Minutes of 269 th SRC Meeting – 01 - 02 July, 2014

269th Meeting of SRC 1 – 2 July, 2014

(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

1

SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

BANGALORE

Minutes of the 269th Meeting of SRC held at the

Conference Hall of NCTE, Bangalore on 01-02 July, 2014

The following Persons attended the Meeting:-

1. Shri S.Sathyam I.A.S (Retired) - Chairman

2. Prof. K. Dorasami - Member

3. Dr.M.P.Vijaykumar, - Member

4. Prof. M.S. Lalithamma. - Member

5. Dr. R. Ayyappan - Representative of the Deputy Director SCERT (TN) Govt. of Tamilnadu 6. Dr. P. Revathi Reddy. Non-Member

Regional Director - Convenor

1.The following Members/Representative did not attend the Meeting.

Prof. Sandeep Ponnala, Member, Dr. (Smt.) Padma Sarangapani, Member,

and the Representatives of the Govts. of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka,

Kerala, U.T’s of Lakshadweep, Pondicherry & Andaman & Nicobar Islands.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

2

SOUTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

BANGALORE MINUTES OF 269th MEETING OF SRC-NCTE

1 Confirmation of Minutes of 268th Meeting held on 03-04 – June, 2014.

Confirmed

2 Action Taken Report (ATR) on the Minutes of 267th Meeting held on 12th – 13th May, 2014.

Noted

Consideration of Court Cases: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course

Name of the institutions

State

Remarks

1) APS00266

H.P.T

Hindi Shikshak

Prashikshan

Mahavidhyalay,

Karimnagar,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan Mahavidhyalay, Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh

Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan Mahavidhyalay, Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh was granted recognition for offering H.P.T Course with an intake of 60 students vide order dated 17.09.2001.

An application was submitted by Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan Mahavidyaalay, Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh for grant of recognition to H.P.T ,course in the office of SRC-NCTE, Bangalore on 09.04.1999.

The application was processed as per the provisions contained in Rules and Regulation, Norms and Standards vogue at that point of time and the recognition was granted to the institution vide order dt 17.09.2001 with stipulated conditions.

The institution in its letter dated 28.12.2008 has submitted proposal for shifting the

H.P.T course to the new location. With D.D of Rs 40,000/- vide no-630787 dated

24.06.2009. Inspection of the institution was conducted on 08.02.2011.

The SRC in its 206th meeting held on 9th and 10th June 2010, considered the VT Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 07.07.2011. The institution has submitted its written representation along with relevant documents on 30.07.2011 received on


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

3

04.08.2011. The SRC in its 211th Meeting held on 21st-23rd September, 2011 considered the

written reply of the institution dt. 30.07.2011 on the above matter and also the

relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition as the

reply is unsatisfactory & unconvincing for the following reasons:-

1. As per BCC report, 713.33 sq.mts of the building is roofed with AC sheets 2. As per the records submitted by the management, the land is on a private

lease deed for 30 years in individual name executed on 19.03.2008, and private lease in the individual name is not acceptable, and against the norms of NCTE.

3. The Affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper in the prescribed format with notary attestation is to be submitted.

4. The institute has not submitted the Land usage certificate from a competent Govt. authority.

5. FDRs for Rs. 5 lacs and 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively in joint account from a Nationalized Bank is to be submitted

6. Salaries are paid in cash instead of through Bank. Based on the above points the committee decided to withdraw the recognition of

the B.Ed (AOS00266) course run by the Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan

Mahavidhyalay, Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh from the academic year 2012-

13, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in HPT course, if any, to

complete their course.

Accordingly, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 30/08/2011.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to

NCTE-Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order dated 20/03/2012 confirms the

order appealed against.

A notice was received form Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No. 17118 of 2012

The petitioner was praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed

herein the High court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order of direction

more particularly one in the mature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the

2nd respondent the renewal of recognition of the petitioner institution vide

proceedings F.No. APS00266/HPT/Andhra Pradesh/2011-12/32326 dated

15/11/2011 and confirming the same by the 1st respondent in proceedings F.No.89-

460/2011 Appeal/2nd Meeting-2012 dated 20/03/2012 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary

to the law and set aside the same consequently direct the respondents to grant the

renewal of recognition to the petitioner institution for the academic year 2012-13.”

At request for filing counter, post after one week finally”.

A letter was sent to Sri Madhav Rao vide letter no. F.SRO/APS00266-

HPT/NCTE/2012-2013/45397 dated 22/08/2012, enclosing brief of the case to


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

4

defend the case and to file counter affidavit. Reply from the advocate not received

so far, hence, followed by reminder on 26.02.2013.

In the meantime, this office has received court order from the Hon’ble High Court of

Andhra Pradesh, W.P.No.17118 of 2012 dated 03/08/2012 stating that

“…this writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent no. 2

in rejecting the petitioners application for renewal of recognition for running D.Ed

(Hindi Pandit) course as confirmed by order, dated 20/03/2012 of respondent No. 1

as illegal and arbitrary.

At the hearing, Sri S.A.K. Mynoddin, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted

that consequent on rejection of the petitioners application for renewal for the year

2011-2012, it has filed a fresh application on 28/04/2012, after removing the

deficiencies pointed out by respondent No. 2 for which it has rejected the renewal

and that the petitioner will be satisfied if respondent no. 2 is directed to consider the

said application filed for the year 2012-2013 and take appropriate decision within a

reasonable time.

Having regard to this submission, the writ petition is disposed of without adjudicating

in the validity or otherwise of the impugned orders with the direction ot respondent

No. 2 to dispose of the petitioners application bearing No. 0266, dated 28/04/2012, if

not already done, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of

this order and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner”.

The SRC in its 240th Meeting held on 09th-11th March, 2013 considered the Hon’ble

High Court order dt. 03.08.2012 and decided the institution be asked to pay

inspection fee of R. 50000/-, for causing inspection of compliance. Further, the

committee also decided that our earlier decision to file an appeal may be kept on

hold.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 27/04/2013 to submit the

inspection fee of Rs.50,000/-.In response to the office letter dated 27.04.2013, the

institution has submitted written representation on 20/05/2013 stating that “ I am

submitting herewith the following few lines for your kind consideration and

sympathetic time extension for remittance of inspection fee.

I hereby respectfully submit that the construction of college building as per the NCTE

latest Norms is being constructed and that the construction work is going on as per

the plan. further I would like to mention that the estimated cost of building is one

core. As per as it is take some more time for completion of entire building. I am

facing much difficulties for construction of college building due to financial matter

and other main important problem is the reimbursement fee for the year 2012-13 is

nto yet sanctioned by the Govt. until to this date even though the 2012-13 financial


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

5

year was over. Reimbursement amount for the previous years are also to be release

meet the concerned dist. Officers for release the reimbursement. They were

replayed that it will be take some time due to grant is not released from the

government.

I view of the above I hereby obediently submit that soon after the construction of the

entire building is completed then the inspection fee Rs.50.000/- will be remitted and

intimated to your office and also I will request you to kindly inspect the HSPM

building as desired by the NCTE authorities”.

The SRC in its 248th meeting held on 13th – 15th July, 2013 had considered the

matter, written reply of the institution on the above matter vide letter dt. 20.05.2013,

and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw

recognition for the following reasons:-

1. The institution has not completed the construction of the new building for shifting.

2. As per the Hon’ble High Court order, the institution was asked to pay inspection of Rs. 50,000/- vide letter dt. 27/04/2013, instead of paying the inspection fee, the institution requested for extension of remittance of inspection fee and their inability to finish the construction of the building before inspection. The request of the institution for extension of time is not acceptable.

Permission to shifting is refused.

Supreme Court order regarding time schedule to be followed by the institutions

Keeping in view, Supreme Court vide their order in Civil Appeal No. 1125-1128/2011

in SLP No. 17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfills the conditions specified in

various clauses of the Regulations. The Council is directed to ensure that in future

no institution is granted recognition unless it fulfils the conditions laid down in the Act

and the Regulations and the time schedule fixed for processing the application by

the Regional Committee and communication of the decision on the issue of

recognition it strictly adhered to”.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the

HPT (APS00266) course run by “Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan

Mahavidyalay,Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh, from the academic year 2013-

14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in H.P.T course, if any, to


Accordingly, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution vide F.No. APSO0266


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

6

/H.P.T/AP/2013-14/53646 dated 13.09.2013.

Aggrieved by the Withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to

NCTE Hqrs vide No.F.No.89-688/2013 Appeal/3rd Meeting-2014 dated 24.03.2014

has stated as follows:

“….committee noted that recognition for B.Ed course offered by the institution was

first withdrawn on 30.08.2011. One of the grounds of withdrawal was that the

institution had 713.33 sq.mts of built up area with A.C sheets. The appellant’s appeal

made against the impugned

withdrawal order was also turned down vide appeal order dated 20.03.2012.

Aggrieved by the impugned order and the appellant authority order the institution

filed a Writ petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The High Court of AP

disposed off the writ petition and resultantly the SRC asked the appellant institution

On,27.04.2013 to deposit inspection fee of Rs. 50,000/- for facilitating verification of

the infrastructural facilities. The appellant institution vide its letter dated 20.05.2013

informed that construction of the college building is still going on and inspection fee

of Rs. 50,000/- remitted after the construction work is completed. The SRC

reaffirmed the withdrawal order with a fresh withdrawal order on 13.09.2013 from the

academic session 2013-14 on the grounds that the appellant institution has failed to

remit the inspection fee and also complete the construction work. The appellant

during the course of presentation before the council on 24.02.2014 admitted that the

construction work is still going on and the appellant institution needs more time to

complete it, since the appellant institution has taken a fairly long time and it is still

not ready with a built up instructional area, the council concluded to confirm the

withdrawal order dated 13.09.2013 issued by SRC.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on

records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the

council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore,

the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC in confirmed”.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 267th Meeting held during 12th and 13th

May,2014,has noted the matter.

A court notice from the Honb’le High court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 14676 of

2014 filed by Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan Maha Vidyalay,Peddapalli,Karimnagar

District,Andhra Pradesh was received by this office on 11.06.2014 to appear

personally or by advocate on 30th June 2014.

Accordingly, a letter was addressed to Shri.Ramakanth Reddy, advocate on

13.06.2014 to defend the case on behalf of NCTE.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

7

In the mean time , on 03.06.2014, this office has received a court order in WPMP.No.182028 of 2014 in WP.No. 14676 of 2014 filed by Hindi Shikshak Prashikshan Maha Vidyalay, Peddapalli, Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh. The Court order is as under ;

‘Petition under section 151 of C.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in the W.P. the High Court may be pleased to suspend the orders

of the 2nd respondent (SRC,NCTE) passed in order No. APS00266/HPT/2013-

14/53646 dated 13.09.2013 ,as is confirmed by the orders of the 1st

respondent(NCTE,HQ) in proceedings F.No. 89-688/2013/3rd meeting/2014/A86223

dated 24.03.2013, signed on 25.04.2014 , pending disposal of WP .No. 14676 of

2014 on the file of the High Court.

The court while directing issue of notice to the respondents herein to show

cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the following

order .(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the

case)

There shall be an interim suspension as prayed for.’

A letter is sent to Shri. K. Ramakanth Reddy , Legal Counsel at Hyderabad on

27.06.2014 to vacate the interim suspension of the order granted by the Hon’ble

Court.

The above matter is placed before SRC for decision and direction.

The Committee considered the matter, advised SRO to ask the Lawyer to get

the ‘stay’ vacated.

2) AP1392

D.Ed

St. Marys D.Ed

College,

Prakasam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

St.Marys D.Ed College, Plot/Khasar No. 728/1,2,3, Podili Village and Post, Podili

City & Taluk, Prakasam District- 523240, Andhra Pradesh.

Joseph Sriharsha & Mary Indraja Educational Society, Street No. 5, Plot No. 102, High Court Colony, Vanasthalipuram Post & Taluk, Hyderabad City, Rangareddi District- 500070, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to St. Marys D.Ed College, Plot/Khasar No. 728/1,2,3, Podili Village and Post, Podili City & Taluk, Prakasam District- 523240, Andhra Pradesh for D.EL.Ed Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.09.2011 and physical copy received on 03.10.2011. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 18.10.2011/ 14.12.2011. A deficiency letter was

issued to the institution on 29.12.2011. The institution has replied to the deficiency

letter on 02.03.2012.

The SRC in its 221st meeting held on 19-20th April, 2012, considered the reply of the

institution dt. 02.03.2102 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was

decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

8

Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 15.05.2012. The

institution has submitted its written representation dt. 05.06.2012.

The SRC in its 225th meeting held on 26th-27th June 2012, considered the reply of

the institution and decided and advised SRO to scrutinize the application in detail

and put up in the next SRC meeting.

As per the decision of SRC the application was scrutinized and placed before SRC

in its 229th Meeting held on 30th-31st July, 2012 and the Committee duly considered

the reply of Show Cause Notice and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory,

deficiencies still persist as under:

1. Approved blue print of the building plan in the name of the proposed college issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

2. Notarized land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not

submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for

conversion of

land from agricultural to educational purposes.

3. Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions towards B.Ed course which is already run by the institution from the affiliating body/State Govt/examining body is not submitted.

Under the above grounds and as per 8 (3) of Regulations 2009:

“An institution can apply for one basic unit only of an additional course or for an

additional unit of the existing recognised course after completion of three academic

sessions of the respective course, for which the institution shall submit application

before the cut off date prescribed for submission of applications in the year

succeeding the completion of three academic sessions. Maximum intake capacity of

an institution taking into consideration of all courses, alongwith additional intake, in

any case, shall not exceed 300”.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order dated 31.1.2011 in Civil Appeal No. 1125-

1128/2011 in SLP No. 17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfils the conditions specified in







(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

9

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected &

based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE

Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for

recognition of D.El.Ed course.

Accordingly, rejection order was issued to the institution on 03/09/2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order No. F.No. 89-508/2012Appeal/12th

Meeting-2012 A 61771 dated 03/01/2013 stated that “…the council concluded that

there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and remand the case to SRC”.

The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 9th-11th March 2013, considered the Appellate

authority order dt. 03/01/2013 and it has decided to further process the application of

the said institution, for necessary action.

As per decision of SRC, the application was processed and placed before SRC in its

244th Meeting held on 09th-11th May, 2013 and the Committee has considered the

Appellate authority order dt. 03.01.2013, reply of the institution to the show cause

notice and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as

under:

1. Certified copy of the land documents duly approved by the competent authority is not submitted.

2. Original approved blue print of the building plan in the name of the proposed college issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

3. Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions towards B.Ed course which is already run by the institution from the affiliating body/State Govt/examining body is not submitted.



Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of D.Ed

course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 07.06.2013.

In the mean time, an email letter has been received by SRC from the Advocate, in

W.P.No.16561 of 2013 filed by St. Marys D.Ed College, Prakasam District, Andhra

Pradesh.

A letter sent to advocate along with brief of the case on 20.06.2013.

A letter has been received from Shri Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate through fax on

11.07.2013 stating that the SRC reiterated what was set aside by the appellate

authority. Kindly place it before the SRC immediately as the matter is coming up for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

10

hearing on Monday the 15.07.2013.

The SRC in its 248th meeting held on 13th to 15th July, 2013 has considered the

matter and decided to “inform the Lawyer about the grounds on which rejected the

application. Further the lawyer to be informed to defend our order in the court on

15.07.2013 specifically citing the NCTE Regulations and the Supreme Court Order

about strict enforcement of norms/standards”.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was issued to the institution on 17.7.2013 along

with brief of the case.

A duly signed counter affidavit was sent to the advocate on 18.7.2013.

A court notice has been received from the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh on

28.10.2013 in W.P. No. 26127 of 2013 filed by the above said institution.

“”.The institution has prayed that this Hon’ble Court may please to direct the 2nd

respondent to forthwith reconsider the application of the petitioners bearing number

SRCAPP1392 in terms of the order dated 31.2013 passed by the 1 respondent and

pass such other order or others as are deemed fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case

Accordingly, a letter to the advocate was sent along with brief of the case on

4.11.2013.

Shri. Ramakanth Reddy, advocate has forwarded counter affidavit for attestation.

Accordingly, duly signed counter affidavit was sent to the advocate on 7.11.2013.

This office has received court order in W.P.No. 26127 of 2013 filed by the above

said institution.

The Hon’ble court has ordered as follows

“…..At the hearing, it has come out that the academic year 2012-13, for which the

petitioners made application, has already expired and the new academic year 2013-

14 is scheduled to commence in a month or two. The counter affidavit has referred

to the judgment of the Apex Court in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v.

State of Uttar Pradesh & Others in support of the plea that no recognition for the

year 2012-14 can be granted, as the cut off date, namely, 03.03.2013 for recognition

has already been crossed. In my opinion, the said judgment applies to the cases

where recognitions are to be granted in ordinary course of things. In the present

case, on account of the highly unreasonable and arbitrary conduct of respondent no.

2, the petitioners have been deprived of one academic year. Had respondent no. 2

complied with the appellate order at the earliest the petitioners would have been

granted recognition on or before the cut off date. The petitioners cannot be put to


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

11

sufferance due to the reasons, which are solely attributable to respondent no 2.

Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, it could be grave

travesty of justice if the petitioners are not permitted to start the course during the

academic year 2013-14. As there is still adequate time left for respondent no. 2 for

completion of the formalities, this court is inclined to accept the plea of the

petitioners for giving appropriate directions to respondent no. 2 to enable them to

commence the course in the academic year 2013-14.

In the result, the impugned order of respondent no. 2(SRC-NCTE) is quashed and

the writ petition is accordingly allowed with costs of Rs. 10,000/- against respondent

no. 2. Respondent no. 2 is directed to forthwith consider the application of petitioner

no. 1 made for the academic year 2012-13 for grant of recognition for the academic

year 2013-14 by ignoring the reasons on which its application was rejected.

Respondent no. 2 shall depute an inspection team and, after completing all the

formalities, it shall complete the process of granting recognition to the petitioners

before the process of counseling is commenced for the academic year 2013-14.

As a sequel, WPMP no. 32284 of 2013 filed by the petitioners for interim relief shall

stand disposed of as infructuous”.

A letter has been received from NCTE-Hqrs., on 16.12.2013 directed as follows;

a) The petitioner has not exhausted the alternative remedy of appeal available

u/s 18 of NCTE Act, 1993 and approached directly to the Hon’ble Court.

b) The institution cannot be granted recognition for the academic session 2013-

14 at this juncture under any circumstances, as directed by the Hon’ble

Court, in the light of the time schedule fixed by the Apex Court in the matter

of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahavidyalaya and ors.

c) The Hon’ble Court in the matter of Adarsh Shiksha Mahavidyalaya v.

subbash Rahangdale, (2012) 2 SCC 425, in para 87 inter-alia held the following:

“87(i) The Regional Committees established under section 20 of the 1993 Act are

duly bound to ensure that no private institution offering or intending to offer a course

of training in teacher education is granted recognition unless it satisfies the

conditions specified in Section 14(3)(a) of the 1993 Act and Regulations 7 and 8 of

the Regulations. Likewise, no recognized institution intending to start any new

course or training in teacher education shall be granted permission unless it satisfied

the conditions specified in Section 15(3)(a) of the Act and the relevant Regulations.”

It is also requested Regional Director, SRC to file a Letter Patent Appeal(LPA)/Writ

Appeal against the above order immediately.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

12

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the advocate on 17.12.2013.

The Committee considered the matter, letter dated 16/12/2013 from NCTE (H'qrs)

New Delhi and decided to remind the Lawyer to file an appeal and obtain stay. The

matter to be pursued with the lawyer.

As per the direction SRC, a letter along with brief of the case was sent to Advocate,

Shri, K. Ramakanth Reddy on 22.01.2014 wit the request to file an appeal and

defend the case on interest of SRC, NCTE and NCTE Hqrs.

A letter has been received from K. Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate along with appeal

affidavit and Condone delay petition for signature of Regional Director, SRC, NCTE

and a letter along with appeal affidavit and condone delay petition duly signed was

sent to the Advocate on 04.02.2014.

An e-mail letter has bee received from the advocate on 16.04.2014 with the request

to present status of the application of the college.

Accordingly, the brief of the case was sent to the advocate on 21.04.2014.

On 28.04.2014 a Court notice has been received from Hon.ble High Court of Andhra

Pradesh in W.A.M.P. No. 1243 of 2014 in WASR 14034 of 2014 filed by Joseph

Sriharsha Mary Indraja Educational Society. It is directed that the appeal will come

on for hearing o the day of 24.04.2014. Hence, you are hereby directed to appeal in

person or by counsel. The notice has been ordered by Court on 03.04.2014.

Accordingly, a brief of the case was sent to the advocate on 1.05.2014.

On 1.5.2014 a Contempt notice in CC No. 601 of 2014 filed by Joseph Sriharsha

Mary Indraja Educational Society in the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra

Pradesh at Hyderabad. The Honorable High Court has directed to appear in person

before Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad on 06.06.2014 at 10.30

a.m.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 266th meeting held on 2nd May,2014,

considered the matter, Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh order dated

03.04.2014, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to

1). ask our lawyer to file a review application citing the Supreme Court order (s)

about new Regulations.

2). if the review application filed succeeds, the appeal can be withdrawn.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was sent to the advocate Shri.Ramakanth

Reddy on 26.05.2014 along with the brief of the case and to file an appeal as per

Hon’ble High Court order in C.C.No.601 of 2014 dated 16.04.2014, Under


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

13

Secretary,SRC,NCTE has appeared before Hon’ble High Court of Hyderabad ,Andhra

Pradesh State on 06.06.2014 at 10.30 a.m.

A letter was sent to the advocate ,Shri. Ramakanth Reddy, on 12.06.2014 requesting

him to furnish the present status of appeal filed and to inform the action taken.

This office is in receipt of a letter from Shri. K.Ramakanth Reddy , advocate on

16.06.2014 stating as under ;

1) The C.C. No. 274 / 2014 and C.C. 601/2014 , were heard by the Hon’ble High Court today. The appeal W.A.M.P 1243/2014 – WASR 14034/14 was not listed today.

2) In CC 274 /2014 Additional Counter was filed by us. The counsel for the college took time for filing reply .The matter will be listed on next Friday.

3) CC601/14 was heard by the Hon’ble Court in the presence of Mr.Sriraman.To avoid contempt, NCTE should comply with the Hon’ble Court order subject to W.A.MP 1243/2014 and WASR 14034/2014. I informed the Hon’ble Court that subject to writ appeal the matter will be placed before SRC on 2nd – 3rd July meeting for compliance. The matter will be listed again on 07.07.2014.

The Committee considered the matter, decided that

1.In pursuance of the Court Order, advised SRO to cause inspection of the

institution.

2. Further, the Lawyer is to be advised to pursue the appeal.

3) SRCAPP1158

D.Ed

Yalamarty

College of

Diploma

Education,

Vishakhapatna

m, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Yalamarty College of Diploma Education, Sy. No. 103, 125 & 128, Plot No. 1- 50,

Yalamarty Street, Tarluvada Village and Post, Anandapuram Taluk,

Visakhapatnam City and District – 530052, Andhra Pradesh

Yalamarty Educational Trust, Plot No. 1 – 50, Yalamarty Nagar, Tarluvada Village and Post, Anandapuram Taluk, Visakhapatnam City and District – 530052, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Yalamarty College of Diploma Education, Sy. No. 103, 125 & 128, Plot No. 1- 50, Yalamarty Street, Tarluvada Village and Post, Anandapuram Taluk, Visakhapatnam City and District – 530052, Andhra Pradesh for D.EL.Ed Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 29.09.2011 and physical copy received on 07.10.2011.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 08.11.2011 followed by reminder on

26.12.2011. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 30.12.2011 and the

institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 14.02.12

The SRC in its 219th meeting held on 15th-16th March 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 14.02.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

14

and decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 11/04/2012. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 24/04/2012.

The SRC in its 222nd Meeting held on 09th – 10th May 2012 considered the reply of

the institution vide letter dt. 25.04.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences

and decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act,

for the following:

1) In the building plan submitted, total earmarked area for proposed D.El.Ed course is not given.

2) Yalamarty Telugu Pandit course run by the institution is recognized by SRC on 15.05.2009, the same has not completed three academic sessions. Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions from affiliating body is not submitted.

3) As per on-line application, land document should be for Sy.No. 103, 125 & 128, but, land usage certificate and land documents reflect different survey Nos.

Accordingly, a final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 09/06/2012.

The institution submitted its written representation on 22/06/2012.

The reply of the institution to the show cause notice was considered by SRC in its

225th Meeting held during 25 – 26 June, 2012 and observed that the reply was

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:

• The institution is running TPT course since 2009, for which proof of affiliation orders for completion of 3 academic sessions at the time of on-line application is not submitted.

As per Regulations 2009:

8 (2) of NCTE Regulations states that In the first instance, an institution shall be

considered for grant of recognition of only one course for the basic unit as

prescribed in the norms and standards for the particular teacher education

programme.

