AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jitendra Ray Goyal, J.—By the aforesaid writ petitions the petitioners prayed for quashment of the order dated 12/11/2008 issued by Deputy Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Primary Education and also desired to direct the State Government to issue no objection certificate and for approval of allotment of seats in second counseling for STC course for the session 2008-2009 in view of the order dated 22/9/2008 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (in short the NCTE) in favour of the petitioner institutions.
Since common question of law and fact is involved in these writ petitions, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.
For the purpose of decision of these writ petitions, the facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13181/2008 are taken as leading facts.
The petitioner applied to the NCTE for grant of recognition/permission for starting STC course of two years duration year 2008-2009 on 17/1/2007. The petitioner was granted the permission for STC course on 22/9/2008 with annual intake of 50 seats for the academic year 2008-2009 subject to certain conditions and in case of non-fulfillment of the same, recognition would be deemed for the academic year 2009-2010. The petitioner made a request to the State of Rajasthan to issue no objection certificate and allow the petitioner to participate in the counseling for the STC course. Since there was no response from the government, therefore, a petition was filed by the petitioner and this Court while disposing of the writ petition on 6/11/2008 directed to the respondent State Government to pass appropriate orders on the application submitted by the petitioner for no objection on or before 8/11/2008, but despite of specific orders, the respondent- State Government declined to accord no objection certificate for the year 208-2009 vide order dated 12/11/2008.
A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stressed that petitioner did not give particulars about the date of submission of the application before the State Government nor it is indicated anywhere in the writ petition as to how and when the application was submitted to the State Government and according to the writ petition, a letter was given to the Director, Education, Jaipur for issuance of no objection certificate whereas the Director has no authority to issue any no objection certificate, therefore, this writ petition has been filed in a most casual manner by ignoring the fact of the process which is required to be followed. It has also been stated that second counseling was also concluded on 20/11/2008, therefore, in this situation, the petitioners are not entitled to get no objection certificate.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the material made available during the course of arguments.
It was inter alia contended that the State Government deliberately delayed in processing the applications submitted by the petitioners for no objection certificates whereas the expert body for the teaching education has already granted recognition/permission for starting STC course for the academic year 2008-2009. It was also submitted that requirement of 180 teaching days can be fulfilled by taking extra classes of the students and also by rescheduling the examination calendar.
Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that even according to the petitioners they were granted recognition/permission for STC course by NCTE on 22/9/2008 but they deliberately did not mention as to when they applied for no objection certificate, therefore, in such circumstances either the application has not been filed or if any such application has been submitted after starting process of admission then in that situation it was not possible for the State Government to complete the process and issue no objection certificate. It was further submitted that completion of 180 teaching days is a prerequisite condition of the sanction accorded by NCTE and now calendar year 2008-2009 is likely to be completed, therefore, even according to NCTE recognition letter, the petitioners cannot be permitted to start STC course at the end of calendar year 2008-2009.
I have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. According to the petitioners'' case, the State Government did not grant no objection certificate for a considerable long time but the petitioners could not point out as to when they applied for the issuance of no objection certificate before the competent authority of the State Government, therefore, it cannot be presumed that there were lapses on the part of the State Government in processing such application. It is also pertinent to mention here that according to the permission granted by the NCTE 180 teaching days were necessary for operation of permission/recognition for the calendar year 2008-2009. Since now the calendar 2008-2009 is at the fag end, in these circumstances it would not be possible to complete 180 teaching days as per the calendar of the affiliated body in this session, therefore, it is not appropriate to give any direction to the respondents for the session 2008-2009. However, the petitioners are free to apply for no objection certificate for the calendar year 2009-2010.
With the aforesaid observations all these writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs.