Annai Sathiya Institute's Student's Welfare Association vs State of Tamil Nadu

P. Shanmugant, J.—Petitioner Association has prayed for the issue of a direction to the Respondents to allow the members of the

Association to sit for the examination for Diploma in Teacher Training.

Petitioner is an Association registered recently on 26.5.1999 said to be consisting of students of Annai Sathiya Institute from 1992-93 onwards.

According to the Petitioners the recognition granted to the said Institute is intact till date. But, however, subsequently the said recognition was

quashed by the Division Bench of this Court. Thereafter, the Institute filed a Writ Petition No. 5022 of 1995 wherein this Court specifically

observed that the Institute is an ""existing Institution"" and it is for the National Council for Teacher Education to consider the case afresh. In another

writ petition in W.P. No. 7654 of 1998, this Court directed that the members of the Association could be allowed to remit fees for writing

examinations. Under those circumstances, the Petitioner seeks for a direction to allow the members to sit for examination.

Learned Government Pleader took notice on behalf of the Respondents and opposed the relief.

4.I have heard the counsel and the learned Government Pleader and considered the matter carefully. At the outset, it has to be stated that after

going through the averments, it is clearly seen that the Petitioner has suppressed the vital and important facts relating to the recognition and the

subsequent orders of this Court. It is obvious from the facts that there is a conserted attempt to get orders from this Court for writing examination

and getting the certificate as if they have gone through the recognised course.

In a series of writ petitions filed in reference to this Institution, the last writ petition was W.P. No. 7654 of 1998 wherein S.S. Subramani, J in

his judgment dated 22.7.1998, after detailed examination of the issue, negatived the identical relief on behalf of the institution. The prayer in that

Writ Petition was, for a direction to permit the students of the Institute to appear for the examination. This Court after referring to the history of the

Institution, and the several writ petitions ordered in reference to the Institution, held that the Institute is not a recognised Institute. However, this

Court gave liberty to the National Council for Teachers Education to decide that question whether the Institute is an ""existing Institution"" under the

Act and whether it is entitled to recognition. And, this Court observed, the students are not entitled to sit for examination, after referring to the

judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Central Board of Secondary Education Vs. Nikhil Gulati and Another, , wherein Then-Lordships have

held as follows:

Occasional aberrations such as these, whereby ineligible students are permitted, under Court orders, to undertake Board and or University

examinations, have caught the attention of this Court many a time. To add to it further, the Courts have almost always observed that the instance of

such aberratiions should not be treated as a precedent in future. Such casual discretions by the Court is nothing but an abuse of the process;

Moreso when the High Court at its level itself becomes conscious that the decision was wrong and was not worth repeating as a precedent. And

yet it is repeated time and again. Having said this much, we hope and trust that unless the High Court can justify its decision on principle and

precept, it should better desist from passing such orders, for it puts the ""Rule of Law"" to a mockery, and promotes rather the ""Rule of Man"".

The said judgment was confirmed in Writ Appeal No. 912 of 1998 dated 24.7.1998. Subsequently, the National Council for Teacher Education in

their order dated 19.5.1999 in paragraph 10 held as follows:

It has been clearly established that the Appellant institution (Annai Sathiya Teacher Training Institute for Women, Periyakumatti, Chidambaram

T.K., Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu) was not an existing institution on the appointed day as it did not have the recognition from the State

Government of Tamil Nadu. Hence it is an institution which can apply for recognition to NCTE only to obtaining a No Objection Certificate from

the State Government of Tamil Nadu as required under the NCTE Regulations....any now therefore the Council hereby rejects the appeal and

confirms the Order appealed against.

It was the order of the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Tamil Nadu in his capacity as Appellate Authority on

4th October 1994 rejected the appeal of Annai Sathiya Teacher Training Institute against the order of the Deputy Director, DTERT dated 2nd

February, 1994 and that refusing the recognition of the said Teacher Training Institute.

Thus it could be seen that the following authorities have negatived the case for recognition of the Annai Sathiya (Women) Teacher Training

Institute.

Sl. No. Date of order Authority passsing Remarsk

the order

1 2.4.1994 Deputy Director, Rejecting the

DTERT. recognition to the said

Teacher Training

Institute.

4.10.1994 Director, Rejecting the appeal

Directorate of against the order of the

Teacher Education,Deputy Director.

Research and

Training.

21.7.1998 Regional Director, Direct the Institute to

National Council Obtain N.O.C. from

for Teacher the Govt of Tamil

Education, Nadu to examine the

Southern Regional application for

Committee, recognition as per the

Bangalore. act;

19.5.1999 National Council Rejecting their appeal

for Teacher and confirming the

Education. order of the NCTE,

Southern Regional

Committee, dt.

21.7.1998.

Apart from these concurrent orders passed by the authorities both under the old systems as well as NCTE Act, it could be seen that the

recognition of the Petitioner Institute was quashed by the Division Bench of this Honourable Court in W.P. No. 9494 of 1992 dated 30.6.1993

(P.M Joseph v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. 1993 Writ L.R.617). The Division Bench was dealing with recognition of about 250 Teacher

Training Institutes. There were several batches of writ petitions and majority of them were relating to the validity of orders of recognition granted to

the Institution and another batch related to the challenge by these Institutions to the recognition Rules framed by the Government. In a batch of

Writ Petitions reported in C. Stephenson Roobasingh v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. 1993 Writ L.R. 544, the Division Bench upheld the validity

of Tamil Nadu Minority Schools (Recognition and Payment of Grant) Rules (1977) etc. and G.O. Ms. No. 536 dated 17.5.1989 etc. All the

Institutions including the Petitioner-Institutions were parties to this batch of writ petitions. In another batch of writ petitions, in P.M. Joseph v. State

of Tamil Nadu 1993 WLR 604, the Division Bench quashed the recognition granted in violation of the Rules in reference to about 250 institutions.

