State
\n              Government\/Central Government\/University\/UGC or the
\n              concerned affiliating body, as the case may be. The
\n              applicant institution shall submit an affidavit in the
\n              prescribed form that the Selection Committee has been
\n              constituted as stated above. A separate staff list with the
\n              details would be submitted in the Prescribed form. The
\n              Regional Committee would rely on the above affidavit and
\n              the staff list before processing the case for grant of formal
\n              recognition.\n<\/p>\n
                       (11) The institution concerned, after appointing the
\n              requisite faculty staff as per Regulation 7(9) above and
\n              fulfilling the conditions under Regulation 7(10) above shall
\n              formally inform the Regional Committee concerned
\n              alongwith the requisite affidavit and staff list. The Regional
\n              Committee concerned shall then issue a formal recognition
\n              order that shall be notified as per provisions of the NCTE
\n              Act.”\n<\/p>\n
        Regulation 8- Conditions for grant of recognition (12). An institution
\nshall make admission only after it obtains order of recognition from the Regional
\nCommittee concerned under Regulation 7(11), and affiliation from the examining
\nbody.\n<\/p>\n
        On the parameter as provided under statutory provision holding the field of
\naccording recognition, as far as recognition by the NCTE is concerned, at no point
\nof time, any formal letter of recognition under Clause 7(11) of the Act had ever
\nbeen issued in favour of the institution in question namely Dulari Devi Degree
\nCollege, Bindwaliya, Bhikhmpur, Deoria. Letter, which has been made foundation
\nand basis     for according admission and for presuming that it is a letter of
\nrecognition is in fact only letter intent prior to recognition as per Clause 7(9) and at
\n                                          12<\/span><\/p>\n
no point of time, any formal recognition order under Clause 7(11) had ever been
\nissued. Letter dated 16.8.2007, of NCTE shows Dulari Devi Degree College,
\nBindwaliya Bhikampur, District Deoria at Serial No. 64, and item No. 3 clearly
\nproceeds to mention that it is letter prior to recognition, and also clearly proceeds
\nto pass prohibitory order, the institution shall not admit the students to the course,
\nuntil it submits the compliance regarding the appointment of qualified teaching
\nstaff and until the unconditional recognition order under 7(12) of Regulation is
\nissued to the institution. Before this Court, it has been submitted by the University,
\nthat Manager had made manipulations in the said letter by deleting the said
\nconditions, whereas the original letter contained such condition. Enquiry against
\nthe Management is already on, and such this Court is not expressing any opinion,
\nbut the fact of the matter is that in term of Clause 7(11) of Regulation, no formal
\norder of recognition had ever been issued, then the institution in question by no
\nstretch of imagination could be accepted to be recognized institution and could
\nhave proceeded to admit the students.\n<\/p>\n
      In respect of Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak Post Graduate College, Anand
\nNagar, Mahrajganj, it has been sought to be contended that on account of allowing
\nof appeal, institution in question has to be accepted as recognised institution.