8 (3) of NCTE Regulations states that “An institution can apply for one basic unit

only of an additional course or for an additional unit of the existing recognised

course after completion of three academic sessions of the respective course, for

which the institution shall submit application before the cut off date prescribed for

submission of applications in the year succeeding the completion of three academic

sessions. Maximum intake capacity of an institution taking into consideration of all

courses, along with additional intake, in any case, shall not exceed 300”.

• Sy.Nos of building plan 103, 125 & 128 are not matching with land documents, with the Sy.Nos given as 125/37, 103/9, 103/10 & 117/20.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

15

The reply to the show cause notice is not satisfactory and unconvincing.





Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the Institution on 23.07.2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the Institution preferred an appeal to

NCTE-Hqrs vide the appellate authority No.F.No.89-658/2013 Appeal/2nd Meeting-

2014 dated 25.02.2014 stating that,

“...Shri Y.V.V. Viswanath, Chairman, Yalamarty College of Diploma Education,

Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on

04-02-2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that

"the course of TPT has commenced in the year 2009 and has finished three

academic years with batches for 2009-10. 2010-11, and 2011-12: the current batch

has completed the course and results are awaited. For the proof of affiliation they

are herewith attaching the counseling lists of the three academic years along with

the results received from the State Government. Hence, three academic years have

been completed. The appellant has not made any submission to the second ground

of rejection relating to discrepancy in land documents.

The Council observed that the submission of the appeal has been delayed by one

year and 29 days beyond the prescribed period of 60 days. The appellant has not

given any reasons for the delay. the Council therefore decided not to condone the

delay. The appeal is not admitted.

The appellate authority, after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit,

documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced

during the hearing, the Council decided not to condone the delay and therefore, the

appeal is not admitted.”

The Institution filed a WPMP No. 14288 of 2014 in WP No. 11324 of 2014 in the

Hon'ble High Court Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad.

A Court order has been received from the Hon'ble High Court on 12.05.2014. The

Court order in WPMP No. 14288 of 2014 in WP No. 11325 of 2014 stating as under:

“The case of the petitioners is that an appeal has been preferred to the 1st respondent on 23.08.2012 by adopting the online mode. Subsequently, the hard copy of the memorandum of appeal enclosing thereto the demand draft drawn in a sum of Rs.10,000/- on Indian Overseas Bank, Kayyapalem Branch, dated 16.08.2012, has also been made available, towards appeal processing fee. On


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

16

11.06.2013, the 1st respondent referred to the appeal dated 24.08.2012, but stated that the appeal has not been submitted through online module in the prescribed format, which is mandatory, as per the Appeal Rules, 2012, and hence, the appeal is returned in original and the appeal fee has also been sent through a cheque drawn on 11.06.2013 for a sum of Rs.10,000/-. It is obvious from this communication that the 1st respondent has encashed the appeal processing fee remitted by the petitioner through the demand draft drawn on Indian Overseas Bank on 16.08.2012, submitted along with the hand copy of the Appeal. On one hand, it is stated that the appeal has been submitted on 24.08.2012. But however, the claim is that it is not submitted through online module. The National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 have been framed in exercise of the power available under Section 31 of the Act. Rule 10 sets out that any person aggrieved by an order made under Section 14, 15 or Section 17 of the Act may prefer an appeal in Form-I appended to these Rules. However, it appears Sub-Rule 2 has been added to Rule 10, which sets out that the appeal may be submitted electronically through online mode on the website of the NCTE along with the processing fee of Rs.10,000/-. It is, therefore, clear that preferring an appeal through electronic mode is one of the options. It is not the only option. If appeal in hard copy is submitted, it is not liable to be rejected only on that ground. Hence, the respondents are directed to reconsider the appeal of the petitioner and communicate the decision taken thereon, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six (6) weeks from today.” A Letter was sent on 20.05.2014 Shri. B.P Pandey, Under Secretary (Legal) for

taking necessary action.

On 29.05.2014, copy of the letter dated 24.05.2014 addressed to the Hqrs with a

request for reconsideration of appeal application is received by this office.

On 30.05.2014, a court notice dated 22.04.2014 directing to appear before the Court

personally or by Advocate on 10.06.2014 is received by this office.

In the meanwhile, a letter has been received on 02.06.2014 from Mr. B. P. Pandey, US (Legal), NCTE Hqrs, New Delhi vide letter No. F.64-208/2012/NCTE/Legal/A88128 dated 26.05.2014 (copy enclosed) which is as under:- :-

“I am directed to refer to the notice dated 27.04.2014 receive from Hon'ble High Court Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad along with in the matter mentioned above. The operative part of the Court order is as under:-

‘The National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 have been framed in exercise of the power available under Section 31 of the Act. Rules 10 sets out that any person aggrieved by an order made under Section 14, 15 or Section 17 of the Act may prefer an appeal in Form-I appended to these Rules. However, it appears Sub-Rule 2 has been added to Rule 10, which sets out that the appeal may be submitted electronically through online mode on the website of the NCTE along with the processing fee of Rs. 10,000/-. It


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

17

is, therefore, clear that preferring an appeal through electronic mode is one of the options. It is not the only option. If appeal in hard copy is submitted, it is not liable to be rejected only on that ground.

Hence, the respondents are directed to reconsider the appeal of the petitioner and communicate the decision taken thereon, as expeditiously as possible, preferable within six (6) weeks from today.’ 2. The NCTE (Third Amendment) Rules, 2011 come into force w.e.f. 01.04.2012 by which Rule 10 has been submitted as under:- 10(1) Any person aggrieved by a refusal order made under Section 14 or Section 15 or withdrawal order made under Section 17 of NCTE Act, may prefer an appeal in Form I or Form II appended to these Rules, to the Council within Sixty days of issue of such orders, along with a fee of Rs. 10,000/- payable on line with the submission of appeal: Provided that an appeal may be admitted after the expiry of the said period of sixty days, if the appellant satisfies the Council that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal with the period of limitation of sixty days.

.

10(2) The appeal may be submitted electronically through online mode on the website of National Council for Teacher Education along with processing fee of Rs. 10,000/-. The appellant shall download the filled in online application and post two sets of hard copies accompanied with the requisite documents, to the Member Secretary, NCTE, New Delhi within two days of online submission of the appeal. 3. It is therefore, apparent that the case has not been contested properly by the Legal Counsel of NCTE of Hyderabad High Court as “preferring an appeal through electronic mode is not one of the options” rather it is only the option to prefer an appeal. The Legal Counsel could not explain the above rule in correct prospect to the Hon'ble High Court therefore, the above order deserves to be challenged before the Division bench by filing Letter Patent Appeal (LPA) / Writ Appeal. 4. It is therefore, requested to file the LPA/WP against the order dated 27.05.2014 immediately, under intimation to this office, in order to avoid any contempt proceedings.”

The above matter was placed before SRC in its 268th Meeting held during 4th – 5th

June,2014 and the Committee decided to ask our lawyer to file an appeal before the

Division Bench as advised by NCTE Hqrs.

As per the decision of 268th Meeting of SRC, a letter was addressed to Shri.K.

Ramakanth Reddy, advocate on 16.06.2014 requesting him to file an appeal before

the Division Bench.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

18

In the mean while, the institution has filed an appeal under Section 18 of NCTE Act, before the Appellate Authority, NCTE, New Delhi .against the rejection order of SRC.The original file has been sent to the NCTE(HQ) on 17.06.2014.

This office is in receipt of a letter from Shri. B.P. Pandey, Under Secretary, NCTE (Hqrs) on 19.06.2014 ,stating as under ;

I am directed to refer to the notice dated 27.04.2014 receive from Hon'ble High Court Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad along with in the matter mentioned above. The operative part of the Court order is as under:- 2. The matter has been examined at the level of NCTE(HQ) as per records available with this office and the following is noted :-

• NCTE (HQ) is cited as a respondent number 1.The concerned Regional Committee is cited as a respondent 2.

• Petitioner Trust made an online application on 29.09.2011 for grant of recognition for D.EI.Ed course which was rejected by SRC vide its order dated 23.07.2012 for the reasons recorded therein.

• Aggrieved with the SRC order dated 23.07.2012(rejection order), the petitioner institution preferred an appeal before NCTE(HQ) on 24.08.2014 received in this office on 30.08.2012. Since the said appeal was not filed through ONLINE module in the prescribed format , the same along with the appeal fee vide Cheque No. 014530 dated 11.06.2012 for Rs. 10,000/- was returned to the petitioner institution vide letter dated 11.06.2013.

• Aggrieved with this , the petitioner filed W.P.No. 11324/2014 followed by WPMP .No . 14288/2014 with a request to direct the NCTE to reconsider the appeal preferred by the petitioner institution against the order dated 23.07.2012 passed by SRC.

• The said WPMP No. 14288/2014 has bee disposed of by the the Hon’ble High court vide its order dated 22.04.2014 with the observation that the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 have been framed in exercise of the power available under Section 31 of the Act. Rule 10 sets out that any person aggrieved by an order made under Section 14, 15 or Section 17 of the Act may prefer an appeal in Form-I appended to these Rules. However, it appears Sub-Rule 2 has been added to Rule 10, which sets out that the appeal may be submitted electronically through online mode on the website of the NCTE along with the processing fee of Rs.10,000/-. It is, therefore, clear that preferring an appeal through electronic mode is one of the options. It is not the only option. If appeal in hard copy is submitted, it is not liable to be rejected only on that ground.

Hence, the respondents are directed to reconsider the appeal of the petitioner and communicate the decision taken thereon, as expeditiously as


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

19

possible, preferably within six (6) weeks from today.

• Since , the said case in WPMP No. 14288/2014 has not been contested properly by the Legal Counsel of NCTE of Hyderabad High Court as ‘preferring an appeal through electronic mode is not one of the options’ rather it is only the option to prefer an appeal. The RD-SRC is therefore asked vide letter dated 28.05.2014 to challenge the same. (policy matter) before Division Bench by filing Letter Patent Appeal (LPA)/Writ Appeal.

• ‘How ever , It has come to the notice ,that after returning the earlier appeal dated 24.08.2012 vide NCTE letter dated 11.06.2014, the petitioner institution filed another appeal through online mode on 22.10.2013 which was not admitted by the Appellate Authority vide its order dated 25.02.2014 on account of delay in submission of the same.

• It therefore apparent that during the course of hearing in WPMP.No.14288 (decided on 22.04.2014), the petitioner had concealed the fact mentioned above , as such ,there is no appeal either online or offline is pending with NCTE as on date.

• Now, this office has received a copy of WP No.11324/2013 whereby the petitioner has inter-alia prayed the Hon’ble Court to direct NCTE to reconsider the appeal (rejected vide order dated 25.02.2014) on this merit.’ (copy enclosed)

1. In view of the above , you are hereby requested to place the aforesaid mentioned additional facts before the Hon;ble High court while challenging the Court order dated 22.04.2014 in WPMP No. 14288 and defend the present case in W.P.No. 11324/2014.

In the mean while an, e-mail letter has been received from Shri. Ramakanth Reddy, advocate stating as under :

‘Vide letter No.SRO/NCTE/SRCAPP1158/D.Ed dated 16.06.2014 received couple of days back from NCTE requested to file an appeal in WPMP No. 14288/2014 in WP 11324 of 2014 dated 22.04.2014. It is not appropriate to file an appeal. In this case it is better to file a VACATE STAY PETITION to vacate the order passed in WPMP No. 14288/2014 in W.P.11324 of 2014 by citing the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgments in MAA VAISHNO DEVI CASE and other cases. If appeal is filed it will take a longer time as the order we wish to challenge is only an interim order. It is better to file a vacate petition since the order we propose to challenge is an interim order.

Therefore , I request you to file vacate stay petition. Please find attached vacate stay petition. Kindly , affix your signature after going through the same. You may make


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

20

changes if your wish to .The papers should be printed on legal size white sheets on one side only.

The same may be signed and send to us through Blue Dart Courier to avoid legal complications and contempt.’

A copy of the vacate petition was also enclosed

An e-mail was sent to Shri.Ramakanth Reddy, advocate on 23.06.2014 , requesting him for inclusion of additional facts as mentioned in the letter from Shri. B.P.Pandey, Under Secretary, NCTE(HQ) vide letter dated 11.06.2014 and send the revised affidavit at the earliest.

The revised affidavit of vacate petition duly signed by the Regional Director was sent to the advocate on 25.06.2014

The Committee considered the matter, noted the fact that the appeal was

heard and disposed of on a second memo by the party was not brought before

the Court. As advised by our Lawyer, therefore, the Lawyer is to be asked to

file a review petition and also to get the ‘stay’ vacated.

4) SRCAPP222

D.Ed

Likitha College

of Elementary

Education, East

Godavari,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Likitha College of Elementary Education, Plot No. 208/1, Chandramamapalli

Village, Divili Post Office, Peddapuram Taluk and City, East Godavari District –

533 437, Andhra Pradesh.

Teresa Educational Society, Plot No. 2-7, Main Road, Ulimeswaram Village, Mallam

Post Office and City, Peddapuram Taluka, East Godavari District – 533 437, Andhra

Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Likitha College of Elementary

Education, Plot No. 208/1, Chandramamapalli Village, Divili Post Office,

Peddapuram Taluk and City, East Godavari District – 533 437, Andhra Pradesh for

D.El.Ed Course for two years duration under Section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993 to

the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012. The institution has

submitted hard copy of the application on 07.01.2013.

NCTE-Hqrs. had directed to process the application in accordance with NCTE

Regulations 2009 and amendment notified on 26th November, 2010 which reads as

follows:-

2(b) for Sub-Regulation (1-A) the following shall be submitted namely” 1(1-A)(I)

the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following

circumstances:

a) The processing fee, as provided under Rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application.

b) Hard coy in triplicate of the on-line application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the on-line application.

c) Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

21

on-line application. The SRC in its 238th Meeting held on 05th-06th February, 2013 ,after careful perusal

of the original file of the institution and other related documents, NCTE Act 1993

Regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table, the Regional

Committee decided to reject the application on the following grounds:

• The processing fee submitted only DD of Rs. 41050/- instead of Rs. 50000/- (Which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulation).

Accordingly, a rejection letter was issued to the institution on 06.03.2013.

The institution in its letter dated 6.10.2013 submitted a court order from the Hon’ble

High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 12252 of 2013 stating that

“…………I leave it open to the SRC to grant, in any such eventuality, permission to

the petitioner for commencing the necessary course during the academic session

2014-2015. Since, the petitioner has admitted to the lapse of concentration while

filling up the application form, it is only appropriate that he shall also remit an

additional sum of Rs. 5000/- as penalty, representing 10% of the processing fee, in

each case to the SRC.

With this order, the Writ petition is disposed of. No. costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.”

Note: The institution has submitted original Demand Draft of Rs. 55,000.00 vide

bearing no. 914958 dated 29.09.2013 .

The Southern Regional Committee in its 254th Meeting held on 25th – 27th October,2013 considered the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh order wherein, the High Court has left it the SRC to decide. ‘It was decided that, the Committee has no discretion in the matter under the Regulations which list this as a factor for summary rejection. The Supreme Court has directed that Regulations shall be strictly enforced. Supreme Court vide their order in Civil Appeal NO. 1125-1128/2011 in SLP No.

17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfils the conditions specified in






Based on the above, the Committee decided to reject the application, refund the amount and to close the file.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

22

As per the decision of SRC, a rejection letter was issued to the institution vide F. No .

SRCAPP222/D.Ed/AP/2013-14/55136 dated 27.11.2013.

This office was in receipt of a Court notice dated 21.03.2014 from the Hon’ble High

Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in CC.No. 2320 of 2013 with

charges of contempt of court for violating the orders of the Court passed in W.P.No.

12252 of 2013 dated 28.08.2012.The Regional Director ,SRC,NCTE was directed to

appear before the Court on 21.04.2014 at 10.30 a.m.

A letter was addressed to Shri.K.Ramakanth Reddy, advocate on 15.04.2014 to appear

before the Court and defend the case of SRC,NCTE in view of the Court notice dated

21.03.2014.

Another Court notice dated 21.03.2014 from the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature of

Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in CC.No. 2320 of 2013 was received by this office on

15.04.2014 directing the Regional Director, SRC,NCTE to appear before the Court on

21.04.2014 at 10.30 a.m. An E-mail was sent to Shri. Ramakanth Reddy on 15.04.2014

for needful action in the matter.

An e-mail was received from Shri.Ramakanth Reddy stating that he has requested the

Court that he will appear in the matter and represent the case.

This office is in receipt of a Court order in CC.2320 of 2013 in W.P.No. 12252 of 2013

filed by Teresa Educational Society, East Godavari District ,Andhra Pradesh on

30.05.2014

The Court order is as under ;

‘ The Regional Director ,Southern Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher

Education (NCTE),Bangalore , is present in the Court today pursuant to the Notice in

Form No.1 issued on 21.03.2014.

Heard Sri.M.V.Rajaram, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Satyanarayana

Goud would submit that the case deserves one more opportunity to be provided to the

Southern Regional Committee to re-examine the entire matter and take an appropriate

decision and report the same back.

Registry is directed to list the matter for consideration after eight weeks.

The further presence of Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, National

Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Bangalore, is not required and hence dispensed

with .”

The Committee considered the matter, advised SRO to ask our lawyer to file

an appeal immediately.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

23

Consideration of Appeal Remand Back Orders: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

5) SRCAPP106

B.Ed

Rains College

of Education,

Erode,

Tamilnadu

TN

Rains College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.776/2, 778/2, Street No.74, Pachampalayam Privu Village, Ganapathypalayam Post Office, Erode City and Taluk, Erode District – 638153, Tamilnadu.

Rains Educational and Charities Trust, Plot No.74, S K C Road, Erode Village and Post Office, Erode City and Taluk, Erode District – 638001, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Rains College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.776/2, 778/2, Street No.74, Pachampalayam Privu Village, Ganapathypalayam Post Office, Erode City and Taluk, Erode District – 638153, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical copy on 04.01.2013.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 05.02.2013 followed by reminder on 22.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 22.04.2013.

Now the institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 01.07.2013.

The reply of the institution has been received on the 70th day from the date of issue of deficiency letter. Hence, the institution has submitted the reply after the stipulated period of 60 days.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 250th meeting held on 11th – 13th August

2013 had considered the reply of the institution, which is received on 28/06/2013,

i.e., on 70th (Seventy) days after issue of deficiency letter and with reference to the

totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the

committee decided as per clause 7(1) of NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the

application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.


Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution had preferred an appeal to

NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014

remanded as follows:

“….. Appeals Committee noted that a deficiency letter dated – 22/04/2013 was issued to the appellant Institution. Deficiencies pointed out in this deficiency letter were required to be removed and reply sent to SRC within 60 days from the date of appeal hearing produced evidence to prove that the above deficiency letter dated – 22/04/2013 was received by him through speed post envelope delivered on 30/04/2013. Reply to this deficiency letter was delivered in the office of SRC on 28/06/2013 vide SRC Dy. No. 128031. Council also noted that the reply sent by the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

24

appellant institution with all its enclosures is available on the relevant file except page one of the forwarding letter. Committee further noted that the reply of the appellant institution which was well within 60 days of the date of receipt of deficiency letter by the appellant institution should have been considered on merit by the SRC. The Council concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to process the application further as per regulations. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with direction to process the application further as per regulations. The Council hereby remands back the case of Rains College of Education, Erode, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)

that all appeal remand cases should be processed only after notification of the

new Regulations. Advised Southern Regional Office to process the case

accordingly, and put up after notification of new Regulations as per NCTE

(H.Q) instructions.

6) SRCAPP6

B.Ed

Maria College

of Education,

Kanyakumari,

Tamilnadu

TN

Maria College of Education, Plot/ Khasara No. 808/6, Perai Street, Thiruvattar

Village and Post Office, Thiruvattar City, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari

District – 629177, Tamilnadu.

Maria Educational and Charitable Trust, Plot No. 808/6, Perai, Puthukulamkarai

Street, Thiruvattar Village and Post Office, Thiruvattar City, Kalkulam Taluk,

Kanyakumari District – 629177, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to

Maria College of Education, Plot/ Khasara No. 808/6, Perai Street, Thiruvattar

Village and Post Office, Thiruvattar City, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District –

629177, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the

NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012

and physical copy on 07.01.2013.



22.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 22.04.2013.


The reply of the institution by SRC in its 248th meeting held on 13th – 15th July 2013

the vide letter date: 05.06.2013 to the deficiency letter was duly considered and the

reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. In the building completion certificate submitted, Type of roofing (RCC) not specifically confirmed. Column No. 9 is not duly filled up for course name.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

25

2. FDRs submitted is from a Private Bank i.e., from HDFC Bank, which is not a Nationalised Bank. Single FDR for Rs. 8 lacks is submitted, FDRs should be for 5 lacks and 3 lacks towards endowment and reserve fund respectively from a Nationalised Bank.



Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed

course.


Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution had preferred an appeal to NCTE

Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014 remanded as follows:

“…… Committee noted that a deficiency letter dated – 22/04/2013 was issued to the appellant Institution seeking information and documents relating to building completion certificate and FDRs as well. The appellant Institution submitted its reply to the deficiency letter on 02/05/2013 the recognition for B.Ed. course was refused by SRC on 19/09/2013 on the grounds that : (i) In the Building Completion Certificate type of roofing not specifically confirmed. (ii) FDR submitted is a single FDR for 8 lakh and its is from HDFC bank which is not a nationalized bank. The order dated-19/09/2013 refusing rcognition on above grounds mentions that reply to the show cause notice is not satisfactory and unconvincing. The Appeals Committee could not find any evidence on record of having any Show Cause Notice issued and thereafter question of any reply received does not arise. The appellant had furnished a Building Completion Certificate in reply to the deficiency letter. In column 9 of this Building Completion Certificate which pertains to purpose, “ Maria College of Education” is written. Committee does not find anything wrong in this as the purpose stands established. Moreover, the appellant institution is at liberty to furnish Building Completion Certificate at the time of inspection. The NCTE regulations regarding furnishing of FDRs from a Nationalized bank are not very assertive and FDRs fro scheduled bank are also accepted after the stage of 7/9. Committee therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to accept the FDRs and BCC submitted by the appellant institution during the appeal hearing and process the case as per regulations. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to accept the FDRs and BCC submitted by the appellant..

The Council hereby remands back the case of Maria College of Education, Kanyakumari,

Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.

The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)




(H.Q) instructions.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

26

7) SRCAPP10

B.Ed

Sri Sai Bharath

College of

Education,

Dindigul,

Tamilnadu

TN

Sri Sai Bharath College of Education, Plot.No.103/3, Sullerambu Village & Post, Dindigul District, Pin-624 710, Tamilnadu. Sri Sai Bharath Charitable Trust, Plot.No.103/3, Vedachandur Highway, Sullerambu Post, Dindigul, Pin-624 710, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Sri Sai Bharath College of Education, Plot.No.103/3, Sullerambu Village & Post, Dindigul District, Pin-624 710, Tamilnadu. For B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 04.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State




The reply of the institution vide letter dt. 19.06.2013 to the deficiency letter was duly

considered by SRC in its 248th meeting held on 13th – 15th July 2013 and the reply is

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted.

2. The Sale deed is in individual name, as per encumbrance certificate gift deed to society is not registered.

3. In the building plan submitted, total earmarked area for the proposed course is not mentioned.

4. Society address is varying in affidavit, application and land documents, encumbrance certificate etc., As per Trust deed, is registered in Madurai District, Whereas in the application it is given in different trust address located in Dindigul District.

Further, as per the sale deed dt. 14.08.2008 and Gift deed dt. 26.12.2012, the

Trust Address again changed to another address located in Coimbatore District,

the Gift deed is not registered. The institution has also not submitted the fresh

Trust deed with change of address .

The Gift deed is executed by one Mr. Arivalagan from Coimbatore. As per the

affidavit the address of society is located in Dindigul District and the above

individual is the Secretary. As per the unregistered Gift Deed it is evident that the

properties is in the name of above individual.


based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations

2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

27



Remanded as follows:

“…..Council noted the grounds of refusal mentioned in the refusal order and reproduced in para 1 on previous page. The institution was issued a Deficiency letter dated 22/04/2013 to which the appellate institute replied to vide its letter dated 17/06/2013 received in the office of SRC on 19/06/2013. Appeals Committee, without going into the merit of reply furnished by the appellant, noted that the recognition has been refused without serving a show cause notice (SCN) to the appellant in terms of section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act. Though the refusal order dated 12/09/2013 makes a mention that ‘reply to the show cause notice is not satisfactory and unconvincing’, yet there is no evidence on record to show that a show cause notice was ever issued to the appellant institution. The council therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue Show Cause Notice in terms of section 14(3)(b) of the Act. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue Show Cause Notice in terms of section 14 (3) (b) of the Act. The Council hereby remands back the case of Sri Bharath College of Education, Dindigul, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)




(H.Q) instructions.