By judgment dated 24.4.1993 the recognition granted in favour of Annai Sathiya Teacher Training Institute for Women was held valid whereas the

recognition granted in favour of Annai Sathiya Teacher Training Institute for Men was found invalid. Subsequently, on a review of the order dated

30.6.1993, the Division Bench after once again going through the factual materials placed before the Division Bench wherein Institute contested the

matter seriously reported in P.M. Joseph v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. 1993 Writ L.R. 617, it was held that the Institution stands on the same

pedestal as other Institutions whose orders of recognition was quashed and there is no justification for making a different order. The recognition

order to Annai Sathiya Teacher Training Institute (Women) was declared as invalid. It was pertinent to note that the Division Bennch observed that

it is open to the Institute to make appropriate representation to the Government to seek for recognition if they fulfilled the orders required in the

Government Order. The Institution appears to have filed an application on 4.10,1993 and the same was rejected. Thereafter, it appears that the

Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Director of Teacher Education which was also dismissed. It was challenged in Writ Petition No. 5022 of

1995 and in Writ Appeal No. 624 of 1997 and the said Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal was disposed of giving liberty to the Institution to move

National Council for Teacher Education. It is under those circumstances, the Petitioner again moved Writ Petition No. 7654 of 1998 and obtained

an interim order for the students to write the examinations. It is pertinent to note that this Writ Petition was filed during the Mid Summer Vacation

and Ultimately the Writ Petition was dismissed by order dated 22.7.1998.

Thereafter, the Petitioner filed appeals and the appeals were dismissed by the National Council for Teacher Education by order dated

19.5.1999.

It is pertinent to note that in spite of the series of rejection and dismissal orders both before the authorities as well as before this Court, the

present Writ Petition is filed again during the summer vacation on 31.5.1999 and the learned judge before whom it came up, directed that the

matters to be posted on 7.6.1999.

Thus it could be seen that the issue which has been concluded against the Institute is sought to be reopened through the Petitioners under the

guise of an Welfare Association. While the Petitioner is able to set out various details, conspicuously ommitted to refer the orders passed by the

National Council for Teachers Education. There is absolutely no scope for reopening the issue which has been concluded by the Division Bench

after elaborate consideration on the issue in T.M. Joseph v. State of Tamil Nadu 1993 Writ L.R. 605. The said findings that the Petitioner Institute

is not eligible for recognition under the then existing Rules reported in C. Stephenson Roobasingh v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. 1993 Writ L.R.

544 viz., Tamil Nadu Minority Schools (Recognition and Payment of Grant) Rules, 1977 and G.O. Ms. No. 536 dated 17.5.1989 and the

subsequent orders passed by the National Council under the new act National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 and the Regulations

framed thereunder has become final.

While the Petitioner have referred to the interim orders obtained in W.P. No. 7654 of 1998, but omitted to mention the ultimate result of the

Writ Petition wherein this Court held that prima facie the Petitioner Institute is not a recognised Institute and the students cannot be permitted to

write the examinations. Petitioners has tried to obtain a contrary order to write the examination while the writ petition filed by the Institute for the

identical relief are negatived. Considering the fact that the issue has been kept alive from the year 1992, since thousands of Writ Petitions have

been filed in reference to teeacher training schools and in so far as the Annai Sathiya Teacher Training Insititute is concerned, they had been raising

this question of recognition and that the Petitioner in their affidavit have set out various details, they must be presumed to know the results of the

writ petition as well as the final orders passed by the National Council for Teacher Education. Therefore, I am firmly one of the view that this writ

petition is filed by sheer abuse of process of the Court to take an order to write the examination at any cost without regard to the realities and the

contrary orders passed by the authorities. As observed by the Honourable Supreme court, in Central Board of Secondary Education Vs. Nikhil

Gulati and Another, , referred above, to permit the ineligible students to write the examination will be an abrasion. It was further observed that the

Court should not exercise the discretion casually and it would be nothing but an abuse of the process of Court. The decisions of the Honourable

Supreme Court deprecating the practice of allowing the students of unrecognized Institute are many-vide C.B.S.E. and Another Vs. P. Sunil

Kumar and Others, , A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Another, and State of Tamil Nadu and

Ors. v. St. Joseph Teacher Training Institute and Anr. 1993 Writ L.R. 830.

After going through the affidavit and hearing the counsel, I am of the view that this writ petition is not bona fide one and is one preferred by

abuse of process of Court by suppressing the real materials and facts as set out above. Therefore, learned Government Pleader is right in

requesting dismissal of the writ petition with exemplary costs. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I have no hesitation in dismissing

the Writ Petition since there is absolutely no ground to grant the relief sought for by the Petitioner and for the reasons stated above, the writ petition

is dismissed with costs of Rs. 5000/-. Consequently W.M.P. No. 13380 of 1998 is closed.