\nAppeal in question have been preferred against the decision dated 11\/12.12.2009
\nrefusing recognition for conducting B.Ed. Course, said appeal has been allowed
\nand therein directions have been issued to issue formal recognition order in
\ncontinuance of conditional recognition order within 15 days from the date of issue
\nrecognition order. Here also till date formal recognition in term of Clause 7(11) of
\nthe Regulation had never been issued           and earlier recognition, which was
\naccorded, it was merely letter of intent as is clearly reflected from condition No.3,
\nwherein it is clearly mentioned, it is letter of intent prior to recognition, and also
\nfurther imposed prohibitory condition, that institution shall not admit to the course,
\nuntil it submits the compliance regarding the appointment of qualified teachers and
\nuntil unconditional recognition order is issued. Without there            being any
\nunconditional recognition order, in the teeth of prohibition imposed on 11.6.2007
\nand as such in between two institution, which are subject matter of issue in the
\npresent writ petition in pith and substance, there is no difference, as in both the
\ncases, formal order of recognition had never been issued, at the point of time,
\nwhen the admission had been accorded, and in breach of the prohibition imposed,
\nadmission to students have been accorded.\n<\/p>\n
      Once this is factual scenario, then net effect of the same is that both the
\ninstitutions in question as per parameter of N.C.T.E. Act and relevant regulations
\n                                         13<\/span><\/p>\n
have to be treated as unrecognized institution for the academic session 2008-
\n2009, when petitioners have been accorded admission, and according of
\nrecognition for session 2009-2010 and allowing of appeal will not change the
\nsituation.\n<\/p>\n
        Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CBSEVS Sunil Kumr AIR 1988 2235
\nhas taken view that permitting students to unaffiliated institution to appear in the
\nexamination tantamount to sub version of law and this Court will not be justified
\nto misplaced sympathy in favour of students. Said principle has been followed by
\nHon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sunil Oraon Vs. CBSE 2006 (13) SCC, 673 by
\nmentioning that ultimate victim are students who are innocent , but same cannot
\nbe ground for granting relief to them. Hon’ble Apex Court following the same
\nprinciples in the case of Director (Studies) Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Hotel
\nManagement Vs. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, 2009(1) SCC 59, took the view in
\nsuch matters, passing of interim orders cannot be approved of. Once petitioners
\nhave been accorded admission in un-recognized institution, then in such a situation
\nqua the said two institution, Dulari Devi Degree College, Bhikampur, Deoria being
\naccorded recognition for academic Session 2009-2010, and appeal of Lal Bahadur
\nShastri Smarak (PG) College, Mahrajganj being allowed, no relief can be accorded
\nto the petitioners to permit them to undertake examination from the said two
\ninstitutions for academic session 2008-2009.\n<\/p>\n
       Section 16 of NCTE Act opens with on-obstante clause and requires
\naffiliating body to grant affiliation only after recognition or permission by the
\nCouncil. In the present case, without there being any formal order of recognition
\nbeen passed, University recommended for grant of affiliation to the State
\nGovernment under Section 37(2) of U.P. State Universities Act 1973 and in
\nmechanical manner, without verifying the factum of recognition, State Government
\nin mechanical manner accorded affiliation. Obtaining of recognition by the Council
\nwas condition precedent before granting affiliation under Section 37(2) of U.P.
\nstate Universities Act, 1973.\n<\/p>\n
       However, in the facts of the present case, as petitioners have not
\nmanipulated anything and to the contrary record in question clearly reflects that
\nunder State Sponsored Test conducted by Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University,
\nAgra, petitioners appeared and thereafter were declared successful, and in the list
\nof the college, which was admittedly supplied by the University for counseling
\nthey were accorded admission in the said respective institution. Here petitioners
\nbefore this court are at not at all fault and they have been accorded admission in
\nun-recognised institution of the NCTE for academic session 2008-2009, on account
\n                                             14<\/span><\/p>\n
of there being gross negligence on the part of the University-authority\/ State in not
\nbeing vigilant words to their obligation, the institution in question succeeded in
\ngetting its name included in the list of recognised institution and thus perpetuated
\nfraud on the students.\n<\/p>\n
       Fact of the matter is that petitioners are not at all fault and in this situation
\nand in this background, as it has been found that both the institutions are un-
\nrecognized for the academic year 2008-2009, in such a situation this court directs
\nmanagement of both the institutions to return entire fees to the petitioners
\nalongwith 9% simple interest within next one month from the date of production of
\ncertified copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n
        Compensation is also being accorded for the wrong which has been done
\non account of gross negligence on the part of the State Authority including
\nUniversity and on account of misrepresentation on the part of the institution
\nconcerned. One academic year             of the students cannot be returned back.