8) SRCAPP2150

B.Ed

Tirukoilur

College of

Education,

Villupuram,

Tamilnadu

TN

Tirukoilur College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. Sy. No. 77, Street. No. M Pet Road, Kuladeepamangalam Village & Post Office, Tirukoilur Taluk, Villupuram District, Pin-605756, Tamilnadu. Mariamman Educational Trust, Plot No. 27A, Street. No. North Street, Sandapettai Village, Tirukoilur Post Office, Tirukoilur Taluk, Villupuram District, Pin-605757, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Tirukoilur College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. Sy. No. 77, Street. No. M Pet Road, Kuladeepamangalam Village & Post Office, Tirukoilur Taluk, Villupuram District, Pin-605756, Tamilnadu for B.Ed course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State


24.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 24.04.2013. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

28

institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 25.06.2013.

The reply of the institution has been received on the 62nd day from the date of issue

of deficiency letter. Hence the institution has been submitted reply after the

stipulated period of 60 days.

The matter was placed before SRC in its 248th Meeting held on 13th-15th July, 2013

and it his decided to process.

Accordingly, the Deficiency letter has been processed and placed before SRC in its

250th meeting held on 11th – 13th August 2013 and the Committee considered the

matter and its reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as

under:

1) Original building completion certificate issued by Government Engineer in the prescribed format along with Land area / Sy.No / Location / Address is not submitted.

2) Notarised copy of Land Use certificate approved by competent authority is not submitted.

3) Original FDR’s of Rs. 5.00 and 3.00 lacks towards Endowment and Reserve Fund from nationalized bank are not submitted.




course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 25.09.2013, the order

was returned back and the same was reposted on 23.10.2013.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE

Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 06.06.2014 remanded as

follows:

“…. Council noted that a deficiency letter dated 24/04/2013 was issued to the appellant institution and its reply dated 21/06/2013 was considered by the SRC. Committee further noted that before passing order under sub clause (b), the regional committee did not provide a reasonable opportunity to the appellant institution for making a written representation. Committee therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue show Cause Notice under section 14(3) (b) of the Act. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue show Cause Notice under section 14 (3) (b) of the Act. The council hereby remands back the case of Tirukoilur College of Education,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

29

Villupuram, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

9) SRCAPP1989

B.Ed

Kavi College of

Education,

Sivaganga,

Tamilnadu

TN

Kavi College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.572/2, Vadagudi Street & Village, Kottaiyur Post, Karaikkudi Taluk, Sivaganga District, Pin-630 106, Tamilnadu. Subbaiah Chettiar Trust, Plot No.572/2, Vadagudi Road, Puduvayal Salai Street, Vadagudi Village, Kottaiyur Post, Karaikkudi Taluk, Sivaganga District, Pin-630 106, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Kavi College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.572/2, Vadagudi Street & Village, Kottaiyur Post, Karaikkudi Taluk, Sivaganga District, Pin-630 106, Tamilnadu for B.Ed. Course of one year duration under Section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 28.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 03.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State



The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 24.06.2013.

The reply of the institution to the deficiency letter dated 24.06.2013 was duly

considered by SRC in its 249th Meeting held on 24th to 26th July, 2013 and decided

that the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1) The institution has not submitted certified copy of the registered land documents duly issued by the competent authority.

2) As per Non-encumbrance certificate, the land is on lease, which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009.

3) In the building plan submitted, total plot area and earmarked built up area is not mentioned.

4) Total built up area shown in building plan and building completion certificate is not matching.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course. Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 12.09.2013, the order

was returned back and the same was reposted on 24.09.2013.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

30

Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014 Remanded as

follows:

“ …Council noted that SRC did not issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution before refusing recognition, which is required to be issued as per the proviso to Section 14 (3) (b) of the NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with the direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further action as per the Regulations. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with the direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further action as per the Regulations. The council hereby remands back the case of Kavi College of Education, Sivaganga, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.” The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)




(H.Q) instructions.

10) SRCAPP2014

B.Ed

Sri

Vidhyodhaya

College of

Education,

Villupuram,

Tamilnadu

TN

Sri Vidhyodhaya College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.7/20, 7/21A, 7/21E, Street.No.7/20, Thiruppachavadimedu village, Kondangi Post Office, Villupuram Taluk & District , Pin-605301, Tamilnadu G.A. Educational & Charitable Trust, Plot No.7/20, 21A,E, Street/Road. Ellichathiram Road, Kandambakkam mathura Village, Thiruppachavadimedu, Kondangi Post Office, Villupuram Talukl & District, Pin-605301, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Sri Vidhyodhaya College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.7/20, 7/21A, 7/21E, Street.No.7/20, Thiruppachavadimedu village, Kondangi Post Office, Villupuram Taluk & District , Pin-605301, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 29.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 03.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State



Now, the institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 19.06.2013.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 250th meeting held on 11-13th Aug, 2013

has considered the reply of the institution to the deficiency letter dated:-19.06.2013

and all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection for B.Ed course


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

31

under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the

requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the

condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the

norms.

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between 24-26th and 2/8-30th

October, 2013, the same was intimated to the institution on 14.10.2013. The

inspection of the institution was conducted on 29/10/2013.

The SRC in its 256th meeting held on 4th – 06th Dec 2013 had duly considered VT

report, VCD of the institution and all the relevant documents of the institution and

deficiencies still persist as under:

1. As per VT report, the size of the multipurpose hall is only 1100 sq.ft, which is less than the requirement of 2000 sq.ft. as per NCTE norms.

2. The institution has not submitted, Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes.

3. Non-encumbrance certificate submitted is in regional language, notarized copy of the same in English version is not submitted by the institution.




course.





“…..The appeals Committee noted that inspection of the Institute was conducted on 29/10/2013. Nothing deficiencies relating to the inadequate size of multipurpose hall, non submission of the Revenue Divisional Officer proceedings on C.L.U and vernacular version of the non encumbrance certificate, the SRC refused recognition for B.Ed. course to the appellant institution. Committee further noted that the appellant institution was not given opportunity to make a written representation as envisaged in section 14(3)(b) of the Act. Committee therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue a show Cause Notice under proviso to section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act to the appellant institution. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

32

to issue a Show Cause Notice under proviso to section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act to the appellant institution. The Council hereby remands back the case of Shri Vidhyodhaya College of Education, Villupuram, Tamilnadu to the SRC NCTE, for Necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

11) SRCAPP2110

B.Ed

Usha College of

Education,

Dharmapuri,

Tamilnadu

TN

Usha College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 180, 181, Street No. 4/117, Vellegoundanpalyam Village, Settikarai Post Office, Dharmapuri Taluk & District, Pin-636704, Tamilnadu. Usha Educational Trust, Plot No. 14/117, Street/Road. Neelapuram Road, Jallihalli Kottai Village, Settikarai Post Office, Dharmapuri Taluk & District, Pin-636704, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Usha College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 180, 181, Street No. 4/117, Vellegoundanpalyam Village, Settikarai Post Office, Dharmapuri Taluk &

District, Pin-636704, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 04.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 04.02.2013 followed by reminder on 22.04.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 22.04.2013.

The Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after

stipulated period of 60 days and till date.

The SRC in its 250th Meeting held on 11th to 13th August, 2013 had considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted reply for deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days from the date of issue of deficiency letter and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee had decided as per clause 7(1) of NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.


Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution had preferred an


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

33

appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014 Remanded as follows:

“…. Appeals Committee noted that the recognition for B.Ed course applied by the appellant Institution was refused on the ground that ‘ Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 day’. Committee further noted that a deficiency letter dated 22/04/2013 was issued to the appellant Institution. the appellant during the course of Appeal hearing produced evidence of having sent reply to the deficiency letter vide

letter dated 06/06/2013. This reply was acknowledged by SRC on 06/06/2013 vide Dy. No 127401. The reply is however not available on the relevant file of SRC. The Committee, however, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to trace out and link the reply dated 06/06/2013 of the appellant Institution for further processing of the application. The appellant should also furnish a copy of the reply to SRC within 10 days of the receipt of the Appeal Order.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to trace out and link the reply dated 06/06/2013 of the appellant institution for further processing of the application. The appellant should also furnish a copy of the reply to SRC within 10 days of the receipt of the appeal Order.

The council hereby remands back the case of Usha College of Education, Dharmapuri, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.” The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)




(H.Q) instructions..

12) SRCAPP1947

B.Ed

Vallalar College

of Education,

Vellore,

Tamilnadu

TN

Vallalar College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 3A/2A, Street. No. 3A/2A, Melmuttugur Village, Chettikuppam Post Office, Gudiyattam Taluk, Vellore District, Pin-635806, Tamilnadu

Sri Meenachi Margabanthu Pillai Trust, Plot No. 33/11A, Street/Road. Pavala Street, Kamatchiammanpet, Gudiyattam Village, Gudiyattam Post Office & Taluk, Vellore District, Pin-632602, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Vallalar College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 3A/2A, Street. No. 3A/2A, Melmuttugur Village, Chettikuppam Post Office, Gudiyattam Taluk, Vellore District, Pin-635806, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 28.12.2012 and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

34

physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 31.12.2012.





The SRC in its 247th Meeting held on 20th-22nd June, 2013 considered the matter

and advised Southern Regional Office to prepare a comprehensive comparative

chart of cases B.Ed (SRCAPP1947) and D.Ed (APS04541) course and put up in the

248th meeting.

Accordingly, the application of B.Ed (SRCAPP1947), D.T.Ed (APS04541), and Courses has been processed and placed before SRC in its 251st meeting held on 25th – 27th August 2013 and the Committee considered the matter and all relevant documents of the institution for both B.Ed (SRCAPP1947) & existing D.T.Ed course (APS04541) of the institution to the deficiency letter was duly considered and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. Total earmarked built up area for both B.Ed and D.T.Ed is not submitted and is inadequate.

2. In the land usage certificate conversion from agriculture to non-agriculture is not mentioned.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the B.Ed (SRCAPP1947) application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course. Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 01.10.2013.




“….. Sh. M. Ramalingam, Chairman and A. Madhava Murthy, Advisor, Vallalar College of Education, Vellore, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant Institution on 11/04/2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the building plan and “the building completion certificate submitted to SRC is for the proposed B.Ed. course only. D.T.Ed. course is conducted in other building which is 2KM away from this building. Since the whole building is meant only for B.Ed., there is no need of earmarking the built-up area separately. We are enclosing both (B.Ed. & D.T.Ed.) for your kind consideration. We have obtained a fresh Land Usage Certificate mentioning conversion from agriculture to non-agriculture as required by SRC NCTE is submitted”. The appeal committee noted that the appellant institution was not given opportunity, by way of issuing a show cause notice (SCN), on the proposed grounds of refusal as


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

35

per section 14 (3) (b) of the NCTE Act. Council, therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue show Cause Notice under section 14 (3) (b) and process further as per regulations. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue Show Cause Notice under section 14 (3)(b) and process further as per regulations. The Council hereby remands back the case of Vallalar College of Education, Vellore, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)





13) SRCAPP1799

B.Ed

Sri

Venkateswara

College of

Education,

Dharmapuri,

Tamilnadu

TN

Sri Venkateswara College of Education, Pappireddipatti Village & Post Office, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636905, Tamilnadu. Sri Venkateswara Educational Trust, Street/Road. Salem Main Road, Pappireddipatti Village, Post Office & Taluk, Dharmapuri District-635207, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition Sri Venkateswara College of Education, Pappireddipatti Village & Post Office, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636905, Tamilnadu., for B.Ed Course for One year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 11.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 12.12.2012.

The Application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 02.01.2013. A reminder letter to the State

Government was sent on 14.03.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the

institution on 14.03.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on

27.03.2013.

The SRC in its 243rd meeting held on 29th- 30th April 2013 considered the reply of

the institution dt.27-03-2012 and all other relevant documents and decided to cause

inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution

fulfills all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to

the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per

the norms.

The inspection of the institution was fixed between 19th August, 2013. The same was intimated to the institution on 10.08.2013. The inspection of the institution was


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

36

conducted on 19.08.2013.

The SRC in its 252th meeting held on 13th – 14th September 2013 had considered

the VT report, VCD of the institution, all other relevant documents were duly

considered and deficiencies still persist as under:

1. As per VT report, multipurpose hall size is only 671 sq.ft. which is less than the requirement of 2000 sq.ft as per NCTE norms 2009.

Supreme Court has directed that norms/standards should be strictly enforced:

Supreme Court vide their order in Civil Appeal NO. 1125-1128/2011 in SLP No.

17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:



no institution is granted recognition unless it fulfills the conditions laid down in the

Act and the Regulations and the time schedule fixed for processing the application

by the Regional Committee and communication of the decision on the issue of


2. Original copy of the building plan approved by competent authority is not submitted.

3. In the land usage certificate submitted, total land area is not mentioned; conversion of agriculture land to non-agriculture land is not mentioned.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.





“…… Shri.P. Thennarasu, Treasurer, Sri Venkateswara College of Education, Dharmapuri, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant Institution on 16/04/2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that “ (i) the wall in between the general hall and the proposed multipurpose hall has been broken and made as a single hall with an area of 2034 sq.ft. (copy of the photograph and the building completion certificate approved by the Assistant Engineer, Panchayat Union Pappireddiapatti dated – 30/10/2013 is enclosed kind perusal as Annexure-1). They have not received any such Show Cause Notice prior to the rejection letter, However after knowing the fact from the VT members who have supplied a copy of the NCTE Regulations 2009 the multipurpose hall has been


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

37

extended to an extent of 2034 sq. ft. by removing the wall in between the general hall and the proposed multipurpose hall. The land along with the building has been purchased from PDR College of Education and Teacher Training Institute by our Society and the sale deed along with the approved building plan by the Executive Officer, Pappireddiapatti Town Panchayat was submitted along with the hard copy of the application and also submitted to the VT members on the day of inspection i.e. 19/08/2013. However they are enclosing the copy of the approved building plan for a constructed area of 6466 sq.ft. of each ground floor and first and second. The land usage certificate for the land 98/1c in the name of Sri Venkateswara Educational Trust has been obtained from the Revenue Divisional Officer, Harur who is the competent authority to issue the certificate vide order K District. 6049/2013 (A3) dated – 05/10/2013 which was submitted to the VT members along with the VT report, However, they are enclosing the copy of the same for perusal. Along with their letter given at the time of presentation, the appellant submitted some more documents”. The Council noted that the SRC, before issuing an order refusing grant of recognition did not issue a show cause to the appellant as required under the proviso to section 14 (3)(b) of the NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the regulations. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations. The Council hereby remands back the case of Sri Venkateswara College of Education, Dharmapuri, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above. The Committee considered the matter, as per the direction of NCTE (H'qrs)


new Regulations. Advised Southern Regional Office to process accordingly,

the case and put up after notification of new Regulations as per NCTE (H.Q)

instructions.

14) SRCAPP1898

B.Ed

Nizam School

of Education,

Nalgonda,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Nizam School of Education, Plot No.182AA, 183AA and 190AA, Deshmukhi Village, Bata Singaram Post Office, Pochampally (M) & City, Nalgonda District-508284, Andhra Pradesh Ummul Qura Education Society, Plot No.8-2-677, Road No.12, Banjara Hills Post Office, Hyderabad City & Taluk, Hyderabad District-500034, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Nizam School of Education, Plot No.182AA, 183AA and 190AA, Deshmukhi Village, Bata Singaram Post Office, Pochampally (M) & City, Nalgonda District-508284, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

38

Committee, NCTE online on 26.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 28.12.2012. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 06.02.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 27.05.2013(late by 2 days) There is no proof available on the cover. The institution has submitted its reply after the expiry of stipulated time of 60 days. “As per sub-clause (1) of Clause 7 of NCTE Regulation 2009, the applicant institutions is required to submit deficiencies to the Southern Regional Committee Office Within 60 days from the date of receipt of communication of deficiencies, failing which the application will be treated as rejected and closed, no extension to time will be granted and any submission received after 60 days will be treated as invalid and not entertained”. SRC in its 249th meeting held on 24th-26th July 2013, decided that dates given in

respect of B.Ed (2646) are discrepant. Recheck. Resubmit with a comparative

statement for B.Ed (2646) and B.Ed (1898).

As per the decision of SRC, a comparative statement was placed before SRC in its

254th meeting held on 25th-27th October 2013 and the reply of the institution to the

deficiency letter dated 27.05.2013 was duly considered and the reply was

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:-

1. Approved blue print of the building plan issued by competent civil authority is

not submitted. In the building plan submitted, total extent of land area is not

mentioned.

2. Total built up area of 16745.25 Sq.ft as shown in building plan is not tallying

with that of 22327 sq.ft as shown in building completion certificate.

3 Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue Divisional Office stating

that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational

purpose is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not

submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to non-agriculture. Land

use certificate submitted is not in the prescribed format.


based on a collective application of mind, the SRC in its 254th meeting decided as

per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution

(SRCAPP1898-B.Ed.)

Further, SRC decided to cause inspection of B.Ed (APS02646) course for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

39

reconstruction of file under NCTE Act. VT to be informed to collect all the relevant

documents of the institution for B.Ed course run by the institution.

As per the decision of the SRC, a rejection order was issued to the institution vide

order No. F.No.SRCAPP1898/B.Ed/AP/013-014/57438 dated 29/05/014 on

25.11.2013 (SRCAPP1898). Whereas, as per APS02646 B.Ed course an inspection

of the institution was conducted on 26.12.2013 and the statement of the VT

members as follows:

“It is pertinent to mention here that, in the Web portal of NCTE, it has been

mentioned that Nizam College of Education, Deshmukhi Village, Pocharampally

Mandal, Nalgonda – 508284, Andhra Pradesh – APS02646-31/12/2003 – Granted

20.06.2000 B.Ed (100)” which is not correct (copy of detailed statement downloaded

from NCTE Website enclosed”.

Meantime, the institution has submitted its written representation on 26.11.2013

stated as follows:-

“…….we are in receipt of minutes of 254th meeting of SRC-NCTE held on 25th-27th

October, 2013 wherein Recognition for B.Ed course for our college is rejected.

In response to our application, you have issued a show cause notice dated

26.03.2013 for which we have sent reply dated 24.05.2013 by Blue Dart Courier.

Further, we are to inform you that your deficiency letter dated 26th March 2013 was

received by us on 29th March 2013 (Xerox copy of speed post cover of NCTE

enclosed) and we have sent the reply on 24th May 2013 i.e. within days of

receipt of communication from you by Blue Dart Couriers, although you have given

60 days time to sent reply. (Xerox copy of Receipt issued by Blue Dart Couriers

enclosed).

We are also to inform you that, earlier we have applied for Grant of Recognition for

B.Ed course on 30.09.2011 which was rejected vide NCTE letter No.SRCAPP1427

(2012-13)B.Ed/AP/2011-12/35961 dated 13.01.2012 (copy letter enclosed).

It is pertinent to mention here that, in the Web portal of NCTE, it has been

mentioned that Nizam College of Education, Deshmukhi Village, Pocharampally

Mandal, Nalgonda – 508284, Andhra Pradesh – APS02646-31/12/2003 – Granted

20.06.2000 B.Ed (100)” which is not correct (copy of detailed statement downloaded

from NCTE Website enclosed).

For your kind information, we state that in the list of B.Ed Colleges of Andhra

Pradesh State Council for Higher Education in Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh,

where currently B.Ed admissions were held, our college name is not reflecting,

which clearly indicates that permission has not granted to our B.Ed College. (Copy


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

40

of downloaded list from APSCHE website enclosed).

We submit that the College building area is consisting of Ground + 3 Floors, Each

Floor Area is 5581.75 sq.ft., thus the total area comes to 5581.75 x 4 floors = 22327

sq.ft., but not 16745.25 sq.ft which is erroneously shown in the 254th meeting of SRC

held on 25th-27th October 2013.

Further, we are to inform you that the ‘Land Use Certificate’ is issued by Tahasildar,

B. Pochampally, Nalgonda District on 09.05.2013 who is the competent Authority in

Government, which is notarized. (Copy enclosed).

Therefore, we are herewith enclosing copies of the following documents once again

to do the needful in the matter.

1. Approved Blue Print of Building Plan issued by competent CivilAuthroity. All deficiencies have been attended

2. Affidavit and notarized land use certificate in prescribed format.

Under the circumstance explained above, we humbly request you to kindly grant

recognition for B.Ed course 2014-15 and oblige.”

The SRC in its 259th meeting held during 17th-19th January, 2014 considered the VT

report, VCD and all other relevant documents of the institution and decided that:-

1. The Application for B.Ed course (SRCAPP1898) was rejected on 25.11.2013.

2. Reference to APS02646-B.Ed was wrong. No such case existed.

3 Request of the institution to SRC to reconsider cannot be considered. There is no provision for that in NCTE Regulations 2009. The Institution can only go for an appeal against our order in case SRCAPP1898.

As per the decision of the SRC,a rejection order was issued to the institution

videF.No.SRCAPP1898/013/014/B.Ed/AP/2013-14/57438 dated 11/03/2014.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution filed an appeal before the

appellate authority, NCTE Hqrs.

The appellate authority order F.No.89-6/014 Appeal/6th Meeting-2014/A88457 dated

29/05/2014 received by this office on 16/06/2014is as under:-

"Mohd. Jafar, Chairman, Nizam School of Education, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh

Presented the case of the appellant institution on 17-04-2014. In the appeal and

during personal presentation it was submitted that "approved Blue print of Building

Plan by Competent Civil Authority already submitted. Again a copy of same is

enclosed for your kind perusal. Our college building area is consisting of Ground + 3

floors. Each floor area is 5581.75 sft. Thus total area comes to 22327 sft but not


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

41

16745.25 sft which is erroneously recorded. Probably NCTE, SRC has taken

Ground + 2 floors although we have Ground + 3 floors. We already submitted Land

Usage Certificate issued by Tahsildar, B.Pochampally, Nalgonda District who is the

Competent Authority in Government, duly notarized. Again we

enclose a copy of same for your kind persual. Copies of Proceedings Documents

pertaining to Land Conversion are submitted."

Appeals Committee noted that the appellant Institution was not given opportunity to

make a written representation on the proposed grounds for refusal of recognition as

envisaged insection 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act. Committee therefore, concluded to

remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue a SCN under the proviso to

Section 14(3)(b) of the Act and take further action as per Regulations.

After persual of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on


Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction

to issue a SCN under the proviso to Section 14(3)(b) of the Act and take further

action as per Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Nizam School of Education,

Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh to SRC, for necessary action as indicated above."



new Regulations. Advised Southern Regional Office to processthe case



15) APS00047

B.Ed

Bhongir College

of Education,

Nalgonda,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Bhongir College of Education, Hanumapur, Bhongir, Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh.

VJR Memorial Educational Society, Hanmapur, Bhongir, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Bhongir College of Education, Hanumapur, Bhongir, Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh submitted an application for grant of recognition to B.Ed course. The application was processed and recognition was granted for offering B.Ed course with an annual intake of 120 students on 14/08/2000 at Hanumapur, Bhongir, Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 01.03.2013 along with DD

of Rs.50,000/- (expired) stating as follows:

“with the reference to the subject cited above, I would like to bring to your kind notice that our Bhongir College of Education (B.Ed), Hanmapur, Bhongir, Nalgonda


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

42

District., managed by “VJR Memorial Educational Society” Established in the year 1999-2000 with an intake of 120. The college is running in rural area which is far away from the Road and Transport facilities. The same has been shifted to own land and newly constructed building, situated at Anantharam, NH 202 Main Road, Bhongir, Nalgonda District, in Sy.No. 131/a, 132 from the academic year 2012-13. I am herewith enclosing D.D. Rs. 50.000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) for shifting fee.

Hence, I request your honor to inspect our new own premises and issue appropriate orders, for which I would be grateful to you”.

A letter was sent to institution for revalidation of original demand drafts on 18.07.2013. The institution has submitted revalidation of Demand Drafts on 05.08.2013 stating that “requesting for shifting to own building for our college”.

The Committee in its 251st meeting held on 25-27th considered the request of the institution for shifting of the B.Ed course to new building & all other relevant documents and decided to cause Composite inspection for B.Ed (APS00047) & APS02804 (D.Ed) course run by the institution under NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms.

Note: The institution to be advised to submit all the documents and approved staff

list to VT member at the time of inspection.

Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed on 7-12th October, 2013. The

same was intimated to the institution on 27-09-2013.

As per the direction of SRC, the inspection of the institution was conducted on

08/10/2013 and the VT report received in the office of SRC on 11-10-2013.

The Committee considered the VT report, VCD of the institution on the above matter

and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to Reject for the

following reasons:-

• The institution has not submitted, original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund in joint account.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has asked for strict enforcement of Regulations.







(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

43




Based on the above points the committee decides to Reject the recognition of the

B.Ed course run by Bhongir College of Education, Hanumapur Village, Bhongir,

Nalgonda District-508116, Andhra Pradesh from the academic year 2013-14, in

order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete

their course.

But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further

admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order.

The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly.

Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC

NCTE, Bangalore, if any, after ensuring payments to all dues of faculty and staff.

The VT report was placed before SRC’s 255th meeting held on 13-15th Nov, 2013

and the Committee has decided to ‘Reject’ the application instead of withdrawal of

recognition”.

The Committee in its 256th meeting held on 04-06th December, 2013 has reviewed

the decision taken in its 255th meeting, decided to correct the mistake of decision as

‘Reject’ and change it to withdrawal of recognition w.e.f 2013-14.

Accordingly, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 07.01.2014.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution filed an appeal before the


The appellate authority order F.No. 89-43/2014 Appeal/6th Meeting 2014/A88441

dated 29/05/2014 is received by this office on 16/06/2014 has ordered as under:

“Dr. M. Niranjan Reddy, Secretary, Bhongir College of Education, Nalgonda, Andhra

Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 17-04-2014. In the

appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that “as per SRC NCTE

office letter No. SRC/NCTE/2009-10/14035 dated 12.06.2009, we have deposited

endowment fund of ₹. 5 lacs under DRS No. 671729 and Reserve fund ₹. 3 lacs

under FDR No. 671732 pertaining to B.Ed, course and ₹. 5 lacs under FDR No.

671734 and Reserve fund ₹. 3 lacs under FDR 671731 pertaining to the D.Ed

course of the institution with the Indian Overseas Bank. Padmarao Nagar Branch

Hyderabad. It is further submitted that the said FDR receipts stood in the name of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

44

our institution as well”.

Appeals Committee noted that recognition for conducting B.Ed course of the appellant institution has been withdrawan by SRC vice order dated 07/01/2014 simply and solely on the ground that the institution has not submitted original FDRs of ₹. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund in joint account. The appellant during the course of appeal hearing produced copy of the SRC letter no. SRC/NCTE/ACCTS/2010-11/24301 dated 1811/2010. The contents of this letter reveal tha torigial F.D. ₹. Bearing no. 571729 and 671732 amounting to ₹, 5 & 3 lacs respectively were seen in original and verified by office of SRC and returned to the appellant institution.

Appeals Committee further noted that an inspection of the appellant institution was conducted on 08/10/2013 for assessing suitability of the premises where the appellant institution was proposed to be located. On page 3 of the inspection report the V.T. members have made entries to the effect that F.D.for ₹. 5 & 3 lacs respectively have been vefrified in original. There was also no show cause notice issued to the appellant institution in terms of proviso to section 17/1) of the Act. Appeals Committee therefore, concluded that the withdrawal order dated 07-01-2014 issued by SRC deserves t be set aside and case be remanded back to SRC with a direction to process further the proposal to grant permission for shiftig the institution from one premise to the other.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced furing the hearing, the Council concuded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process further the proposal to grant permission for shifting the institution from one premise to the other.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Bhongir College of Education, Nalgonda, Andhra Pradesh to SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

16) APS00288

B.Ed

Gayathri

College of

Education,

Vizianagaram,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Gayathri College of Education, Naidu Colony, Thotapalem Post Office,

Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh

Sangamitra Educational Society, Dr.No.8.20-25, Balaji Nagar, Vizianagaram ,

Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Gayathri College of

Education, Naidu Colony, Thotapalem Post Office, Vizianagaram District, Andhra

Pradesh for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act,

1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, on 31.12.2001.

The application was processed and granted recognition to Gayathri College of

Education, Naidu Colony, Thotapalem Post Office, Vizianagaram District, Andhra


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

45

Pradesh for B.Ed course of one year duration from the academic session 2002-03

with an annual intake of 100 students on 04.04.2003 with a condition to shift its own

premises within three years from the date of recognition.

The institution has submitted a letter requesting shifting of premises from temporary

to permanent building on 24.09.2007 and along with Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/-

A letter was issued to the institution on 25.05.2009 with the request to submit the

relevant documents for shifting.

1. Land documents of new building/location for having own land in the name of the institution/society/trust.

2. Building plan of the new building duly approved by the Government authority. 3. Building Completion Certificate from the Government authorities in the

prescribed format (format enclosed) 4. Land Usage Certificate from the concerned Government authorities stating

that the land is exclusively permitted/sanctioned for Educational purposes only should be submitted.

5. Encumbrance Certificate from the competent government should be submitted.

6. Fixed Deposit Receipt of Rs.5 lakhs kept in JOINT ACCOUNT with SRC in Nationalised Bank for a period of 5 years towards Endowment Fund in ORIGINAL should be submitted.

7. Fixed Deposit Receipt of Rs.5 lakhs kept in JOINT ACCOUNT with SRC in Nationalised Bank for a period of 5 years towards Endowment Fund in ORIGINAL should be submitted.

8. Certificate of Registration / Bye-law of the society / Trust should be submitted.

9. The affidavit in Rs.100/- stamp paper in the prescribed format with Notary attestation should be submitted (Format Enclosed).

The institution has submitted relevant documents on 29.06.2009 and the original

FDR of Rs.5 lakh and Rs.3 lakhs.

Now, the institution has submitted its written representation on 03.10.2013 stating as

follows:-

“as per the instructions specified in your office letter No.F.SRO/NCTE/2008-

09/13071 dated 25.05.2009 and the follow up letter dated 03.06.2009. we

have been sent original FDRs (Rs.5,00,000/- & Rs.3,00,000/-) to your office

on 22.06.2010 by speed post.

So far we did not receive the official acknowledgement of the original FDRs

from your office. Since the original FDRs or the acknowledgement from your

office is not in our records, we are unable to answer the university and state

government officials in this issue. Hence I request you to issue the original

FDRs to the bearer of this letter Sri.Y.S.P.N. Mangesh who is working as

Principal, Ashoka College of Education, Jammu, Vizianagaram District,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

46

Andhra Pradesh. In this matter we correspondent your office several times.”

The SRC in its 255th meeting held on 13th- 15th November 2013 and the written reply

of the institution vide letter dated 29-06-2009 & 03-10-2013 on the above matter and

also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to refuse shifting

permission and withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

• The Clear title to the land is not established. The institution has not submitted certified copy of the land documents approved by competent authority.

• As per the Encumbrance certificate of the institution, the land is mortgaged to Vijaya Bank.

• FDR of Rs. 5 lacs towards endowment fund is expired on 23-05-2011. Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the

B.Ed course run by Gayathri College of Education, Naidu Colony, Thotapalem Post

Office, Vizianagaram District,, Andhra Pradesh from the academic year 2013-14, in

order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete

their course.






As per the decision of the SRC, rejection order was issued to the institution vide

order No.F.No.APS000288/B.Ed/AP/2013-2014/57420 dated 10/03/2014.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution filed an appeal before the


The appellate authority order F.No.89-12/2014 Appeal/6th Meeting-2014 dated

29/05/2914 is received by this office on 16/06/2014 is as under:-

"Dr. C.H. Satya Rao, Principal, Gayatri College of Education, Vizianagaram, Andhra

Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 17-04-2014. In the

appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that "the clear title to the

land is established by the certified land document from (a) The Joint Sub-Registar,

Land Registration, Vizianagaram (b) The Mandal Revenue officer,

Bondapalli Mandal, Vizianagaram District (c) The Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO),

Vizianagaram district. During the time of construction of permanent building at the

site, the land was mortgaged to Vijaya Bank. But the land is released from its

mortgage w.e.f. 12-05-2012 (Copy is enclosed). The Institution submitted all

necessary documents along with a FDR of Rs.5.lakhs for the purpose of Endowment


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

47

Fund to your good office on 29-06-2009 for shifting of premises from temporary

accommodation to permanent accommodation. At the time the due date of FDR is

25-05-2011 which is in live. Subsequently the bank automatically renewed the FDR

for next three years up to 23-05-2014 as per the endorsement no.

060920001000353 (Relevant document given by the bank enclosed)."

The Council noted that the appellant institution had submitted a proposl for shifting

of premises from temporary to permanent building on 24-09-2007. The Sourthern

Regional Committee (SRC) vide its letter dated 25-05-2009 sought certain

documents from the appellant institution which were furnished by the appellant on

20/29-06-2009. Committee further noted that the SRC, after a lapse of more than

four years dated 27-12-2013 refused the shifting permission and also withdrew

recognition for B.Ed. course from the academic session 2013-2014. The Appeals

Committee further noted that no show cause notice as required under proviso to

Section 17 (1) of the NCTE Act was issued seeking written representation from the

appellant institution. Committee therefore, concluded to remand back the case to

SRC with a direction to issue SCN and take further action as per Regulations. The

Council also expressed it serious concern over the long delay caused in setting the

request for shifting of the appellant institution.


records and considering the oreal arguments advanced during the hearing, the


to issue SCN and take further action as per Regulations and also expresses it

serious concern over the long delay caused in setting the request for shifting of the

appellant institution.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Gayatri College of Education,

Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above."





(H.Q) instructions.

17) SRCAPP155

B.Ed

Islamia College

of Education,

Warangal,

Andhra

Pradesh

Islamia College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.11-23-446/1, L.B.Nagar Street, Warangal Village and Post Office, Warangal City and Taluk, Warangal District-506002, Andhra Prdesh.

Islamia Education Society, plot No.11-23-446, Lal Bahadur Nagar Street, Warangal Village and Post Office, Warangal City and Taluk, Waqrangal District-506002, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Islamia College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.11-23-446/1, L.B.Nagar Street, Warangal Village and Post Office, Warangal City and Taluk, Warangal District-506002, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

48

AP Course of two year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 04.01.2013.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 06.02.2013/28.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 05.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 05.06.2013. The reply of the institution vide letter dated 05-06-2013 to the deficiency letter was

duly considered by SRC in its 252nd meeting held on 13th -14th September 2013, and

observed that the reply was unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still

persisted as under:-

1. Building plan submitted is not approved by the competent civil authority. 2. Total built up area as per building plan is18776.20 sq.ft and as per building

completion certificate it is 26437.32 sq.ft, both are not tallying. 3. The institution has not submitted valid minority certificate issued by the

competent authority from the State Govt. as B.Ed is banned in the State of Andhra Pradesh for the session 2013-14.

4. A proceeding for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural purpose is not submitted.




recognition of B.Ed course.


order No. F.No.SRCAPP/155/B.Ed/AP/2013-2014 dated 10/03/2014.




29/05/014 is received by this on 29/05/2014 which is as under:

"Shri Shaikh Bashree Ahmed, President, Islamia College of Educaion, Warangal,

Andhra Pradesh Presented the case of the appellant institution on 16-04-2014. In

the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that a revised Building

Plan is resubmitted with Application form submitted along with the Approved plan on

05-06-2013 with inward no. 127366 at SRC-NCTE, Bangalore. The society is

already running Govt. Aided School, Junior College and Degree College having

permanent Minority Status Certificate. Application to obtain Minority Status for B.Ed.

Course is in process at the Minority Welfare Department, Govt. of AP. The Minority

Certificate is expected within a couple of days. A land use Certificate obtained from


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

49

Tahsildar has already been submitted along with the application on 05-06-2013 with

Inward no. 127366 at SRC-NCTE, Bangalore.

The Council noted that the SRC, before issuing an order refusing recognition, did not

give a show cause notice to the appellant, which is required to be issue in terms of

the proviso to Section 14 (3)(b) of the NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the

council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a

direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per

the Regulations.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on


Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a show

cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Islamia College of Education,

Warangal, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above."





(H.Q) instructions.

18) SRCAPP47

B.P.Ed

Sree

Vidyaranya

B.P.Ed College,

Anantapur,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sree Vidyaranya B.P.Ed College, Khasara No.533-B, Plot No.1/253, Gotty

Village, Gooty P.O., City & Taluk, Anantapur District-515401, Andhra Pradesh

Sree Vidyaranya Educational Society, Plot No.1-253, Teachers Colony, Gooty

Village, P.O., City & Taluk, Anantapur District-515401, Andhra Pradesh had

applied for grant of recognition to Sree Vidyaranya B.P.Ed College, Khasara

No.533-B, Plot No.1/253, Gotty Village, Gooty P.O., City & Taluk, Anantapur

District-515401, Andhra Pradesh for B.P.Ed course online on 30.09.2011 for one

year duration under section 14(1) of the NCTE Act 1993 and received in the

Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 18.10.2011.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 08.02.2013/12.04.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 12.04.2013, again reposted on 26.04.2013. The institution has submitted its written representation on 12.06.2013. The reply of the institution vide letter dated 12-06-2013 to the deficiency letter was

duly considered by SRC in its 252nd meeting held on 13th to 14th September,2014

and the reply was unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

50

under:Approved building plan from competent civil authority is not submitted.




recognition of B.P.Ed course.


order No. F.No.SRCAPP/47/B.P.Ed/AP/2013-14/54281 dated 09/10/2013




21/05/2014 is as under.

"Sh.T.Rajakumari, Administrator cum Clerk, Sree Vidyaranya B.P.Ed. College,

Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 12-04-

2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the

Building Plan approved by the Commissioner, Gooty Municipalty on 27/12/2012 was

submitted along with the triplicate hard copy submitted on 07-01-2013. However on

receiving the deficiency letter dated 12-04-2013 another copy was submitted to

SRC, NCTE on 11-06-2013. It is also informed that the date of submission of online

application was on 31-12-2012 not 30-09-2011 and the

submission of hard copy was on 07-01-2013 not 18-10-2011 as mentioned in the rejection

letter dated 09-10-2013.

The Council noted that the SRC before refusing recognition has not issued a show cause notice to the institution, which is required in accordance with the proviso to Section 14(3) (b) of the NCTE Act. In the circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further action as per the Regulations.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and

considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the

appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the

appellant institution and take further action as per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Sree Vidyaranya B.P.Ed.College, Anantapur,

Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above”.







(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

51

19) SRCAPP1894

B.P.Ed

Narayana

B.P.Ed College,

Anantapur,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Narayana B.P.Ed College, Khasara / Plot No.779-B, Peddapolamada Village, Tadipatri Post & Taluk, Anantapur District-515411, Andhra Pradesh Adithya Educational Society, Plot No.3/456-3-1, Krishnapuram Zero Road, Tadipatri Village, Post & Taluk, Anantapur District-515411, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Narayana B.P.Ed College, Khasara / Plot No.779-B, Peddapolamada Village, Tadipatri Post & Taluk, Anantapur District-515411, Andhra Pradesh for B.P.Ed Course of One year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 26.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 27.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 09.01.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 17.05.2013. The SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th-22nd June 2013, considered the reply of

the institution to the deficiency letter dt.17-05-2013 and all other relevant documents

and decided to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to examine

whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed

programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified

by the institution, as per the norms.

Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed on 26th-31rd August 2013, the same was intimated to the institution on 22.08.2013. As per the direction of SRC, the inspection of the institution was conducted on 30.08.2013 and the VT Report received in the office of SRC on 06.09.2013

The SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25th-27th October,2014 duly considered VT

report, VCD of the institution and all the relevant documents of the institution and

observed that deficiencies still persist as under:-

1. Building plan submitted by the institution is not duly approved by the competent authority. The Building plan submitted is approved by Municipal Licensed Surveyor, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.

2. Notarised English version of the land document is in individual name of J.C. Ravi Kumar Reddy S/o J.C. Sankara Narayana Reddy, President of Adithya Education Society, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.



Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.P.Ed

course.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

52



21/05/2014 received by this office on 16/06/2014 is as under:-

"Sh. B. Ramasubramanyam, E.C. Member, Narayana B.P.d. College, Anantapur,

Andhra Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 12-04-2014. In

the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that Building plan

submitted by them was duly approved by the competent authority i.e.Panchayat

Secretary, (R.C. No: 22/2012/Peddpolamada), Peddapolamada (Village), Tadipatri

(Mandal), Anantapur(Dist), AP on 28/12/2012 and Govt. Mandal Engineering officer,

Mandal Parishad, Tadipatri, Anantapur (Dist), AP is also certified the same. The

Muncicpal Licensed Surveyor has drawn the building sketch plan only. Notarized

English Version of the land documents is in the name of Adithya Educational Society

but not in individual name. The necessary notarized English version of origional

document is with them and it was already submitted to SRC NCTE on 27/01/2013.

Which was overlooked by the council.

The Council noted that after receiving a reply to the deficiency letter, the SRC got an

inspection of the institution conducted on 30/08/2013 and considering the VT Report

refused recognition. The Council noted that the SRC has not issued a Show cause

notice before refusing recognition which is required to be issued in accordance with

the proviso to Section 14 (3) (b) of the NCTE Act. In the circumstances, the Council

concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to

issue a show cause notice and take further action as per the Regulations.


records and considering the oral aruguments advanced during the hearing, the


to issue a show cause notice and take further action as per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Narayana B.P.Ed. College,

Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above."

Note: On 29/05/2014, in obdience to the appellate authority order, the institution has

submitted documents with respect to the points mentioned in the rejection order.





(H.Q) instructions.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

53

20) SRCAPP202

B.Ed

Greater College

of Education,

Ranga Reddy,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Greater College of Education, Plot/Khasra No. 165/a, Plot No.1,1st Street, Majidpur Village, Shamirpet Post Office and Taluk, Shamirpet Town, Rangareddy District- 500078, Andhra Pradesh Vishwa Vishwas Educational Society, Plot No. 3-4-78,Sajidpura Street,Siddipet Town and Post Office,Siddipet Taluk and Town,Medak District – 502103, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Greater College of Education, Plot/Khasra No. 165/a, Plot No.1,1st Street, Majidpur Village, Shamirpet Post Office and Taluk, Shamirpet Town,Rangareddy District- 500078, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 06.02.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013 and reposted on 26.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 29.05.2013. The reply of the institution vide letter dt. 29.05.2013 to the deficiency letter was duly considered by SRC in its 248

th meeting held on 13

th-15

th July 2013, and the reply was

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:

• Institution has not submitted valid minority certificate issued by the competent authority from the State Govt. as B.Ed is banned in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

• Total built up area earmarked for B.Ed course as per building plan is 1431.68 sq.mtrs, which is less than the requirement of 1500 sq.mtrs as per NCTE Norms 2009.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer is not submitted.

• Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes.

• Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank in favour of Society/college/institution name is not submitted.




course.

As per the decision of the SRC,a rejection order was issued to the institution

videF.No.SRO/NCTE/SRCAPP202/B.Ed/AP/2013-14/55797 dated 31/12/2013


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

54

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution filed an appeal under Section

18 of NCTE Act, before the Appellate Authority, NCTE, New Delhi.


1/05/014 is as under

'The Council noted that the SRC did not issue a show cause notice to the appellant

institution before refusing recognition, which is required to be issued as per the

proviso to Section 14 (3) (b) Sof the NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the Council

concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with the direction to

issue a show cause notice to the appllant institution and further action as per the

Regulations.



Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with the

direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further

action as per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Greater College of Education,

Rangareddi, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above.'





(H.Q) instructions.

21) SRCAPP1885

B.Ed

Princess

College of

Education,

Hyderabad,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Princess College of Education, Plot No.19-3-1090/S/2, Hyderabad Village, Falaknuma Post Office, Bahadurpura Taluk, Hyderabad District-500053, Andhra Pradesh.

Syed Noorunnisa and Rizwana Parveen Educational Society, Plot No.19-3-1090/S/2, Falaknuma Main Road, Bandlaguda Taluk, Hyderabad District-500053, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition Princess College of Education, Plot No.19-3-1090/S/2, Hyderabad Village, Falaknuma Post Office, Bahadurpura Taluk, Hyderabad District-500053, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 26.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 31.12.2012.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 06.02.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013. Now the institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 27.05.2013 (the reply


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

55

dispatched on 24.05.2013 as per speed post). The Deficiency reply of B.Ed courses i.e. (SRCAPP1885) was placed before the

SRC in its 247th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd July, 2013 and the Committee directed

the SRO to put up a comparative chart in the 248th Meeting for all the 4 courses –

B.Ed (SRCAPP1885), B.Ed (APS07049), B.Ed (SRCAPP857), D.Ed (APS07048).

Accordingly, comparative for all the 4 courses – B.Ed (SRCAPP1885), B.Ed

(APS07049), B.Ed (SRCAPP857), D.Ed (APS07048) was processed:.


considered by SRC in its 250th meeting held on 11th -13th August 2013, and the reply

is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:-

1.The institution has submitted only Certificate for regularizing unauthorized construction and not original approved Building Plan. 2. The institution has submitted the LUC and it is meant for residential use.




course.


order No.F.No.SRO/NCTE/SRCAPP1885/B.Ed/AP/2013/14.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution filed and appeal before the



21/05/2014 is received by this office on 16/06/2014 is as under:-

"Sh. M.A. Qayum Khan, Secreatry, Princess College of Education, Hyderabad,

Andhra Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 11-04-2014. In

the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that "original approval

building plan copy of GHMC is enclosed. Our institution building lies under

residential area institutions are allowed in residential area. In Andhra Pradesh as

per G.O. Ms. 33 dated 24-01-2013 copy of G.O. is enclosed for your reference."

Council noted that the rejection order dated 30/09/2013 is mainly on two grounds

namely; (i) the institution has not submitted origional approved building plan and (ii)


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

56

land use certificate is means residential use.

Committee further noted that the building plan submitted by the appellant bears

approval signatures and stamp of the Greater Hyderabad Muncipal Corporation.

The stamp and signatures are affixed at the back page of building plan and this

might have been a reason that SRC could not notice it. The appellant had also

furnished to the SRC vide its letter dated 03/09/2013 copy of the Greater Hyderabad

Municipal Corporation notification dated 14/07/2011 which indicates that properties

lying in Residential use Zone can be used for the purpose of Educational institutions

like school, degree college, professional college and universities. Committee

therefore, concluded to remand the case to SRC with a direction to process the

application further as per regulations.




to process the application further as per regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Princess College of Education,

Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above."





(H.Q) instructions.

22) APS05561

B.Ed

Rajeev

Mamorial

College of

Teacher

Education,

Kannur, Kerala

KL

Rajeev Memorial College of Teacher Education, Mattanur, Kannur, Kerala

Rajeev Memorial College of Teacher Education, Mattanur, Kannur, Kerala was

granted recognition for B.Ed. course on 7.12.2007 with an annual intake of 100

students with a condition to shift to its own premises within 3 years. As per the

decision of SRC in its 175th meeting, the SRC reviewed the files of the institutions

who were granted recognition either in permanent premises or in leased premises.

A list of such institutions was prepared and placed before SRC in its 176th meeting.

In the 176th meeting of SRC, it was decided to issue Show Cause Notice to the

institutions which was issued on 2.7.2009 calling for documents for shifting of

premises. The institution submitted its explanation to the Show Cause Notice on

28.7.2009. It was observed from the file and notings that a draft agenda item was

prepared, however, no further course of action is available in the file, thereafter.

On 5.10.2011, a complaint against the above institution was received from Sri.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

57

Rajesh P.V., Advocate & Notary, Taliparamba, Kannur, Kerala on behalf of Sri.

Prakashan.P. This office vide letter dated 21.10.2011 had requested the

complainant to submit an affidavit of Rs.100/- on non-judicial stamp paper in respect

of the complaint received on 5.10.2011.

Sri. P.V. Rajesh, Advocate & Notary submitted an affidavit on Rs.100/- non-judicial

stamp paper duly signed by the complainant Sri. Prakashan.P., S/o. Damodaran,

Payyanadan House, Kannothumchal, Chovva P.O., Kannur-6, Kerala. The

complainant requested not to recognize Rajiv Memorial College of Teacher

Education, Mattanoor and not to give affiliation as well and to take immediate steps

to close down the College since it is alleged that the institution is functioning without

complying the terms and conditions fixed by Kannur University and NCTE. The

affidavit along with the complaint is enclosed.

In the Reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 28.7.2009, the institution had stated

that the construction of the proposed new building had been started and was likely to

be completed upto November, 2010.

The SRC in its 215th meeting held on 12-13 December, 2011 considered the complaint of Mr. Sri. Prakashan.P and decided that to register this as a shifting case, if a file is already pending, and also to cause inspection at the premises on receipt of Rs. 40.000/- towards inspection fee and to ascertain the facts of the complaint. Accordingly, a visit wasscheduled to the institution during 6th February, 2012 to 8th February, 2012. A letter to the institution was addressed vide letter No. APS05561/B.Ed./KA/2011-12/36061 dated 18.01.2012. A fax was received from the institution on 24.01.2012 stating that they are not ready for inspection as the permanent building for the College is under construction. The building will be ready for inspection by the end of May, 2012.

As per the decision of 215th SRC meeting held on 12th – 13th December 2011, the

visiting team comprising of Dr. S. Thangasamy, Director and Professor, Centre for

Educational Research, Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai and Dr. C. Raja Moauli,

Professor, Dept. of Education, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University, Hyderabad was

proposed to the institution during 6th to 8th February, 2012. On 14.2.2012, the

Visiting team has submitted a blank report stating that the inspection may kindly be

postponed.

The SRC in its 224th meeting held on 14th – 17th June, 2012 has considered the

matter and decided to serve Final Show Cause Notice Under NCTE Act. Accordingly

Final Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 09.07.2012, the institution

submitted its written representation on 30.07.2012.

The SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21st – 22nd November 2012,considered the

reply of the institution dt.30-07-2012 and all other relevant documents and decided


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

58

to cause inspection as per NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the

requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the

condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the

norms.