\nCompensation can always be awarded when there is infringement of States
\nobligation, in proceedings under Article 226, by-passing the old doctrine of
\nrelegating aggrieved     to     the remedies available in civil law suits, and current
\njudicial trend is to provide expeditious relief to an individual . Court of law cannot
\nclose its consciousness and aliveness to stark realties, by adopting justice oriented
\napproach. In the facts of present case driving the students to civil court to contest
\nlitigation, when they are in such stage of career will not at all be appropriate, when
\neither they should be in classroom or preparing themselves to settle them selves.
\nIn this background in order to bring their agony to an end, as State
\nGovernment\/University, Deen Dayal Upadhaya, University Gorakhpur and
\nrespective institution all have contributed to such situation, compensation of Rs
\nOne lac is awarded to each student. Out of this one lac rupees fifty thousand
\neach shall be paid to the student by the Management of the institution within two
\nmonths from the date of judgment. Remaining fifty thousand amount shall be paid
\nby State Government\/ University in equal proportion, to the students concern within
\nthe same period as mentioned above. State Government\/University, would be
\nentitled to recover the said amount, from its erring official\/employees after making
\ndue enquiry into the matter and after fixing due responsibility in accordance with
\nlaw.\n<\/p>\n
       Petitioners at last contended that in the next academic session, as they are
\nnot at all at fault, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of
\nDally Chandra Vs. Chairman JEE 2004 AIR SCW 5699, directives be issued for
\ngiving admission. At this juncture, the view point of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case
\n                                             15<\/span><\/p>\n
of Dally Chandra Vs. Chairman JEE 2004 AIR SCW 5699, is being looked into.
\nRelevant para no. 10 and 11 are being extracted below.\n<\/p>\n
             10. The appellant had qualified in the JEE-2003 but the said
\n             academic year is already over. But for this situation the fault lies
\n             with the respondents, who adopted a highly technical and rigid
\n             attitude and not with the appellant. We are, therefore, of the
\n             opinion that the appellant should be given admission in MBBS
\n             course in any of the State medical colleges in the current
\n             academic year.\n<\/p>\n
             11. The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs. The judgment
\n             and order dated 31-10-2003 of the High Court is set aside. The
\n             respondents are directed to give admission to the appellant in
\n             any one of the State medical colleges forthwith. In case the
\n             State seats have already been filled up, one extra seat shall be
\n             created for her.\n<\/p>\n
       On the parameters as set out as petitioners had undertaken entrance test
\nand admittedly have been accorded admission.              Had State\/University-authority
\nbeen vigilant, such situation would never have occurred and petitioners would not
\nhave been put in such great dis-advantageous situation in such a situation and in
\nthis background, it is hereby directed that as academic session 2009-2010 has
\nbeen declared to be zero session, in such a situation and in this background it is
\nhereby directed that for academic session 2010-2011 State Government shall
\nmake arrangement of admission of these students in any affiliated college of
\nDeen Dayal Upadhaya University, Gorakhpur without asking them to undertake
\nany regular process of examination etc on the basis of their merit status in the
\nearlier examination, preferably within period of next two months from the date of
\nproduction of certified copy of this order. For this purpose State Government shall
\ncall for the list of private affiliated college, affiliated to Deen Dayal Upadhaya
\nUniversity, Gorakhpur, wherein B.Ed. course, approved by NCTE is imparted and
\nin the said institution, students be distributed in equal proportion as per their merit
\nstatus and choice.\n<\/p>\n
       With these observations, writ petitions are allowed.\n<\/p>\n
Dt. 03.07.2010
\nT.S.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 A.F.R. Court No. 21 Reserved on 11.05.2010 Delivered on 03.07.2010 Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.677 of 2010 Amrit Bhushan Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others Connected with Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.17311 of 2010 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8905","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAmrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-07-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-24T18:25:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"31 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-24T18:25:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":6042,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-24T18:25:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-24T18:25:19+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"31 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-24T18:25:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010"},"wordCount":6042,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010","name":"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-24T18:25:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amrit-bhushan-singh-others-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-3-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Amrit Bhushan Singh & Others vs State Of U.P. & Others on 3 July, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8905","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8905"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8905\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8905"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8905"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8905"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}