Accordingly, an intimation letter was sent to the institution on 03/12/2012 .

An E-Mail dated 05/12/2012 is received by this office from the Principal, Rajeev

Memorial College of Teacher Education requesting the postponement of inspection

to February 2013 as they are not prepared for the inspection as the permanent

construction of the building of the college has been 90 % completed. Another letter

regarding postponement of inspection is received by this office on 07/12/2012..

An E-mail dated 10/12/2012 and 12/12/2012 from Mr. Balaramulu and

Ms.Philomena Lobo is received by this office seeking clarification regarding the date

of inspection.

The Inspection team members were informed to conduct the inspection as

scheduled vide F.SRO/NCTE/KL/VT/2012/47730 dated 14/12/2012.

Another letter dated 21/12/2012 from the Principal, Rajeev Memorial College of

Teacher Education is received by this office on 24/12/2012 requesting for

postponement of inspection to February 2013.

On 30/01/2013 , E-Mails from Mr. Balarumulu and Philomena Lobo has been

received by this office enclosing a brief report of visit to Rajeev Memorial B.Ed

College, Mattanur, Kannur, Kerala

The report was as under :

“On 11th January, 2013,Friday,we visited the colleges at 9.00 a.m .We were

received by a reluctant Principal, Dr.Pillai. To our great shock and surprise, we found

that neither the management nor the Principal had mad any preparations for the visit

of VT, though it was intimated to them well in advance by both your office and by us.

The basic requirements of preparedness like, filling up of the Format supplied by

you was not done. No records, be it of the building or academic were kept ready. In

short, it was the Principal expected us not to conduct any inspection and asked us to

get back.”

A blank inspection report and non filed questionnaire has been received by this

office on 01/02/2013 along with the letter from the VT members enclosing a report

and a few photographs stating that”

“ We visited the Rajeev Memorial College of Teacher Education, Mattanur, Kannur

District ,Kerala, as reported by the Principal earlier, the college building is not


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

59

completed nor the records were produced. They were not prepared for the

inspection, still as per intimation we have visited the spot and saw that the college is

running in the first floor of a commercial complex.

We have enclosed a report regarding the visit, the letter given by the Principal of the

College, the formats given by you for the inspection and TA and Honorarium bills

A copy of the report is enclosed.

A certificate from the Principal, Dr.Vijayan Pillai submitted along with the VT report

has states that :

“ On the day of their visit, the Manager of Society was not present on our premises

due to ill health. Since all the original records are with the Manager himself, I

couldn’t produce any document regarding the building or others, for the perusal of

the V.T , nor the application format was also filled up and kept ready for the

inspection.

I hereby state that, all the relevant records will be produced for inspection once our

building is ready and shifted to our new campus.”

The SRC in its 241st meeting held on 29th & 31st March 2013 & 1st April 2013

considered the Institution letter dt.11-01-2013 and all other relevant documents and

decided to cause inspection in the month of April-2013 under NCTE Act, to examine

whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed


by the institution, as per the norms.

The inspection of the institution was scheduled for 27thMay, 2013 and the same was

intimated to the institution vide this office letter F.No.APSO5561/B.Ed/KE/2013-

14/51703 dated 16/05/2013..Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was carried

out on 30.05.2013

The Southern Regional Committee in its 248th Meeting held on 13th – 15th July 2013

considered the VT report, VCD of the institution on the above matter and also the

relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the

following reasons:-

3. Original certified copy of the land documents from Govt. authority is not submitted. The institution has submitted photocopy of the land documents, the land documents is in favour of in individual by name Prof. K.Lakshmana, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009. Approved blue print of the building plan issued by competent civil authority is not

submitted. In the building plan copy submitted, Institution’s name is not

mentioned.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

60

4. Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer is not submitted. 5. Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalized Bank in joint name is not given. Notarized land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes. 6. Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.

• Staff is not accordingly to NCTE norms.

• Original affidavit is not submitted. Supreme Court order regarding time schedule to be followed by the institutions









Based on the above points the SRC decided to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed

course run by the Rajeev Memorial College of Teacher Education, Mattanur,

Kannur, Kerala, from the academic year 2013-14 in order to enable the ongoing

batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course. It was made

clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent

to the date of issue of this order.The Affiliating body / Examining board / body were

informed accordingly. Further it was decided to return Endowment funds and

Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any.

Accordingly, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution vide F.No.APS05561

/B.Ed /KL / 2013-14/53312 dated 26.08.2013.

On 08.11.2013, an e-mail was received from K.Priyesh stating as under ;

“ We wish to inform you that Rajeev Memorial B.Ed College is still working in Kannur

District without your recognition.

Kindly , please give a direction to Kannur University to stop the college working

illegally without your recognition and also please give direction to Rajeev Memorial

B.Ed College to stop their cheating to students by taking admissions without your

recognition. I got information from the local public that the college authorities still

going forward by taking new admissions by hiding that they have no recognition from


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

61

NCTE.

Kindly take necessary actions, otherwise we have to compel to forward this matter to

newspapers, channels etc.”

The Southern Regional Committee in its 256th Meeting held on 4th – 6th December

2013 considered the matter, complaint through e-mail on the said college, decided

and advised Southern Regional Office to send a copy of the complaint to the

Affiliating University along with a copy of the order of withdrawal of recognition for

needful action.As per the decision of SRC, a letter addressed to the

Registrar,Kannur University was sent vide F.SRO/APSO5561-B.Ed/KL/2013/55713

dated 27.12.2013

This office has not received any reply from the University so far.

In the mean time, the institution had filed an appeal under Section 18 of NCTE Act, before the Appellate Authority, NCTE, New Delhi against the withdrawal order of SRC. On 13.03.2014, this office has received the appellate authority order No.F.No.89-667/2013 Appeal/2nd Meeting – 2014 dated 25.02.2014 remanding back the case of Rajeev Memorial College of Teacher Education, Thrissur, Kerala to the SRC, NCTE. The Council has made the following observations ; ‘The Council noted that the SRC conducted an inspection of the institution on 30-05-

2013 and after considering the VT report and other documents decided to withdraw

recognition and issued the order dated 27-08-2013 citing the reasons therein. the

Council noted that the SRC, before withdrawing recognition, has not issued any

show cause notice to the institution as required under the provisions of Section 17 of

the NCTE Act. In the circumstances the Council concluded that the matter deserved

to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the

appellant institution and take further action as per the provisions of the NCTE Act.




to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution and take further action as

per the provisions of the NCTE Act.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Rajeev Memorial College of Teacher

Education, Thrissur, Kerala to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above, ‘Note : On 06.01.2014 , a complaint of Shri.Ajaykumar.M, Kannur, Kerala

State is received alleging that the college is making admissions without the approval

of NCTE.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

62





(H.Q) instructions.

.

Consideration of Appeal Confirm & Not Admitted Orders: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

23) SRCAPP2061

B.Ed

Divyakala

College of

Education,

Dindigal,

Tamilnadu

TN

Divyakala College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 274/4, Divyapuram Street, Malayagoundanpatty Village and Post, Nilakkottai City and Taluk, Dindigul District-624208, Tamilnadu.

Divyakala Educational Trust, Plot No. 274/4, Nilakkottai Main Road,

Malayagoundanpatty Village and Post, Nilakkottai City and Taluk, Dindigul

District- 624208, Thailand had applied for grant of recognition to Divyakala

College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 274/4, Divyapuram Street,

Malayagoundanpatty Village and Post, Nilakkottai City and Taluk, Dindigul

District-624208, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section

14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on

29.12.2012 and physical copy on 04.01.2013.





The SRC in its 251st Meeting held on 25th to 27th August, 2013 considered the

reply of the institution to the deficiency letter and the reply is unconvincing and not

satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1) The institution has applied online application on 31-12-2013 and the land is registered on 13-06-2013, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009. As per 8 7 (i) of Regulation:

‘No institution shall be granted recognition under these Regulations unless the

institution or society sponsoring the institution is in possession of required land on

the date of application. The land free from all encumbrances could be either on

ownership basis or on lease from Government or Government institutions for a

period of not less than 30 years. In cases where under relevant State or Union


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

63

Territory laws the maximum permissible lease period is less than 30 years, the State

Government or Union Territory Administration law shall prevail. However, no building

shall be taken on lease for running any teacher training course’.




(SRCAPP2061) course.



Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated – 21/05/2014 has

confirmed the order of SRC.

“ …. Council noted that the appellant did not send a certified copy of the registered

land document along with the application. In response to the deficiency letter he has

forwarded only a copy and not original certified copy of the land document. The

copy of the land document forwarded indicates that it was registered on 13/06/2013

i.e. after the date of submission of the application i.e. 29/12/2012. There is no proof

in support of the appellant’s claim that he was instructed by the SRC to register the

same land owned by the Trust with Trust seal. In these circumstances, the Council

concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore, the

appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC confirmed.



Council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore,

the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC is confirmed.

The Committee took note of the matter.

24) SRCAPP2054

B.Ed

St. Arokia Annai

College of

Education,

Dharmapuri

District,

Tamilnadu

TN

St. Arokia Annai College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 135/2A,135/2C,131/3B2, 131/3C2, Selliampatti Village & Post Office, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-636809, Tamilnadu. Aroka Annai Trust, Sellipampatti Village & Post Office, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-636809, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to St. Aroka Annai College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 135/2A, 135/2C, 131/3B2, 131/3C2, Selliampatti Village & Post Office, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-636809, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 29.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 31.12.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

64


The Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after stipulated

period of 60 days and till date.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 250th Meeting held on 11th – 13th August,

2013 has considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted reply for

deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days from the date of issue of

deficiency letter and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on

a collective application of mind, the committee has decided as per clause 7(1) of

NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of

B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 25.09.2013 along with

the original FDR’s.


Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated - 21/5/2014has confirmed

the order of SRC.

“ …The Council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC is confirmed.


25) SRCAPP1931

B.Ed

Sama

Bharatham

College of

Education,

Madurai,

Tamilnadu

TN

Sama Bharatham College of Education, Khasara No. 1058, 1055, 1058, Plot No. 25/6, 25/5, 24/3D, Kilankulam Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Post Office and City, Madurai District District - 625703, Tamilnadu. Sama Bharatham Trust, Plot No. 24/3D, 25/6, 25/5, T.Kallupatti Road, Kilankulam Village, Peraiyur Post Office & Taluk, Madhurai District, Pin-625703, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to Sama Bharatham College of Education, Khasara No. 1058, 1055, 1058, Plot No. 25/6, 25/5, 24/3D, Kilankulam Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Post Office and City, Madurai District District - 625703, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 27.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 02.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State



The Institution has not submitted reply to the deficiency letter even after

stipulated period of 60 days and till date.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

65

The Southern Regional Committee in its 250th meeting held on 11th – 13th August

2013 had considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted reply for

deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days from the date of issue of

deficiency letter and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on

a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per clause 7(1) of NCTE


course.





“…..Council noted that the appellant did not send any reply to the deficiency letter dt.

22/04/2013. They have also not sent any letter to the SRC about the consideration

of their application for a later academic year. In the circumstances, the Council

concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore, the

appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC confirmed.



Council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore,

the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC is confirmed.

The Council hereby confirms the order appealed against.


26) SRCAPP1604

D.Ed

Naren College,

Ranga Reddy,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Naren College, Khasara No. 234, Lemooru Village, Kandukur Post Office, Maheshwaram Taluka, Ranga Reddy District – 500 007, Andhra Pradesh Naren Educational Academy, Plot No. 9-15/b, 3rd Floor, K.K Arcade, Dilsukhnagar Village, P & T Colony Post Office, Saroor Nagar Taluka, Hyderabad City, Ranga Reddy District – 500 060, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Nareen College, Khasara No. 234, Lemooru Village, Kandukur Post Office, Maheshwaram Taluka, Ranga Reddy District – 500 007, Andhra Pradesh for D.El.Ed Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.09.2011 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.10.2011. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 09.11.2011/26.12.2011 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 30.12.2011. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 13.02.2012. The SRC in its 219th Meeting of SRC held on 15th – 16th March, 2012 considered


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

66

the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 13.02.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 09.04.2012.The institution has submitted its written representation on 27.04.2012.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 222nd meeting held on 9th and 10th May,2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 27.04.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 11.06.2012. The institution has submitted a written representation on 28.06.2012.

The reply of the institution vide letter dt,. 28.06.2012 to the show cause notice was

duly considered and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still

persist as under:

• Sale deed of land documents dt. 06.02.2012, which is registered after the date of on-line submission, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations.

As per NCTE Regulations 2009, conditions of grant of recognition under Rule 8 (7)

(i) & (ii) is

(i) No institution shall be granted recognition under these Regulations unless the institution or society sponsoring the institution is in possession of required land on the date of application. The land free from all encumbrances could be either on ownership basis or on lease from Government or Government institutions for a period of not less than 30 years. In cases where under relevant State or Union Territory laws the maximum permissible lease period is less than 30 years, the State Government or Union Territory Administration law shall prevail. However, no building shall be taken on lease for running any teacher training course.

(ii) The society sponsoring the institution shall have to ensure that proposed teacher education institution has a well demarcated land area as specified by the norms. The teacher education institution shall not be allowed to have any other institution within its demarcated area or building and shall not have any other course(s) in its building.

• In the building completion certificate submitted, column No. 5 dt. Of land registration is shown as 29.01.2012, which is not tallying with the land documents registered date and type of roofing is not given.

• In the encumbrance certificate submitted, 60 Guntas on Sy.No. 234 is


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

67

in favour of Society and 4 Acres is in favour of individual name, which is not permissible as per NCTE norms.

• Copy of affidavit is not submitted.


based on a collective application of mind, the SRC in its 226th meeting held on 09th-

10th July 2012, committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and

reject the application of the institution for recognition of D.El.Ed course.


The institution has submitted its written representation on 04.10.2012 and

16.10.2012 requesting to re-consider application, Process further and do accord

permission/recognition to run D.Ed College.

The SRC in its 235th Meeting held on 21st -22nd November, 2012 considered the

request of the institution vide letter dt. 04.10.2012 & 16.10.2012 and decided to

confirm the earlier decision taken in 226th meeting held on 09-10th July 2012 to

refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of D.El.Ed course,

as there is no provision for reconsideration in NCTE Regulation 2009.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 20-12-2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution filed an appeal before

the appellate authority,NCTE Hqrs.

The appellate authority order F.No.89-755/2013 Appeal/5th Meeting-2014/A88749

dated 21/05/2014 is received by this office on 16/06/2014 is as under:-

"SH. MD. Yadolla, Vice President, Naren College, Rangareddi, Andhra Pradesh

presented the ccase of the appellant institution on 12-04-2014. In the appeal and

during personal presentation it was submitted that due to clouser of all offices in the

Telangana Region on account of agitation, the registration of land could be got done

only on 06-02-2012 and according to the guide-lines issued by NCTE, the

applications of D.Ed. Colleges in Telangana Region of Andhra Pradesh can be

considered as and when requested to in the Building Completion Certificate

submitted, column No.5 dated of land registration is show wrongly by over sight as

29-01-2012, which is corrected later as 06-02-2012, and type of roofing mentioned in

the building completion certified is RCC (Issued in the format, prescribed by

Assistant Executive Engineer, Panchayat Ral) is submitted to the Regional Director,

NCTE, Bangalore. The Encumbrance Certificate submitted earlier is exhibitingthe

true & correct view that 60 Guntas (i.e. about ONE and HALF Acres) of land is

transferred in favour of Society from 4 Acres available in the name of the individual.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

68

Affidavit was already submitted. A copy of same is submitted again on 04-10-2012.

The submission of the appeal has been delayed by one year one month and eight

days beyond the prescribed time limit of 60 days. The appellant submitted that after

receiving the refusal order, their Secretary/Correspondent (Mrs. Arshia Nawsheen)

went under depression and was admitted in hospital for one month. The doctor

advised to bring her to the hospital after discharge twice a week for check up. On

doctor's advice they did not discuss this matter in their Society's meeting. She is still

taking pills to maintain her mental condition and due to unavoidable circumstances

they could not concentrate. Medical certificate are subbmitted for consideration.

The Council noted that the appellant subbmitted copy of a Psychometric Report dt.

18-09-2012 from a Psychotherapy Clinic, which diagnosed depression and

Psychosis in the patient. The Report also indicated that the total duration of the

illness is about six years. The appellant also submitted a copy of a medical

prescription dt.22-10-2012/08-12-2012 from a Consultant Psychiatrist. Besides

these documents, the appellant did not submit any documents in support of

hospitalization and other precaution to be taken by the patient. The Council

concluded that these submissions did not dealy of over one year and one month in

the submissions of the appeal. The appeal could have been submitted by the other

office bearers of the Society. In these circumstances the Council decided not to

condone the delay. The appeal is, therefore, not admitted.



Council decided not to condone the delay and therefore, the appeal is not admitted."


27) SRCAPP1715

D.El.Ed

Sri Balaji

Venkateshwara

Swamy College

of Elementary

Education,

Ranga Reddy,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sri Balaji Venkateshwara Swamy College of Elementary Education, Khasara No. 81/2, Land Title 2461, Plot No. 81, Street No. 01, Keshvaram Village, Shamirpet Post and City, Medchal Taluk, Ranga Reddy District – 500078, Andhra Pradesh P. Janardhan Reddy Memorial Educational Society, Plot No. 1-7, Toopran Road

and Village, Toopran Post and City, Gajwel Taluk, Medak District – 502334,

Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Sri Balaji Venkateshwara

Swamy College of Elementary Education, Khasara No. 81/2, Land Title 2461,

Plot No. 81, Street No. 01, Keshvaram Village, Shamirpet Post and City,

Medchal Taluk, Ranga Reddy District – 500078, Andhra Pradesh for D.El.Ed

course of two years duration under Section 14 (1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the

Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 01.10.2011 and physical application

has been received in the office of SRC on 07.10.2011.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

69

Government for recommendation on 08.11.2011 / 29.12.2011 (Reminder). A

deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 30.12.2011. The institution replied to

the deficiency letter on 29.02.2012.

The SRC in its 220th meeting held on 30th – 31st March 2012, considered the reply of

the institution dt.29.02.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and

decided to serve Show Cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 30.04.2012. The

institution submitted its written representation on 21.05.2012.

The reply of the institution to the Show Cause Notice was duly considered by SRC

in its 223rd Meeting held on 29th – 31st May,2012 and the reply was unconvincing and

not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under :

1. Approved blue print of the building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

2. Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted.

The reply to the show cause notice was not satisfactory and unconvincing.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected

and based on a collective application of mind, the SRC in its 223rd meeting held on

29th – 31st May 2012 decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009 to refuse and reject

the application of the institution for recognition of D.El.Ed course.

As per the decision of SRC, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 27.06.2012.

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority ,vide order no. F.No. 89-440/2012 Appeal/9th Meeting- 2012 has stated as under:

“after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that there was adequate justification to remand the case to the SRC for further processing as per the NCTE Regulations.

Now therefore, the Council hereby remands back the case of Sri Balaji Venkateshwara Swamy College of Elementary Education, Rangareddy, Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above”. The above matter was placed before SRC in its 235th meeting held on 20th-21st November 2012 and the Committee decided to process the application. Accordingly, the application was processed.

The SRC in its 236th meeting held on 16th -18th December 2012, considered the

Appellate authority order and all other relevant documents and decided to cause

inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution

fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to

the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

70

the norms.

The inspection of the institution was fixed between 15th -19th January 2013. The

same was intimated to the institution on 08.01.2013. The inspection was conducted

on 15.01.2013.

The SRC in its 241st Meeting held on 29th and 31st March 2013 and 1st April

2014,based on the reports submitted by the Visiting Team and other related

documents, concluded that the management is not maintaining norms and

standards prescribed for D.El.Ed course by NCTE. The deficiencies still persisted

as under:

• Photocopy of encumbrance certificate is submitted. But it is not notarized.

• Original FDR’s of Rs.5.00lakhs and Rs.3.00 lakhs is not submitted.

• As per VTR in the Furniture are almost good. Furniture wise ok. But the vouchers which be enclosed are not carries. Tallied. An furniture also carries school name.

• As per VTR in the Science lab & Psychology Laboratory equipment be presented. But no vouchers for even single equipment therefore I was totally distracted.

• As per VTR Education Technology lab & Language learning lab All equipment are labeled with different school names.

• As per VT report, multipurpose hall size is only 600 sq.ft. which is less than the requirement of 2000 sq.ft as per NCTE norms.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected

& based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE



As per the decision of SRC , a rejection order was issued to the institution vide F.No.

SRCAPP 1715 / D.EI.Ed /Andhra Pradesh/2013-14/51776 dated 18.05.2013.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution filled an appeal under

Section 18 of NCTE Act, before the Appellate Authority, NCTE, New Delhi.

The appellate authority , vide order No. F.No.89-54/2014 Appeal / 6th Meeting –

2014 dated 29.05.2014 has noted that the submission of appeal has been delayed

by six months and 23 days beyond the prescribed time limit of 60 days. The

appellant has not furnished any reasons for the delay in the submission of the

appeal. In the circumstances , the council decided not to condone the delay. The

appeal is therefore not admitted.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

71

Consideration of Complaint Case: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

28) APS09412

D.Ed

Sri Vasavi Raja

Prathap College

of Elementary

School

Education,

Mahabubnagar,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sri Vasavi Raja Prathap College of Elementary School Education, H.No. 1-10-85/3/C, S.S.

Gutta, Christian Pally, New Town, Mahabubnagar Disttict- 509001, Andhrapradesh

Sri Vasavi Raja Prathap College of Elementary School Education, H.No. 1-10-85/3/C, S.S. Gutta, Christian Pally, New Town, Mahabubnagar Distirct-509001, Andhra Pradesh was granted recognition for D.Ed Course of two years duration with an annual intake of 50 students on 28.02.2008.

A complaint has been received by this office on 13/06/2014 from G. Satynarayana, S/o G. Bal Reddy, Mahabubnagar District-509001, Andhra Pradesh on 13.06.2014 against Sri Vasavi Raja Prathap College of Elementary School Education at New Town, Mehabubnagar, Andhra Pradesh regarding the functioning and objection in payment of salaries to Sri. G. Satyanarayana, English Lecture and certain other issues (copy enclosed).

The Complainant has stated as under:-

1) "The institution is not maintaining the required number of academic staff for conducting the course. According the section 17(1) of the NCTE act. So the regional committee cancel the rcognition of Sri Vasavi Raja Prathap College of Elementary School Education (D.Ed), New Town Mahabubnagar.

2) According to the new norms 1+7 to run for D.Ed course the management is not following the norms and standards of NCTE and SCERT.

3) Putting C.L's to the lectures when the inspection team came to visit the college. Without the lecture leave letter.

4) Forgery signatures in the acquaintance and attendance registers. 5) In the same building three course are functioning at the same

time D.Ed, B.Ed, and junior college. According to the norms institution is violating the rules. It is running in a rented building since 2008. The running institution has no proper hygine condition; it is a slum area.

6) Information in the order for running programme under the section 14 (3) a, of NCTE Act 1993. The address of the college Sri Vasavi Rajaprathap College of Elementary School Education (D.Ed) (APS09413) H No-1-10-85/3/C, S.S Gutta. Christanpally, New Town Mahabubnagar. The Correspondent mentioned three (3) colony Names in the order but the course is running in New Town Mahabubnagar. He has given false information in the order. It is also against the norms and standards.

7) In the college staff approval the correspondent appointed two govt


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

72

teachers. He is not paying the salaries to any lectures. When we went to ask for the salaries he is saying that we removed your names from our college, but still the correspondent is functioning the college with our names only. The management is running the college according to the old norms. The correspondent is not appointed P.D and fine arts lectures. It is running bogus Principal of the college was already crossed 65 years for the year 2011 still his name is in the approval list it is also against the norms and standards.

Therefore I humbly submit that the recognitions given to Sri Vasavi Raja Prathap

College of Elementary School Education, Mahabubnagar to be canclled

immediately."

A copy of approved staff lists of D.Ed course, approved by Director, SCERT, AP,

Hyderabad submitted by the complainant.

The Committee considered the matter, complaint against the said college vide

letter dated 13/06/2014, decided and advised SRO to request SCERT Andhra

Pradesh to enquire and advise.

Consideration of Delayed reply to Deficiency Letter: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

29) SRCAPP2078

M.Ed

Sri

Sundareswari

College of

Education,

Virudhunagar,

Tamilnadu

TN

Sri Sundareswari College of Education,Plot/Khasara No. 29/1, 29/2, 29/5, 26/7B, Malli Village & Post, Srivilliputtur Taluk & City, Virudhunagar District, Pin-626141, Tamilnadu

Sri Sundareswari Medical Educational Research and Social Welfare Charitable

Trust, Plot No.11, Sivakasi Road, Malli Village & Post, Srivilliputtur Taluk & City,

Virudhunagar District, Pin-626 141, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to

Sri Sundareswari College of Education, Plot/Khasara No. 29/1, 29/2, 29/5, 26/7B,

Malli Village & Post, Srivilliputtur Taluk & City, Virudhunagar District, Pin-626 141,

Tamilnadu for M.Ed Course under Section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern

Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.12.2012. The institution has submitted

hard copy of the application on 03.01.2013.

Para 7[1-A(i)] and 7[1-A(ii)] of extant NCTE Regulations published in the Gazette of India on 31st August 2009, as amended from time to time, the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

Para 7[1-A(i)]

a) The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

73

Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;

b) Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application;

c) Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

Para 7[1-A(ii)]

The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the circumstances referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the applicant and refund the processing fees within 30 days of the online submission of the application.

Further, 8(7)(i) of NCTE Regulations reads as under:

No institution shall be granted recognition under these Regulations unless the institution or society sponsoring the institution is in possession of required land on the date of application. The land free from all encumbrances could be either on ownership basis or on lease from Government or Government institutions for a period of not less than 30 years. In cases where under relevant State or Union Territory laws the maximum permissible lease period is less than 30 years, the State Government or Union Territory Administration law shall prevail. However, no building shall be taken on lease for running any teacher training course. In this application the following has been observed:

• On-line application was submitted on 30.12.2012 and the Processing fee Challan dated 31.12.2012. Hence, the society has not remitted the processing fee as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 on or before the date of submission of online application, as required under sub-regulation 7(1-A)(i)(a) of NCTE Regulations 2009.

The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 09th-11th March, 2013 reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [ 7 1–A (i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009.

•••• On-line application was submitted on 30.12.2012 and the Processing fee Challan dated 31.12.2012. Hence, the society has not remitted the processing fee as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 on or before the date of submission of online application, as required under sub-regulation 7(1-A)(i)(a) of NCTE Regulations 2009.

Accordingly, a rejection letter was issued to the institution on 27.04.2013.

The institution moved to the Hon’ble High Court of Madurai Bench of Madras in


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

74

WP(MD) No. 7964 of 2013 and MP (MD) Nos. 1 to 3 of 2013 dtd. 03.05.2013 reads

as under:-

“………. The petitioner is directed to file an appeal before the National

Council for Teacher Education under Section 18 of the National Council for

Teacher Education Act, within a period of one week from the date of receipt

of a copy of this order. On receipt of such appeal petition, the

Council/Appellate Authority shall take note of the observations made by this

Court in this order and examine the case of the petitioner in a pragmatic

manner as to fulfilling the conditions contained in the Regulations and pass

appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of

three weeks thereafter.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly, Consequently, M.P.(MD) Nos.1

to 3 of 2013 are closed. No costs”.

The institution vide its letter dtd. 27.01.2014 and has stated as follows:-

“as per your Public Notice, our institution is also one of the institutions which

paid the processing fee one day after the submission of application, we

submitted application on 30.12.2012 which is Sunday, so we remitted the fee

of the next day 31.12.12. Our application is also rejected for the same

reason and we received the rejection order on 30.04.2013. After the public

notice, still now, we have not received any correspondence on this regard.

So, hereby, I request you to consider our M.Ed., application and process the

same accordingly. I am enclosing the Public notice copy, Rejection order

copy, challan copy & Application copy for your kind perusal. I request your

goodself to consider our application for further process”.

The SRC in its 261st meeting held on 9-10 February 2014, considered the institution request letter dated 27/01/2014 (as per NCTE public notice, late submission of fee by one day) for consideration and to process, decided to process the said application. Accordingly, application was process/scrutinized and a copy of application was sent

to State Government for recommendation on 05.02.2013 followed by reminder on


The date of receipt of letter by the institution is not known.

Now, the institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 30.05.2014.

As per sub-clause (1) of Clause 7 of NCTE Regulation 2009, the applicant institutions is required to submit deficiencies to the Southern Regional Committee Office Within 60 days from the date of receipt of communication of deficiencies, failing which the application will be treated as rejected and closed, no extension to


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

75

time will be granted and any submission received after 60 days will be treated as invalid and not entertained.

The institution had applied on-line for M.Ed course (SRCAPP2078) on

30.12.2012. The SRC in its 261st meeting held on 9-10 Feb, 2014, considered as

per NCTE (H'qrs) New Delhi public notice, late submission of fee by one day

and decided to process the said application.

Accordingly, the application was processed nd a copy of application was sent

to Stte Government for recommendation on 05.02.2013 followed by reminder

on 21.02.2014. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 21.02.2014.

The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 30.05.2014, 99 days after

the date of issue of deficiency letter.

The committee considered the matter, as the institution has not submitted

reply for deficiency letter even after stipulated period of 60 days from the date

of issue of deficiency letter and with reference to the totality of information

collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided

as per clause 7(1) of NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the

institution for recognition of MEd course.

Consideration of Delayed LOI Reply: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

30) SRCAPP43

M.P.Ed

Department of

physical

Education &

Sports, Kalapet,

Puducherry.

PU

Department of physical Education & Sports, Pondicherry University, Plot/Khasara No. 206, Street. No. ECR, Kalapet Revenue Village, Kalapet Post Office & Taluk, Puducherry District, Pin-621115. Pondichery University, Plot No. 206, Street. No. ECR, Kalapet Revenue Village, Kalapet Post Office & Taluk, Pin-605014, Puducherry had applied for grant of recognition to Department of Physical Education & Sports, Plot/Khasara No. 206, Street. No. ECR, Kalapet Revenue Village, Kalapet Post Office & Taluk, Pin-621115, Puducherry for M.P.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State




(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

76


The reply of the institution has been received on the 76th day from the date of issue

of deficiency letter. Hence, the institution has submitted the reply after the stipulated

period of 60 days.

The SRC in its 250th Meeting held on 11th-13th August, 2013 considered the matter

and advised SRO to process and put up in 251st meeting.

Further,

The Committee decided to inform MHRD for condonation of delayed submission of

Deficiency Letter Reply. Accordingly, a letter was sent to the MHRD on 12.09.2013.

Accordingly, the application has been processed.

The SRC in its 252nd Meeting held on 13th-14th September, 2013 considered the

matter, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to write to the said University

to clarify for the following deficiencies:

1. Sy.nos. in Govt. Notification, Building plan and Building completion certificate do not tally. Particularly, Sy.no. 20b should be shown to be University’s land.

2. Earmarking of 8 acres for B.P.Ed programme is also not evident. 3. In the approved building plan submitted, Sy.no. is not mentioned, Location of

the building is not mentioned. 4. In the Affidavit submitted, land area is not mentioned. 5. As per building plan, total built up area is 62782.82 sq.mtrs, as per affidavit,

total built up area is 300000 sq.mtrs and as per building completion certificate total built up area is 4525.60 sq.mtrs. These are not matching together.

Accordingly, clarification letter was sent to the University on 08.11.2013.

As per oral direction of NCTE Hqrs., the matter was placed before SRC in its 255th

meeting held on 13th -15th November, 2013 and the committee decided to cause

inspection.

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between 02nd - 07th December

2013, the same was intimated to the University on 28.11.2013. The inspection of the

institution was conducted on 07.12.2013.

The SRC in its 257th meeting held on 20th-22nd December 2013, considered the VT

report, VCD of the institution and all the relevant documents, the following points to

be clarified from the University.

• As per Building plan submitted, total built up area shown is 62782.82 sq.mtrs, as per affidavit it is 5000 sq.mtrs and as per building completion certificate, the total built up area is 4525.60 sq.mts. All are not matching.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

77

There is confusion about sq.ft. and sq.mtrs regarding built-up area. University to

clarify for the same. If it is only sq.ft. Then, the University may be required to

increase the area by 30 Nov, 2014.

In view of the GOI/NCTE directives about facilitating Central Universities, LOI is

given for M.P.Ed in temporary relaxation of the norms.

On careful perusal of the original file of the institution, VT report, VCD, all relevant

documents and other related documents, Act of NCTE, 1993, Regulations and

guidelines of NCTE published from time to time laid on the table, the Regional

Committee decided to issue Letter of Intent for grant of recognition to M.P.Ed course

of two academic year of four semesters duration with an annual intake of 40(forty

only)(one unit), subject to the appointment of qualified staff through duly constituted

selection committee as per the Norms of NCTE/State Government/Affiliating

University and be given effect before the commencement of the academic session.

Accordingly, letter of Intent was issued to the university on 17.01.2014. Since, the

institution has not submitted LOI reply as directed a letter was issued to the

university on 25.02.2014, directed to submit the LOI reply latest by 28.02.2014.

The university has submitted its reply on 11.06.2014. The reply has been submitted

after lapse of 106 days (3 months 17 days)

Sl.

No. Particulars

Reply to LOI

1. Name of the Institution Department of Physical Education & Sports, Plot/Khasara No. 206, Street. No. ECR, Kalapet Revenue Village, Kalapet Post Office & Taluk, Pin-621115, Puducherry

2. Date of issue of LOI 17.01.2014

3. Date of Receipt of LOI Reply

11.06.2014

4. Date of Staff List approved by

Registrar, Pondicherry

University

Not mentioned

5. Service Certificate of Principal

/Lecturers

Not submitted


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

78

The Committee considered the reply of the University to the LOI issued and

all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show

Cause Notice Under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act for the following:

• The University (Department of Physical Education & Sports) has not appointed Sports Trainer.

• The University to send the list of approved staff for the B.P.Ed course. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to

the University as to why the application be not rejected and thereby providing

an opportunity to the University to make a written representation within 21

days from the date of receipt of the Show Cause Notice along with necessary

certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing

which action will be taken including the Rejection of application, based on the

records available with no further notice.

6. Original FDRs for Rs. 5 lacs

and Rs. 3 lacs in Joint A/C

for 5 years submitted

Not applicable

7. Web Site Address www.pondiuni.edu.in (as per VT report)

Functioning

Consideration of Shifting Cases: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

31) APS06294

B.Ed

Tirupati

Institution of

Education,

Chittoor,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Tirupati Institution of Education, 481/B, V.V.Mahal Road, Tirupathi, Chittor,

Andhra Pradesh.

The Sourther Regional Committee granted recognition on 12.04.2007 to Tirupati

Institution of Education, 481/B, V.V.Mahal Road, Tirupathi, Chittor, Andhra Pradesh

for Secondary (B.Ed) course of one year duration with an annual intake of 100

(hundred) students under clause 7 (12) of Regulations dated 13.01.2006 with the

condition that the institution shall shift to its own premises/ building within three

years from the date of recognition. (in case the course is started in rented


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

79

premises).

On 02-06-2014,a letter dated 19-05-2014 is received from the Secretary &

Correspondent Tirupati Institution of Education, Tirupati, which is as under:

"We were accorded permission to start a B.Ed course under Om Venkatesa

Educational Society, Tirupati, vide proceeding No. SRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2006-07/690,

dated:12.04.2007 by the NCTE of Sourthern Region for the year 2007 in the name of

TIRUPATI INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION, Tirupati in rented building (lease) situated

at 481/B, V.V.Mahal Road, Tirupati Urrban Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P.

Our society having a pucca building of its own situated at 10-281, Viswam Nagar,

Jeevakona, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. So, we want to permission

to shift the college permission from Tirupati Urban Mandal to Tirupati Urban Mandal.

Hence, we request the NCTE authorities to consider our request and accord

permission to shift the college premises from rented building at Tirupati Urban

Mandal to permanent building at Tirupati Urban Mandal.

The Institution has enclosed the Two original DD's for Rs. 40000/- and 10000/-

(D.D.No-524307, 524306 dt:02/06/2014), Corporation bank, Bangalore. and also

submitted the xerox copy of DD's."

The Committee considered the request letter from the institution dated

19.05.2014 for shifting and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was

decided to serve Notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• The institution to submit all documents and approved staff list. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Notice to the Institution

to submit all necessary certificates/documents within 21 days from the date of

receipt of this notice, in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing

which action will be taken including the withdrawal of recognition, based on

the records available with no further notice.

32) SRCAPP469

D.Ed

Y.S.R

Elementary

Teacher

Training

Institute, Ranga

Reddy, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Y.S.R Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Kasara No. 7606, Plot No. 84, Street No. 5, Petbashirbag Village, Quthbullapur Post Office and Taluka, Ranga Reddy District – 501 403, Andhra Pradesh. Dr. Y.S.R Rajashekar Reddy Memorial Christian Educational Society, Plot No. 1-4/2, Brahman Veedi Street, Toopran Village and Post Office, Gajwel Taluka, Toopran City, Medak District – 502 334, Andhra Pradesh had submitted an on-line application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE on 01.10.2011 and physical application on 08.10.2011 for grant of recognition for D.Ed course of two years duration with an annual intake of 50 students at Y.S.R Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Kasara No. 7606, Plot No. 84, Street No. 5, Petbashirbag Village, Quthbullapur Post Office and Taluka, Ranga Reddy


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

80

District – 501 403, Andhra Pradesh. The application was processed and the inspection of the institution was conducted and finally SRC granted recognition for offering D.Ed course with an intake of 50 students from the academic session 21012-2013 on 11.09.2012. Secretary, Dr. Y S Rajashekar Reddy Memorial Educational Society had submitted a letter dated 02.01.2014 received in the office on 07.01.2014 which is stating as follows:

“We are members of Dr. Y S Rajashekar Reddy Memorial Educational Society, we applied D.El.Ed course on 08.01.2010. We suffered 3 years for getting LOI, PPA, 2 times we attended appeal NCTE HQ, New Delhi. Finally we got LOI, PPA, Andhra Pradesh Govt. Order also. We spent 35 lakhs rupees (Expect building) building owner also one of the Director. We suffered 3 years. We spent huge amount, that way we gave college Mr. K.R.K Reddy (He also have 1 D.El.Ed college at Ankireddypally (V), Keesara (M), R.R Dist., A.P). We did not pay single 1 rupees as on today, He sold this YSR D.Ed College another place i.e. KRK D.Ed college, Keesara, R.R Dist., AP.

Sir our 2 partner and I not feeling to change management, Shifting building (other Place) so kindly reject or stop shifting proposals 2 months. We will discuss this issue so kindly favour to e sir. We suffered 3 years, huge amount spent. If we will also plan to go A.P High Court, Hyderabad. Please stop”.

The institution has submitted shifting proposal on 10.01.2014 along with shifting fees of Rs. 50,000/- and stated that “….the premises has been demolished under road widening by the government of Andhra Pradesh as such, we constrained to shift our premises to elsewhere for smooth running of our institution. We have identified and purchased land in the name of Dr. YS Rajashekar Reddy Memorial Christian Educational Society (Ac. 1.20 Gts) in Sy. No. 500 situated at Ankireddypally, Kesara Mandal, R.R district and valid building permission has been obtained for construction of building as per the specifications of NCTE from the concerned authorities and building completion certificate is also obtained.

In view of the above, I request your good office kindly to inspect our new premises situated at Ankireddypally, Keeasara Mandal, R. R District, Andhra Pradesh and grant extension of affiliation for the academic year 2014-15 to YSR Elementary Teacher Training Institute”. The Committee in its 262nd Meeting held on 17th – 19th February, 2014 considered the matter, letter from the institution 07/01/2014 and 10/01/2014, it is noticed that the two letter received to this office is from two different letter heads having different nomenclatures and having management disputes. The Committee decided and advised SRO to write to SCERT, Hyderabad, Andhra Prdesh to verify facts and advise this office on which group is the real management. As per the decision of SRC, a letter was sent to the Director, SCERT with request to


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

81

verify the facts and advise this office on which group is the real management at the earliest. Now, a letter has been received from the Director, SCERT, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh on 13.06.2014. “…. The Management Dr. YSR Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Petbashirbag (V) Quthbullapur (M) R.R. District was requested to furnish the following documents in support of their claim so as to enable this office examine the matter in details and furnish a comprehensive report to the Regional Director, NCTE-SRC, Bangalore.

1. Land Document 2. Formal Recognition orders SRC 3. SRC Submitting shifting 4. Staff Approval Orders 5. Society by law, Membe Change.

The Management of Dr. YSR Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Petbashirbag (V) Quthbullapur (M) R.R. District has furnished the above documents. I further wish to add that in the reference 4th cited, the Management Dr. YSR Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Toopran, Medak District was also requested to submit the relevant documents by 31.05.2014 as the Management in the other party in the dispute, But the Proceedings were returned to this office as Undelivered. As such, it is concluded that there is no other party to stake their claim over the Management of Dr. YSR Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Petbashirbag (V) Quthbullapur (M) R.R. District and there exists only One Management in the name of Dr. YSR Elementary Teacher Training Institute, Petbashirbag (V) Quthbullapur (M) R.R. District. In view of the above facts, the Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, Bengaluru is requested to take necessary action at their end.” In view of the report submitted by the Director, SCERT confirming the management

of the institutions decision needs to be taken with regard to processing of the shifting

proposal submitted by the Management of Dr. YSR Elementary Teacher Training

Institute, Petbashirbag Village, Qutubullapur Manual, Ranga Reddy District.

The Committee considered the matter, letter from the Director SCERT,

Hyderabad dated 13.06.2014, decided and aadvised SRO to process w.r.t. all

documents and approved staff list of the said institution for causing

inspection.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

82

Consideration of VT Reports: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

33) APS07608

B.Ed

Narendar

College of

Education,

Trichy,

Tamilnadu

TN

Narendar College of Education, Venkatachalapuram, Pullambad, Trichy-

621711, Tamilnadu

Narendar College of Education, Venkatachalapuram, Pullambad, Trichy-621711,

Tamilnadu had submitted an application for seeking recognition for B.Ed Course on

21.11.2006. The institution was granted recognition on 31.01.2008 with an annual

intake of 100 students.

In the meanwhile, a complaint was received from Shri. V.C. Ravi Chandran, No.40, Kamarajarnagar, Chinnatirupathy, Salem-636008, Tamilnadu regarding concealment and violation of rules and regulation by Narendar College of Education. The SRC considered the complaint in its 195th meeting held on 17-18 August 2010 and decided to call for remarks with necessary documentary evidence on the specifics of the complaint from the institution and to obtain an affidavit from the complainant. Accordingly, letters to complainant and institution were issued on 24.09.2010.The reply from the complainant was received on 14.10.2010. The complainant had submitted affidavit on Rs.10/- stamp paper along with encumbrance certificate. Reply from the institution was not received. The reply from the complainant was considered in its 198th Meeting of SRC held on 24-26 November 2010 and the committee decided to cause inspection under Section 17 of NCTE Act. The institution was directed to submit the essential documents within 30 days of the receipt of the notice. Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/- towards inspection fee in favour of “The Member Secretary, NCTE” payable at Bangalore should be submitted. Duly filled in Questionnaire along with all the necessary documents for land, building approval and building completion certificate from a competent Govt. Engineer and other relevant documents should also be submitted within the stipulated notice period of 30 days. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 06.01.2011 to submit the above. Inspection of the institution was fixed between14-19 February 2011 and the same was intimated to the institution on 08.02.2011. Meanwhile, a letter was received from the institution on 17.02.2011 requesting to give a copy of complaint to give a detailed explanation and to carry out the inspection thereafter. The inspection team visited the institution on 15.02.2011 but did not carry out the inspection. A letter from VT members was received on 21.02.2011 stating that ; “the chairman of the college was not willing for the inspection and said that he has received a court direction against the inspection. The letter from the chairman along


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

83

with a copy of the court direction is enclosed herewith”. Meanwhile, a court order in W.P.No.3596/2011 was received by this office on 21.02.2011 stating as follows: “the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to furnish a copy of the written complaint, if any available to the petitioner within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, proceed in accordance with law. It is open to the petitioner to communicate the inspection team, if they visit the site, about the order of this court, in which event the inspection team shall act as per the order of this court”.

The institution vide its letter dated 15.02.2011 again requested to furnish a copy of

complaint received against the institution, in order to give reply. After seeing the

complaint, SRC considered the matter in its 202nd meeting held on 14th-15th March

2011 and decided that court order be complied with.

Accordingly, a copy of complaint was forwarded to the institution on 11.03.2011.

The institution vide its letter dated 16.03.2011 requested for extension of time to

submit the reply. SRC in its 203rd meeting held on 31st March & 1st April 2011

decided to wait for the reply from the institution for causing inspection.

The reply from the institution was received from 27.04.2011 stating as follows:

“....The complaint from V.C. Ravichandran against our institution are false and

motivated. We have civil dispute pending against him and he has given the said

false complaint. We wish to inform you that we have clear title of property in which

our institution is situated. Our institution is situated in Sy.No.164/2, 164/3, 164/4A,

162/7, 162/8, 163/1, 163/2 at Venkatachalapuram. The above said land is also not

under any litigation. The Encumbrance certificate produced by the complaint is

totally false and I am hereby submitting the real encumbrance certificate relating to

the lands in which the institution is situated. The attachment of the property as stated

in the complaint does not refer to the lands in which the institution is situated. I

therefore request you to drop all action against us and not proceed any further”.

The SRC in its 205th meeting held on 18th-19th May 2011 considered the matter and

decided to cause inspection under section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, inspection

was carried out on 10.08.2011.

The SRC in its 211th meeting held on 21st-23rd September, 2011 considered the VT report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it has decided to serve Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

84

Accordingly, a Show cause notice was issued to the institution on 24.11.2011. The institution had submitted its written representation on 26.03.2012. The SRC in its 223rd meeting held on 29-31 May 2012, considered the reply of the institution and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice Under of NCTE Act for the following:

• The institution has submitted notarized land title certificate dt. 14.02.2012, which is on lease basis, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulation 2009.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer is not submitted.

• In the Questionnaire submitted, Address of the land is not submitted.

• Original FDRs. Of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively from a Nationalised Bank in joint account is not submitted.

• The management has not submitted certificate from the affiliating body to the effect that no other programme is being conducting by the institution in the same building/campus, along with the existing B.Ed course.

• As per land usage certificate submitted, the land is on lease basis, which is not permissible as per NCTE norms.

• Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.

• The institution has not submitted any bills towards proof of purchase of equipments available in the Language learning lab.

Accordingly, a final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 25.06.2012.

The institution has submitted its reply to final show cause notice on 06.07.2012

stating as follows:-

“…..request you to withdraw the show cause notice and if you have any doubt,

please conduct inspection in accordance with Rule 8 of the NCTE Rules by

informing us the date of inspection in advance.”

(Note: it is observed from the file that the reply of the final show cause notice was

not placed before SRC)

The court notice in MP9MD) No.2, of 2013 in WP (MD) No.9977 of 2012 filed by

Narendar College of Education V/s NCTE-SRC and The Registrar, Teacher

Education University was received by SRC on 17.06.2013.

A letter addressed to Sri.A.Sivaji, Advocate along with brief of the case was sent on

10.07.2013.

An e-mail from the Advocate was received by SRC on 03.01.2014 seeking remarks.

A letter addressed to Sri.A.Shivaji Advocate along with e-mail details, brief of the

case was sent on 06.02.2014 .


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

85

Now, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, Madurai Bench has sent a court order of

W.P.(MD) Nos.9977 and 9978 of 2012 and M.P.(MD). Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 (each

two MPs) and M.P.(MD( Nos.2 of 2012 (two Mps) and M.P. (MD) No.3 of 2012 dated

03.01.2014 as follows:-

“……..the petitioner institution should have been given an opportunity by the

authorities concerned. Therefore, both the impugned orders are set aside, as no

opportunity has been given for them to rectify the mistakes pointed by the

respondents, following the judgement made in the Teacher Education vs. Vaishnav

Institue of Technology & Managements, reported in (2012) 5 Secc 139. At the same

time, since the next admission will start only from the year 2014, the respondents will

give a notice of inspection to the petitioners concerned and inspect the institution in

accordance with section 13 or the NCTE Act coupled with Rule 8 of the Act and if

they are satisfied in respect of the rules and regulations, the petitioner institution will

be permitted to start admission. It is made clear that till the inspection is over and

recognition is given, the petitioner institution will not start admission.

With the above discussions and observations, these writ petitions are disposed of.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.”

Note: Same court order for both cases i.e. W.P.(MD) No.9977 of 2012 related to


Tamilnadu (APS07608/B.Ed) and W.P.No.9978 of 2012 related to MSES College of

Education, 1st Floor, S.F.No. 721, Thanthantrimalai, Karur District-639005,

Tamilnadu (APS05519/B.Ed).

The Southern Regional Committee in its 266th Meeting held on 2 May, 2014

,considered the Hon’ble High Court order dated 03.01.2014 and all other relevant

documents and decided to cause inspection for B.Ed (APS07608) course under

NCTE Act, to examine whether the Institution fulfils all the requirements as per the

norms, existing programme

As per the decision of SRC, the inspection of the institution was scheduled on 3rd

June 2014 and the same was informed to the institution on 20.05.2014 .The

inspection of the institution was conducted on 03.06.2014 and the visiting team

report was received by this office on 06.06.2014.

The Committee considered the request letter from the institution dated

19.05.2014 for shifting, and all the relevant documentary evidences of the

institution, it was decided to serve Notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• Certified copy of the land document in favour of the Society/Institution is not submitted by the institution. The institution /society is not in possession of land.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

86

• In the building plan submitted, Labs and Multipurpose hall are not reflected.

• Notarised English version of land usage certificate is not submitted.

• Building completion certificate in original certified by Govt. Engineer is not submitted. At column 7 of BCC, type of ownership is mentioned as Lease.

• As per the Non –Encumbrance Certificate submitted along with the application, the land is in the name of an individual which is not permissible as per NCTE norms. Up to date Non –Encumbrance Certificate is not submitted along with the VT report.

• As per VT report, at present the Institution is not running B.Ed course.

• As per VT report, the B.Ed course is not functional, the college has not made sufficient arrangements for the visit of VT members.

• As per VT report, No faculty members are avialble in the institution, all faculty members had been relieved of their duties.

• As per VT report, Library, labs, ET labs and sceicne books are insufficient and less than the requirement as per NCTE norms.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Notice to the Institution

as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an

opportunity to the Institution to make a written representation within 21 days

from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary




Consideration of Withdraw Request: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

34) APS02969

B.Ed

Venkateshwara

College of

Education,

Pondicherry

PU

Venkateshwara College of Education, 108-A, Muraimalai Adigal Salai, Pondicherry – 600 501

Venkateshwara College of Education, 108-A, Muraimalai Adigal Salai,

Pondicherry – 600 501 was granted recognition for (Secondary) B.Ed from the

academic year 2005-2006 with an annual intake of 100 students on 08.07.2005.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

87

The institution has submitted its written representation on 26.05.2014 stating as

follows:-

“….the majority of teaching faculty members except one or two have not

qualified NET/SLET as per NCTE/UGC/University norms even though

sufficient period of time was given by the university. (copy enclosed)

2. Intimation of Pondicherry University to the Institution stating that

“Admission to the course should not be made without the approval of

the University”. (copy enclosed)

3. Due to non availability of students for admission to B.Ed course for

academic year 2013-2014 (less 10 students approached for

admission).

4. The society is already running with loss.

The Board of Directors met and decided to close down the college which was

informed to Pondicherry University & Govt of Pondicherry dated 14.08.2013

(copy enclosed).

I further submit that the decision to close the institution after winding up the

course was informed to all the staff members in the meeting held on

02.08.2013. as all the staff members had agreed to leave the institution and

get their accounts settled, in accordance with mutual negotiations, formal

notices of termination were issued to all of them and their accounts were

settled in accordance with law. Based on the decision reached between two

sides, the management has given 3 months salary and decided to close the

course. Now the university requested the management to get NOC from

NCTE for closing the course. Hence, I kindly request you to issue the NOC

as early as possible.”

The Committee considered the Institutions request for closure of B.Ed course

and decided to permit the closure by withdrawing the recognition for

(APS02969) B.Ed course with effect from 2014-2015, in order to enable the

ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their final year

course.




Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with

SRC NCTE, Bangalore. after ensuring settlement of all faculty and staff claims.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

88

35) APS00689

T.T.I

Theera Jyothi

Teacher

Training

Institute,

Trivandrum,

Kerala

KL

Theera Jyothi Teacher Training Institute, St. Vincent's High School Campus,

Chittattumukku P.O. Kaniyapuram, Trivandrum-695588, Kerala.

The sourthen Regional Committee of NCTE accords recognition to Theera Jyothi Teacher Training Institute, St. Vincent's High School Campus, Chittattumukku P.O. Kaniyapuram, Trivandrum-695588, Kerala to offer Elementary Teacher Training course of two years duration from the academic session 2004-2005 with the condition that the institution shall shift to its own premises/ building within three years from the date of recognition. (in case the course is started in rented premises).

On 15/04/2014, a letter No.4610/D3/2013/GEdn dated 12-03-2014 is received from

The Secretary to Government, requesting to furnish opinion on the letter of the

(institution) dated 30.07.2013 letter requisting from closure which reads as under:-

"As per the GO referred to above Theera Jyothi T.T.I., Vincent's HS compound,

Chittattumukku, Kaniyapuram started functioning as an unaided self financing

instution from 2004-2005. As per GO read 2nd above (MS) No.339/2004/GEdn

dated 12-11-2004 above the address of the institution was changed as Theera

Jyothi T.T.I. Menamkulam, Kazhakuttom.

The admissions of candidates for the 1st year T.T.C. are generally complete during

June to August, for every year.

No candidates has been enrolled or applied for the admission to the first year T.T.C.

course for 2013-2015 in the Theera Jyothi T.T.I. till date. No candidate has been

advised for admission to the course from the department. In future also there is no

scope to seek admission for any candidate to the Institute.

In this circumstances I wish to close down the Theera Jyothi T.T.I. from the opening

of the academic year commencing from 2014-2015. This letter may be considered

as a Notice issued under the provisions in section 7 (6) of KE Act and Rule 24

chapter V of KERs.

The delay in filing this proposal from 01-06-2013 till date may be condoned

considering the delay in the commencement of the T.T.C course beyond June every

year and this proposal may be accepted.

As per reference 4th cited (This office letter No. 249/2013 dated 25-07-2013

addressed to DPI, DDE and DEO, Thiruvananthapuram) I have laready forwarded

proposal in this regard to the DPI, DDE, and DEO, Thiruvananthapuram.

On receipts of your order permitting the closure of the Institution, I will make

necessary arrangements to hand over the school records to nearby Aided or Govt

Teacher Training Institute as per your further direction.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

89

I request that this proposal may be considered at your earlist convenience."

The Committee considered the Institutions request for closure of T.T.I course


(APS00689) T.T.I course with effect from 2014-2015, in order to enable the

ongoing batch of students in T.T.I. course, if any, to complete their final year

course.






36) APS01099

D.Ed-AI

J J Teacher

Training

Institute,

Tiruchirapalli,

Tamilnadu

TN

J.J. Teacher Training Institute, Anantha Building, 18, Madurai Road, Tiruchirapalli -620 008, Tamilnadu The Southern Regional Committee of NCTE granted recognition to J.J. Teacher Training Institute, Anantha Building, 18, Madurai Road, Tiruchirapalli -620 008, Tamilnadu for Elementary (D.Ed) course of two years duration from the academic session 2005-06 with an annual intake of 100 (fifty) which includes the existing intake of 50 and an additional intake of 50 granted on 03.11.2005. Now, the institution has submitted its written representation on 23.06.2014 stating as follows:-

“…the J.J. Teacher Training Institute at Ammapettai, Tiruchirapalli District, sponsored by J.J. Educational Health and Charitable Trust during the Academic year 2004-2005 with annual intake of 50 students, during the Academic year 2005-2006 with first additional intake of 50 students, and during the academic year 2009-2010 with second additional intake of 50 students respectively. (Total intake of 150 students) As per our request dated 04.01.2012, we have been permitted to cancel the recognition granted to the institution for D.T.Ed-AI (APS07969) one unit of 50 intake with effect from 2012-2013 (Ref. 5 cited) We have enrolled only 45 students during the year 2011-2012 and they have completed their second year course in the academic year 2012-2013. The management has not admitted fresh candidates from the academic year 2012-2013 and also they have decided to surrender the remaining two units. We have written letter to surrender the remaining two units (sanctioned during the year 2004-2005 and 2005-2006) with effect from 2012-2013, and close our institution (Ref.6 cited copy enclosed). But till date we have not received the order of closure for the second and third additional so far.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

90

……issue orders for the closure of our erstwhile J.J. Teacher Training Institute with effect from 2012-2013 and to issue the necessary orders permitting encashment of the original joint Fixed Deposits for both Endowment fund and Reserve fund at the earliest”.

Note: The application of D.T.Ed-AI (APS07969) 50 units was already closed/withdrawn as per this office order dated 18.05.2012 The Committee considered the Institutions request for closure of D.Ed-Al

course and decided to permit the closure by withdrawing the recognition for

(APS01099) D.Ed-Al course with effect from 2014-2015, in order to enable the

ongoing batch of students in D.Ed-Al, course, if any, to complete their final

year course.






37) APS00864

APS00812

D.T.Ed

D.T.Ed-AI

Kasthoorbha

Gandhi Teacher

Training

Institute,

Namakkal,

Tamilnadu

TN

Kasthoorbha Gandhi Teacher Training Institute, 1/220, Nethaji Road, Masakalipatty P.O., Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District-637401, Tamilnadu Kasthoorbha Gandhi Teacher Training Institute, 1/220, Nethaji Road, Masakalipatty P.O., Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District-637401, Tamilnadu has granted recognition for D.T.Ed course of two years duration from the academic session 2005-06 with an annual intake of 100 students which includes the existing intake of 50(APS00864/D.T.Ed on 22.06.2004) and an additional intake of 50(APS00812/D.T.Ed-AI) on 25.08.2005 with the condition to shift the institution from temporary to own premises within 3 years from the date of recognition. Shifting permission order was issued to the institution on 12.07.2011 to new permanent premises at No.1/220-A, Nethaji Road, Masakalipatty Post, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal-637401, Tamilnadu. The institution has submitted its written representation on 02.06.2014 stating as follows:-

“…kindly consider our request and withdraw the recognition granted to our said Kasthooribha Gandhi Teacher Training Institute, Masakalipatty and issue orders to close the institution at an early date. The institution is willing to hand over the records relating to our Kasthooribha Gandhi Teacher Training Institute, to the concerned authorities soon after the National Council for Teacher Education issued orders to this effect. Further, the National Council for Teacher Education, requires any more details, in this subject I shall submit the same immediately soon on receipt of intimation.”


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

91

The Committee considered the Institutions request for closure of D.T.Ed &

D.T.Ed-Al courses and decided to permit the closure by withdrawing the

recognition for (APS00864)-D.T.Ed & (APS00812)-D.T.Ed-Al course with effect

from 2014-2015, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.T.Ed &

D.T.Ed-Al course, if any, to complete their final year course.






38) APS04416

D.T.Ed

A K T Memorial

Teacher

Training

Institute,

Vilupuram,

Tamilnadu

TN

A.K.T. Memorial Teacher Training Institute, AKT Nagar, Neelamangalam, Kallakurichi, Villupuram- 606 202, Tamilnadu

A.K.T. Noble Cause Volunteers Trust, 11, Katcheri Road, Kallakurichi – 606 202, Villupuram District, Tamilnadu had submitted an application to the SRC, NCTE for grant of recognition to A.K.T. Memorial Teacher Training Institute, AKT Nagar, Neelamangalam, Kallakurichi, Villupuram- 606 202, Tamilnadu for D.T.Ed course of two years duration from the academic session 2006-07 with an annual intake of 50 students on 04.09.2006. As per the recommendation of Sri. Sathyam Committee report and based on the directions of MHRD, re-inspection was conducted to all the institutions which were granted recognition in 116th meeting of SRC held on 22-23 August 2006. The institution was re-inspected on 17.12.2008 and the VT report along with all documents were placed before 169th meeting of SRC held during 12-13 January 2009, wherein, it was decided to issue notice under section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a notice was issued to the institution on 05.03.2009. the institution submitted its written representation on 15.04.2009 along with supporting documents. The SRC in its 178th meeting held on 13-14 July 2009 considered the written representation dated 15.04.2009 and observed that the deficiencies mentioned in the show cause notice were rectified and hence decided to continue the recognition accorded to the institution. Accordingly, a letter (Restoration of recognition) was sent to the institution on 10.08.2009. Now, the institution has submitted its written representation on 23.06.2014 stating as follows:-

“Our A.K.T. Memorial Teacher Training Institute will functioning from the academic ytear 2006-2007 onwards. From the academic year 2013-2014 the management will not admit the students for the above mentioned course. We are getting the letter from the Director, SCERT, Chennai for closing of our institution. So kindly accept this letter and refund the Endowment fund and Reserve fund.”


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

92

The Committee considered the Institutions request for closure of D.T.Ed

course and decided to permit the closure by withdrawing the recognition for

(APS04416) D.T.Ed course with effect from 2014-2015, in order to enable the

ongoing batch of students in D.T.Ed, course, if any, to complete their final

year course.






Consideration of Other Caes: (Vol – 1)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

39) APS05398

D.Ed

New Model

College of

Elementary

Education,

Cuddapa,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

New Model College of Elementary Education, siddavatam , Cuddapa District,

Andhra Pradesh.

Sri Sai Educational Society, Kadapa District-516001, Andhra Pradesh has submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition to New Model College of Elementary Education, siddavatam , Cuddapa District, Andhra Pradesh for D.Ed course recognition order was issued to the institution on 22/04/2008 for D.Ed course of two years duration with an annual intake of 50 students.

Meantime, an abstract received from the Government of Andhra Pradesh dated 01/07/2011 received on 15/07/2011 stating that “…they have admitted extra students in D.Ed, 1st year after completion of 3rd phase DIETCE-2010 counseling during the academic year 2010-2011. But in the 4th phase counseling, the convener DIETCET-2010 have allotted students to the vacant seats of their colleges under category-A seats and requested the government to accord permission for the extra seats for the year 2010-2011 as a special case”.

The representation was placed before SRC in its 209th Meeting held on 31st July,

2011, and the committee has decided to issue show cause notice to the institution.

Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 07/10/2011. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 11/11/2011.

The reply of the institution was placed before SRC in its 218th Meeting held on 218th

Meeting held on 28 February, 2012 and the committee considered the matter and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

93

decided that, in view of the condonation ordered by the State Govt. SRC may warn

the erring institution and require them to give an undertaking that there will be no

recurrence of such a lapse.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 06/06/2012.

A complaint has been received from Shri. B. Kishore Kumar, Staff Reporter, Zee 24

Hour TV Channel, D.No. 42/585-3, Behind Gate of Saraswathi Vidyalayam, N.G.O.

Colony, Kadapa District-516002, Andhra Pradesh on 30/04/2013 & 02/05/2013

stating that “… the new model college of Education & Diet college was initially

established in Siddavattam in Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh at the following

address in the year 2005-06 R.S. Nagar, Eguvapeta Siddavattam Post & Mandal,

Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh this college functioned at the above address up to

2007-2008. There after this college was unauthorisedly shifted to D.No. 20/864

Radha Krishna Nagar, Co-Operative Colony, Kadapa in the year 2008 and is

functioning at this address regularly till now. This fact was brought to the notice

authorities several times, but in vain. In spite of complaint several times, the above

concerned authorities have not taken any action against the college for its illegal

functioning at the place other than the sanctioned place since 2008”.

The SRC in its 245th Meeting held on 19th-21st May, 2013 considered the non-reply

of the institution to the SRC letter dt. 06.06.2012 on the above matter and also the

relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the

following reasons:-

�� The SRC in its 218th meeting held on 28th Feb, 2012 considered the condonation ordered by the State Govt. and decided to warn the erring institution and an undertaking was sought from the institution that there will be no recurrence of such a lapse (regarding admission of extra students in D.Ed 1st year as per letter received from Government of Andhra Pradesh dt. 01/07/2011).

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 06/06/2012. But, so far the

institution has not submitted any reply nor given any undertaking towards recurrence

of such lapse.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the

recognition of the D.Ed (APS05398) course run by the New Model College of

Elementary Education, Siddavatam, Cuddapa District, Andhra Pradesh

from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of

students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

94


The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly. Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any.

As per the decision of SRC, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 20.06.2013.

A letter has been received from Government of Andhra Pradesh on 14.11.2013 with the request to send the status position of New Model College of Elementary Education, Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh for D.Ed Course.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to Sri. G. Gopal Reddy, Director, SCERT on 03.12.2013.

A court order has been received from Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 35033 of 2013 dated 13.12.2013 stating as follows:

“The relief sought for in this writ petition is to declare the order dated 20.06.2013 in F.No. APS05398/D.Ed/AP/2013-14/52372 on the file of the second respondent, as illegal and arbitrary.

With the consent of both Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri K. Ramakanth Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for

respondents 1 and 2, the Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

Consequent on the amendment petition, in W.P.M.P.No. 45315 of 2013 being aloowed, the relief sought for in the writ petition includes a declaration that the order of the second respondent dated 20.06.2013 is illegal. The second respondent dated by the said proceedings dated 20.06.2013, withdraw recognition to the petitioner-college for D.Ed course in terms of section 14 (3) (b) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (for brevity, ’the Act’)

Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would draw attention of this court to the affidavit, filed in support of W.P.M.P. NO.

45135 of 2013, wherein the petitioner undertook to withdraw the appeal filed by them before the first respondent and to question the impugned order passed by the second respondent in the present writ petition itself. In view of the undertaking now given by the petitioner to withdraw the appeal, and in view of the prayer having been amended pursuant to the order of this court in W.P.M.P. No. 45135 of 2013. The question, which necessitates examination, is whether the order of the second respondent dated 20.06.2013 is in accordance with law or not.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

95

The only ground on which the recognition, granted to the petitioner earlier, was withdrawn is that they had failed to submit an undertaking as directed by the second respondent vide proceedings dated 06.06.2012. pursuant to the show cause notice issued earlier, the petitioner submitted a reply which was considered by the second respondent in its meeting held on 28.02.2012, and it was decided that, in view of the condonation ordered by the State Government, the erring institution (the petitioner herein) may be warned and be required to give an undertaking that there will be no recurrence of such a lapse. The petitioner was, therefore, informed by the second respondent, vide proceedings dated 06.06.2013, that the excess admissions were condoned as directed by the State Government; and they should submit an undertaking that no excess admission would be made in future. The impugned order dated 20.06.2013 was passed, withdrawing recognition to the petitioner- institution, solely on the ground that the petitioner had failed to furnish the said undertaking as directed by the

second respondent in its proceedings dated 06.06.2013.

Section 17 (1) of the Act enables the Regional Committee, on its own motion or on any representation received from any person, and on being satisfied that a recognized institution has contravened any other provisions of the Act, Rules, regulations, orders made or issued thereunder, or any condition subject to which the recognition under Sub-Section (3) of Section 14 or permission under Sub-Section (3) of Section 15 was granted, to withdraw recognition in writing. Under the proviso thereto, no such order shall be passed against the recognized institution unless a reasonable opportunity of making representation, against the proposed order, has been given to such recognized institution.

While Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would

submit that an undertaking was furnished by the petitioner, (and a copy of the undertaking given by the petitioner has also been placed before this court), it would be wholly inappropriate for this court to examine whether the said undertaking is in accordance with the order of the second respondent dated 06.06.2012. the fact, however, remains that, in view of the stipulation in the proviso to section 17 (1) of the Act, the recognition granted to the petitioner earlier could not have been withdrawn without giving them a reasonable opportunity of making a representation against the proposed

action. the proviso to Section 17 (1) of the Act obligated the second respondent to issue a notice to the petitioner to show cause why their recognition should not be cancelled for their failure to furnish the undertaking in terms of the proceedings dated 06.06.2012, permit them to submit their reply thereto and, therefore, to pass an order in accordance with law. As the impugned order dated 20.06.2013 is passed in contravention of the proviso to Section 17 (1) of the Act, and as the said


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

96

order was neither preceded by a show cause notice nor was the petitioner given an opportunity to submit a representation, it is liable to be, and is accordingly, quashed. Needless to state that this order shall not preclude the second respondent from putting the petitioner on notice, give them an opportunity of being heard, and, thereafter, pass an order afresh in accordance with law.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs”.

The Committee in its 258th Meeting held on 03rd – 05th January, 2014 considered the matter, the letter related to condonation ordered by the State Govt. connected to allotment of extra students in the 27 colleges, was addressed to the AP Govt. Apparently it was not conveyed to the Colleges. It is decided by the Committee now to write directly to the 27 colleges and require them to furnish the undertaking.

Further, the Committee considered the Hon’ble High Court order and decided to continue recognition accorded to the New Model College for B.Ed

As per the decision of SRC, continue recognition order was issued to the institution on 11.02.2014.

Now, a proceedings Rc.No.310/N1-3/SCERT/2013 dated 19.03.2014 has been received from the Director, SCERT on 24.03.2014 stating as follows:

“As per the Hon'ble High Court Judgement dated 13.12.2013, the

Regional Director NCTE Bangalore was addressed vide this office Letter dated 15.05.2014 to confirm the recognition status to the petitioner College in question. The Regional Director, NCTE Bangalore vide reference 4th cited has informed that the said court order was placed before SRC in its 258th Meeting held on 03rd – 05th January, 2014 and the Committee decided to continue recognition to the New Model College of Elementary Education, Kadapa District.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

97

The admission counseling for admission into 1st year D.Ed course for the year 2013-14 was held in three phases from November, 2013 to January, 2014 and no further counseling planned. The classes for the 1st year D.Ed course is already commenced from 27.11.2013 onwards and as on today 3 ½ months working period is over.

In view of no possibility of further counseling and in view of not having sufficient working days to fulfill the required number of 200 working as per rules, the request of the petitioner College i.e.,. New Model College of Elementary Education, No. 2/83-2A, Rathna Sabhapathinagar, Siddavatam, Kadapa District for allotment of students for the year 2013-14 is not feasible at this juncture. The request to the management will be considered for allotment of students for 2014-15 as per rules.”

The Committee took note of the reply from SCERT, Hyderabad.

40) APS09534

B.Ed

Periyar

Maniammal

Universitym,

Thanjavur,

Tamilnadu

TN

Periyar Maniammal University, Department of Education School of Humanities Universities, Science & Management, Periyar Nagar, Vallam, Thanjavur-613403, Tamilnadu

Periyar Maniammal University, Department of Education School of Humanities Universities, Science & Management, Periyar Nagar, Vallam, Thanjavur-613403, Tamilnadu had submitted an application for B.Ed Course on 17.06.2008. The institution was granted recognition on 25.09.2009 with an annual intake of 100 students.

The institution vide its letter dated 20.12.2011 submitted its proposal for change of premises for the programme within the University campus. Accordingly, a letter sent to the institution seeking for Rs. 40,000/- towards change of premises along with documents on 04.01.2012. The institution vide its letter dtd. 08.02.2012 submitted required documents and DD bearing no. 644257 dtd. 25.01.2012 for Rs. 40,000/- towards change of premises fee on 08.02.2012.

The NCTE, Hqrs vide letter dtd. 27.02.2012 had forwarded a complaint dtd. 16.01.2012 which was received against the institution from Dr. B. Ramaswamy, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110091. NCTE, Hqrs has stated that “some allegations have been made by complainant against the aforesaid institution. You are, therefore, requested to examine the matter and to take necessary action against the institution as per the NCTE Act, 1993, by placing the complaint before the Regional Committee and to furnish action taken to NCTE, Hqrs., New Delhi within a month”.

The SRC in its 219th meeting held on 15th-16th March, 2012 considered the matter and decided to call for Affidavit from the complainant. Also the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

98

committee decided to call for comments from the institution after receiving the affidavit from the complainant.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the complainant on 13.04.2012. The complainant has not submitted any written representation/affidavit till date. The institution has submitted shifting inspection fee of Rs. 40,000/- on 08.02.2012. Further, as per NCTE notification dated 13.09.2011, the institution is required to submit another Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) as shifting fee as per norms. Further, the NCTE Hqrs has forwarded a complaint against the institution on

06.12.2012 from Dr. B.Ramaswamy, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110091 and has

requested to take necessary action against the institution as per the NCTE Act,

1993, by placing the complaint before the Regional Committee.

The SRC in its 236th meeting held on 16th - 17th December, 2012, considered the

complaint matter and reply of the institution dt. 08/02/2012 and all other relevant

documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to

examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the

proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were

duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms, after collecting balance of

inspection fee of Rs. 10000/- and instruct VT members to look into the specific

allegations in the complaint.

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between15th-19th January

2013. The same was intimated to the institution on 08.01.2013. The inspection was

conducted on 19.01.2013 and has submitted balance of inspection fee of Rs.

10000/-by DD bearing No.543665 dt.17.01.2013.

The SRC in its 241st meeting held on 29th & 31st March 2013 & 01st April 2013 considered the VT report, VCD of the institution and advised Southern Regional Office to put up the details in the standard format in the next meeting.

The SRC in its 242nd Meeting held on 14th -16th April, 2013 considered the VT report,

VCD and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw


1. Certified copy of land documents issued by the Sub-Registrar is not submitted. If the documents are in Tamil, Notarised English version of the same required.

2. Non-Encumbrance Certificate is not submitted in original and the University has submitted Non-Encumbrance Certificate in the name of Periyar Maniammal Institute of Science and Technology and not in the name of Periyar Maniammai College of Technology for Women. This needs clarification. Notarised English version of Encumbrance Certificate is


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

99

required. 3. The University has submitted the Deed of Declaration in the name of Periyar

Maniammai College of Technology for Women. Whereas, the Non-Encumbrance Certificate is in favour of Periyar Maniammal Institute of Science and Technology. This needs clarification.

4. The University has submitted photocopy of the affidavit. In the affidavit built-up area is not mentioned. Hence, fresh original affidavit showing built-up area is required.

5. Blue Print of the Building Plan required, if the approving authority is in Regional Language, Notarised English version of the same required.

6. Original FDRs of Rs. 5 lacs and Rs. 3 lacs from Nationalised Bank for a duration of 5 years required.

7. Principal/Head is having only 4 years of Teaching experience is college of Education. As per NCTE norms Ten years teaching experience is required out of which at least 5 years teaching experience in a Secondary Teacher Education institution.

8. Lecturer in Foundation course and Methodology course are not identified. Lecturer in Art Education is not having Master Degree in Fine Arts/Music with 55% marks. Hence, Lecturer in Art Education with required qualification required to be appointed as per NCTE norms.

9. As per NCTE norms at least one lecturer should have specialization in ICT and another in the special education.

The institution has failed to follow the rigid application of NCTE norms and

standards. It is a case of strict application of norms and standards as directed by

S,C, in their order dt. 31-01-2011 in case Civil Appeal No.1125-1128/2011 in SLP,

SLP No. 17165-68/2009 filed by NCTE Vs ors, which reads as under:

“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfills the conditions

specified in various clauses of the Regulations. The Council is directed to

ensure that in future no institution is granted recognition unless it fulfils the

conditions laid down in the Act and the Regulations.


B.Ed course run by the Periyar Maniammal University, Department of Education

School of Humanities Universities, Science & Management, Periyar Nagar, Vallam,

Thanjavur-613403, Tamilnadu, from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable

the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.

Accordingly, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 24.05.2013.

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide

order no. F.No.89-390/2013 Appeal/14th Meeting-2013 dtd. 07.11.2013 has stated

as follows:-

“ after perusal of the documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

100

considering the oral arguments advance during the hearing, the Council

concluded that the appeal deserved to be remanded to SRC with a direction

to issue a show cause notice to the appellant institution within 15 days from

the date of issue of the order in the appeal and thereafter complete further

processing as per the Regulations within 45 days. In the meantime the order

of withdrawal should be kept in abeyance.

NOWTHEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Periyar

Maniammal University, Thanjavur, Tamilandu to the SRC, NCTE, for

necessary action as indicated above.”

The SRC in its 256th meeting held on 04th –06th December, 2013 has considered the

appellate authority order dated 07/11/2013 directing to take necessary action and

advised Southern Regional Office to process the case and put up in the 257th

meeting.

Accordingly, the application was processed and placed before SRC in its 259th

meeting held on 17-19 January 2014 has considered the matter and decided that the

University to be asked to file staff list, in accordance with NCTE norms, as approved

by the University and signed by the Registrar.

By seeing the website the University has submitted written representation on

24.01.2014 along with staff profile list approved by the Registrar, Periyar Maniammal

University.

The SRC in its 262nd meeting held on 17-19 February 2014 has considered the

Appellate authority order dated 7/11/2013, also reply of the institution vide letter

dated 24/01/2014 all other relevant documentary evidences and decided to allow for

shifting of the institution to the new premises.

Accordingly, an order permitting shifting of premises was issued to the institution on

14.03.2014 along with the note that the university has to submit the approved staff

list in the format as prescribed by NCTE.

On 07.04.2014, the university has submitted its written representation on

07.04.2014.

As per direction of competent authority, a letter was issued to the institution on

20.05.2014 to submit approved staff list.

Now, the university has submitted its written representation on 06.06.2014 along

with approved staff list, affidavits of faculties and an affidavit of Rs.100/- stamp

paper.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

101

The Committee considered the reply of the University dated 07.04.2014 and all

the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show Cause

Notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• The University has not submitted approved staff list with details regarding designations, subject specializations and percentage of marks in the qualifying examainations of all teachers as per NCTE Annexure.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to

the University as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby

providing an opportunity to the University to make a written representation

within 21 days from the date of receipt of the Show Cause Notice along with

necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the

matter; failing which action will be taken including the withdrawal of

recognition, based on the records available with no further notice.

41) SRCAPP1013

B.P.Ed

Sri Sai Aditya

Institute of

Diploma

Education, East

Godavari,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sri Sai Aditya Institute of Diploma Education, Sreenagar Colony, Kakinada Urban, East Godavari District-533003, Andhra Pradesh

Sarojini Educational Society, Plot No. 2-24-4, Ground floor, Temple Tree Apartments, Near Janma Boomi Park, Srinagar Village, Engineering College Post Office, Kakinada Urban and Town, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh has applied for grant of recognition to Sri Sai Aditya Institute of Diploma Education, Plot No. 2-6-17, Sreenagar Colony, Kakinada Urban, East Godavari District-533003, Andhra Pradesh for B.P.Ed course online on 29.09.2011 for one years duration under section 14(1) of the NCTE Act. 1993 and received in the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE on 30.09.2011.

NCTE-Hqrs had directed to process the applications in accordance with NCTE Regulations 2009, it amendment Notified on 26th November 2010 which reads as follows:-

2 (B) for Sub Regulation (1-A) the following shall be submitted namely. 1 (1-A) (I) the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

a. The processing fee, as provided under Rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application.

b. Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

c. Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society. Institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of online application.

The SRC considered the matter in its 213th meeting held on 6th-7th November, 2011 and after careful perusal of the original file of the institution and other related documents, NCTE Act 1993. regulations and guidelines from time to time laid on the table. The Regional committee decided to reject the application on the following


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

102

grounds.

• Valid printout of on-line application not submitted.

As per the decision of SRC, a rejection letter was issued to the institution vide no. F.No. SRCAPP1013(2012-13)/B.P.Ed/AP/2011-12/36192 dated 23/01/2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order no. F.No.89-57/2012 Appeal/3rd Meeting-2012 A 50899 dated 18/04/2012 state that “the council concluded that there was adequate Justification in remanding the case to the SRC for further processing of the application on merit as per regulations”.

The SRC in its 222nd meeting held on 09th – 10th May 2012 considered the Appellate authority order dt. 18/04/2012 and it decided to process the application on submission of original application and related supporting documents as per the regulations.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 25.06.2012/(Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 11.07.2012. The institution has submitted written representation to the deficiency letter on 17.09.2012

� The institution has not submitted the reply with in stipulated time of 60 days and with delay of 7 days.

The SRC in its 233rd meeting held on 26-28th September, 2012 considered the reply of the institution, which is received on 17/09/2012, i.e., after 07 (Seven) days from the date of issue of deficiency letter dt 11/07/2012 and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per clause 7(1) of NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of D.El.Ed course.

As per the decision of SRC, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 30.10.2012.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs and the appellate authority in its order dt. 06.03.2013 stated that “….the council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC to consider the reply of the institution and take further action as per the regulations”.

In pursuance to the appellate authority order ,reply to the deficiency letter dt. 29.12.2011 was processed and placed before SRC in its 242nd meeting held on 14th-16th April 2013, and it has considered the appellate authority order dt. 06.03.2013, reply of the institution vide letter dt. 29.12.2011 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under section 14 of NCTE Act, for the following:

2. The FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs already expired on 21.09.2012, the institution has not submitted original FDRs.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

103

3. Proof of completion of 3 academic sessions towards T.P.T & H.P.T courses which are already run by the institution from the affiliating body/State Govt/examining body is not submitted.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 17.05.2013. The institution has submitted its written representation on 06.06.2013

The SRC in its 249th meeting held on 24-26th July, 2013 considered the matter and advised Southern Regional Office to Re-submit in the 250th meeting with a comparative statement for T.P.T, H.P.T, U.P.T & B.P.Ed courses. Accordingly, a comparative statement was placed before SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25th-27th October 2013.The committee considered the reply of the institution dt.06-06-2013 to the show cause notice letter and all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection to B.P.Ed course (SRCAPP1013) under section 14 of NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms. Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed between 28th November to 2nd December 2013 and the same was intimated to the institution on 22.11.2013. As per the direction of SRC, the inspection of the institution was conducted on 02.12.2013 and the VT Report was received by this office of SRC on 09.12.2013 SRC in its 257th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd December, 2013 ,on careful perusal of the original file of the institution, VT report, VCD, all relevant documents and other related documents, Act of NCTE, 1993, Regulations and guidelines of NCTE published from time to time laid on the table, the Regional Committee decided to issue Letter of Intent for grant of recognition to B.P.Ed course of one year duration with an annual intake of 100(one hundred only)(one unit), subject to the appointment of qualified staff through duly constituted selection committee as per the Norms of NCTE/State Government/Affiliating University and be given effect before the commencement of the academic session.

As per the direction of SRC in its 257th Meeting held on 20th – 22nd December, 2013 an LOI was issued to the institution on 08.01.2014 and the institution has submitted its reply on 02.03.2014.

The SRC in its 264th Meeting held on 1st to 3rd March,2014 ,on careful perusal of the original file of the institution and staff profiles submitted by the institution in response to the letter of Intent, decided that Formal Recognition be granted to B.P.Ed., course of one year duration with an annual intake of 100 (one hundred only) students, with effect from 2014-2015.

As per the decision of SRC, a Formal Recognition order was issued to the institution vide F.No.SRCAPP1013/B.P.Ed/2013-14/57347 dated 03.03.2014.

A letter was addressed to the institution on 03.03.2014 seeking the service certificate of the Principal, original FDRs in Joint Account and Educational qualifications of all staff members.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

104

On 01.04.2014, in response to this office letter dated 03.03.2014, the institution has submitted a written representation along with the certain documents which is as under ;

‘ We submit that in reference 2( Our office letter dated 03.03.2014), we have handed over in person , the original Joint FDRs and list of faculty approved by affiliating body, Dean, College Development Council ,Andhra University, Vishakapatnam. The enclosed acknowledgement given by SRC,NCTE, confirms the content of our reply.

Notarized Service Certificate of the Principal,Mr.Himashu Sekhar Mohanty is also enclosed. Educational qualification of all staff members is mentioned in the enclosed notarized staff lists.

Perusing the enclosed documents and the documents already submitted, we request you to arrange for issue of formal recognition order to Sri Sai Aditya College of Physical Education at the earliest for offering B.P.Ed course with effect from 2014-15 as the commencement of academic year is fast approaching.’

The institution has submitted the following documents :-

1. Service certificate of the Principal, Shri. Himanshu Sekhar Mohanty for a period of six years.

2. Photocopy of the Staff list consisting of Principal. doctor, 6 lecturers in physical education appointed on full time basis and 3 sports trainers appointed on part time basis.Staff list aproved in original by the Registrar , Andhra University Vishakapatnam is submitted along with the reply dated 03.03.2014.

3. List of technical support staff and administrative staff appointed by the college is submitted.

4. Original Fixed Deposit Receipts of Rs. 5 lakh and Rs. 3 lakh from a nationalized bank for a period of 5 years in joint account with the Regional Director are submitted along with the reply of the institution dated 03.03.2014.

Remarks :

1, Photocopies of the Marks sheets of the teaching faculties are not submitted.

2. Copy of the Principal’s experience certificate shows 6 years of experience in a college of physical education.. As per the norms the Principal should have 10 years of teaching experience , out of which 5 years in a college of Physical Education.

The Committee considered the reply of the institution vide letter dated

1.04.2014 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to

serve Notice Under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act for the following:

• The Institution has not submitted proper certificate of Principal’s experience.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Notice to the Institution


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

105

as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an

opportunity to the Institutiion to make a written representation within 21 days

from the date of receipt of the Show Cause Notice along with necessary




42) SRCAPP2169

B.Ed-DE

School of

Distance

Education

(Andhra

University),

Vishakhapatna

m, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

School of Distance Education, D.No. 7-15-4, AU Outgate Street, Chinna Waltair Village, Andhra University Post, Visakhapatnam (URBAN) Taluk, Vishakhapatnam District-530003, Andhra Pradesh.

School of Distance Education, D.No. 7-15-4, AU Outgate Street, Chinna Waltair Village, Andhra University Post, Visakhapatnam (URBAN) Taluk, Vishakhapatnam District-530003, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to School of Distance Education, D.No. 7-15-4, AU Outgate Street, Chinna Waltair Village, Andhra University Post, Visakhapatnam (URBAN) Taluk, Vishakhapatnam District-530003, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 29.07.2013 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 05.08.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 26.10.2013. A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 29.10.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 21.12.2013.

As per the oral direction of the SRC, a list of application status report 2014-15 was

placed before SRC in its 256th Meeting held on 04th-06th December, 2013 considered

the matter and all relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under

section 14 to examine whether the Central Universities & State University (Govt.

only) applied for the session 2014-15, fulfils all the requirements as per the norms,

for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any,

were duly rectified by the Universities/inspection, as per the norms.

Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed on 06th-09th January, 2014 the same was intimated to the institution on 24.12.2013. As per the direction of SRC, the inspection of the institution was conducted on 07.01.2014 and the VT Report received in the office of SRC on 15.01.2014. On careful perusal of the original file of the institution, VT report, VCD, all relevant

documents and other related documents, Act of NCTE, 1993, Regulations and

guidelines of NCTE published from time to time laid on the table, the Southern

Regional Committee in its 260th meeting held on 29th to 31st January,2014

,decided to issue Letter of Intent for grant of recognition to B.Ed –DE course

of two academic sessions / years with the basic unit of intake for the B.Ed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

106

(ODL) programme shall be 500 students subject to the condition that a study Centre

shall enroll not more than one hundred students in a given session, subject to the

appointment of qualified staff through duly constituted selection committee as per

the Norms of NCTE/State Government/Affiliating University and be given effect

before the commencement of the academic session.

Note: The institution should get UGC clearance for Self Learning Materials.

As per the decision of SRC, LOI was issued to the university on 11.02.2014.Reply to

LOI was received on 25.02.2014

The Southern Regional Committee in its 264th Meeting held during 1st to 3rd March ,2

014,considered the matter, reply vide letter dated 25.02.2014 of the Andhra

University, School of Distance Education to LOI issued vide letter dt 11.02.2014. On

observation it is noticed that

the LOI issued to B.Ed-DE course was a mistake. Since the M.Ed-DE course of the

said University was recognized only in 2013. The Committee can not recognize

B.Ed-DE (SRCAPP2169) before the completion of 3 academic years of running

M.Ed-DE. Issuance of LOI to B.Ed-DE is reconsidered and corrected.



Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the University for recognition of

(SRCAPP2169) B.Ed-DE course.

In the mean time, the University has submitted a letter dated 28.02.2014 received on 06.03.2014 along with the staff list approved by the Registrar,Andhra University. Now, on 17.03.2014, the university has submitted a letter dated 12.03.2014(copy enclosed) stating that “ May I draw your kind attention to the following facts with reference to item No. 28 of the 264th Meeting of the SRC held during 1st to 3rd March, 2014 regarding our application No. SRCAPP2169 for the sanction of B.Ed course through Distance Mode. M.Ed and B.Ed Programmes.

1. B.Ed Programme started in 1982 with the approval of the Board of

Studies and Academic Senate as per the then existing rules with an intake of 500 seats and continued till the Academic year 2002.

2. M.Ed programme started in 1984 in accordance with the rules of the University with an intake of 250 seats and continued till the Academic year 1998.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

107

3. M.A. Education programme started in 2003 and continued till the Academic Year 2009.

4. M.Ed programme was restarted again in the academic year 2013-14 with an intake of 250 students with NCTE recognition and it is now in existence and need not be considered as a fresh course as it was offered for 15 years.

Hence, the School has more than 27 years of experience in offering

teacher education courses. These courses were offered strictly in accordance with the rules of Andhra University which is a state university, duly constituted by an act of A.P. Legislative Assembly.

These courses are kept under suspended animation as the National

Council for Teahcer Education came into existence and to comply with the Rules and guidelines prescribed therein.

I may also add that the education faculty recruited for these courses

were retained in the School of Distance Education even though the courses were not being offered with a view to offer these courses as soon as the approval is obtained from the NCTE. As a consequence, teachers who were recruited as early as 1994 are still on the rolls of the School of Distance Education

It may be brought to your notice that the education programme

through distance mode in the School of Distance Education caters to the needs of the entire Coastal Andhra Pradesh”.

The Committee considered the matter, letter dated 12.03.2014 from the

University, and advised SRO to inform the Uiversity that the Committee has no

scope for waiving the deficiency for which application has already been

rejected..

43) APS00574

B.Ed

Titus II

Teachers

College,

Pathanamthitta,

Kerala

KL

Titus II Teachers College, Tiruvalla, Pathanamthitta, Kerala.

Titus II Teachers College, Tiruvalla, Pathanamthitta, Kerala had applied for grant of

recognition to B.Ed course on 12.04.1996.

Provisional Recognition was granted to Titus II Teachers College, Tiruvalla,

Pathanamthitta, Kerala with the duration of one year for the year 1997-98. on

16.09.1997 subject to removal of certain deficiencies. The intake of students was

fixed at 80 .

The institution submitted its compliance report with respect to removal of

deficiencies on 24.11.1997.

The institution was granted provisional recognition for B.Ed course with duration of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

108

one year for the year 1998-99, subject to removal of certain deficiencies on

09.02.1998 .The intake of students was fixed at 80 .

The institution submitted its compliance reports on 16.12.1998 and 29.03.1999.

The institution was accorded conditional recognition of one year for the year 1999-

2000 subject to removal of certain deficiencies on 09.06.1999.

The institution submitted its compliance report on 29.12.1999 ,

Conditional recognition was granted to the institution for B.Ed course of one year,

for the academic session 2000-2001 on 22.03.2000 with an intake of 70 students

subject to fulfillment of certain conditions .

The institution submitted its compliance reports on 23.07.2001 and 26.07.2001.

.The institution had filed a court case in C.M.P.No. 28018/2000 and O.P.No.

17018/2000 in the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala challenging the teacher pupil ratio

fixed by NCTE.

A clarification letter in this regard was sent to the institution on 10.07.2002.

The institution submitted a copy of the interim direction of the Hon’ble High Court of

Kerala in CMP No.28018/2000 in OP.No.17018/2000 along with the staff list on

22.07.2012 allowing the petitioner institution to make admissions as per the student

strength sanctioned by the University ( 150.students)

The institution submitted the performance appraisal report for the year 2003-2004.

Letters seeking clarification regarding the maintenance of teacher pupil ratio of 1:

12.5 was sent to the institution on 06.07.2004 and 24.12.2004.

The matter relating to institutions, where recognitions were granted subject to

compliance reports in the State of Kerala, where recognition was granted for one

academic session was placed before the 175th Meeting of the Southern Regional

Committee. As per the decision of 175th meeting of SRC, a letter seeking

compliance report from the institution was sent on 07.07.2009 and a reminder was

sent on 08.01.2010.

The institution submitted a reply stating that the compliance report was already

submitted to this office vide their letter No. 69-11/09 dated 11.08.2009.The copy of

the report is not found in the file.

Further, there is no action seen in the file.

On 09.07.2013, the Principal , Titus II Teachers College, Tiruvalla has submitted a


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

109

written representation on which is as under ;

‘ Titus II Teachers College, Tiruvalla, Pathanathitta, Kerala is a Government aided

Training college established in the year 1957 under the auspices of the Mar Thoma

Syrian Church of Malabar. The College was affiliated to the Kerala University since

1957 and from 1984 onwards to the Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottyam. The

College is included in the list of 2(f) and 12(B) of UGC and accredited by the NAAC

with ‘A’ Grade in the year 2004.The staff of this college is appointed as per

UGC/University/Government Norms subject to the approval of affiliated University.

The students are admitted as per the directions of the Government of Kerala and the

Government sanctioned strength of 150.

As per your direction through letter cited under ref (1),(F.SRO/NCTE/2009-

2010/17323 dated 07.07.2009) we had submitted our compliance report vide

ref.(2)(NO.69-11/09 dated 11.08.2009 )with supporting documents. The institution

could also receive the ID No. as cited above. We are yet to receive the latest order

regarding permanent recognition for the B.Ed course from your esteemed

organization. We would be much obliged if you could grant us Permanent

Recognition at the earliest since we are in the process of NAAC re-accredition for

which the letter from your office is a mandatory one.’

Note : Recognition was granted to Titus II Teachers

College,Tiruvalla,Pathanamthitta District – 689101,Kerala for M.Ed Course of one

year duration with an annual intake of 25 students on 05.11.2007 and enhancement

of intake from existing 25 to 35 students was permitted vide this office order

F.SRO/NCTE/2010-11/20529 dated 20.08.2010.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 253rd Meeting held on 30th September and 1st October,2013 considered the matter, letter from the institution dated 09/07/2013 decided and advised Southern Regional Office to write to the concerned University and obtain all relevant documents from the University pertaining to the said college including staff approval list from the University and to process the file.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the Mahatma Gandhi

University with a request to provide all relevant documents pertaining to the

institutions including staff approved list from the University in order to consider the

matter of accord of permanent recognition to the institution.

On 03.03.2014, the Principal, Titus II Teachers College has submitted a written

representation enclosing the staff list of the college approved by the Joint Registrar,

Mahatma Gandhi University.

The staff list submitted comprises of one Principal, 4 Associate Professors , 6

Assistant Professors and a guest lecturer. The Approval of one Assistant Professor


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

110

is pending.

Note : The University has not submitted any other relevant documents pertaining to

the institution .

The Committee considered the matter, advised SRO to

1. Request the University once again to furnish information about the said

college, as already requested as per 253rd SRC meeting decision.

2. and to ask the College to submit approved staff list in the prescribed

format


Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

44) SRCAPP2132

B.P.Ed

Sri Krishnaveni

College of

Physical

Education,

Krishna, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sri Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, Plot/Khasra No. 222/1,224/3,Tatineni Nagar,1st Street, Gollanapalli Village and Post Office, Gannavaram Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Krishna District – 521101,Andhra Pradesh

Tatineni Gopaiah Memorial Educational Academy, Plot No. 1-2, Tatineni Nagar, Poranki Village and Post Office, Penamaluru Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Krishna District - 521137, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to Sri Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, Plot/Khasra No. 222/1,224/3,Tatineni Nagar,1st Street, Gollanapalli Village and Post Office, Gannavaram Taluk, Vijayawada Town, Krishna District – 521101,Andhra Pradesh for B.P.Ed Course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 06.02.2013/26.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 26.03.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 23.05.2013.

The SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th-22nd June 2013, considered the reply of

the institution to the Deficiency letter vide letter dt. 23-05-2013, the committee

decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for

recognition of B.P.Ed-SRCAPP2132 course.

Accordingly, rejection order was issued to the institution on 31.7.2013.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

111

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution filed a court case in the

Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No. 22725 of 2013.

Shri. Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate in its e-mail letter dated 1st August, 2013 stating

that “……that a deficiency letter was issued by the NCTE and the institution replied

stating that the deficiencies pointed out by NCTE were complied. On 19th June,

2013, SRC had rejected the case of the institution on the ground that the reply given

by the institution was not satisfactory. On 13th March, 2013, State Government

addressed a letter to the NCTE stating that deficiencies pointed by NCTE were

complied with by the college. NOW THE COURT WANTS TO KNOW BY

TOMORROW 2:15 PM AS TO WHETHER THE NCTE CONSIDERED THE STATE

GOVERNMENT RECOMMENDATION WHICH STATED THAT DEFICIENCIES

WERE COMPLIED BY THE COLLEGE”.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the advocate on 05.08.2013.

Meantime, a letter dated 5th August, 2013 has been received from the advocate,

Shri. K. Ramakanth Reddy stating as follows; “……writ petition in W.P. No. 22725 of

2013, filed by Krishnaveni College of Physical Education, was heard by the Hon’ble

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at 10:30 a.m. on 5.8.2013. The Hon’ble High Court

after hearing the matter directed the NCTE to reconsider the case of the petitioner

after considering the recommendations of the State Government within four weeks

for the academic year 2013-2014, while granting time to NCTE to file counter

affidavit.

I am of the considered opinion that though the recommendations of the State

Government were considered earlier, the SRC of NCTE can again reconsider the

case of the petitioner in the light of the recommendations of the State Government

already considered and pass appropriate orders. If the SRC of NCTE feels that the

recognition cannot be given, the SRC of NCTE can reject the same again. It can

also be stated in the rejection order about the cut-off date fixed by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court, if the cut-off date is applicable in this case also. If the SRC again

resolves to reject, it should be stated in the rejection order that the State

Government recommendations have been considered. Thus all aspects can be

covered again while reconsidering the case instead of filing vacate stay

petition/appeal in the matter.

The matter may be placed in the immediate next meeting of the SRC-NCTE to avoid

contempt of court and legal complications.

The SRC in its 250th meeting held on 11th-13th August 2013, considered the matter

and decided to review the earlier decision and considered the State Government

letter and the enclosed report. Further decided that since the Building Plan is not


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

112

approved by the competent authority the case is rejected.

The court order (interim order) received from the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in

WPMP.No.27859 of 2013 in WP.No.22725 of 2013 dated 05.08.2013 received by

SRC on 19.08.2013 stated as follows:-

“the State Government has made its recommendations vouching for the

infrastructural facilities put in by the petitioners. Therefore, it is only appropriate that

Respondents 1 and 2 shall reconsider the case of the petitioners afresh in the light

of the report submitted by the State Government and take an appropriate decision

for grant of recognition to the institution established by the 1st petitioner herein for

commencing the Bachelor of Physical Education Course for the academic year

2013-14 at the earliest, at any rate, within a fortnight’s time from the date of receipt

of a copy of this order and communicate its decision to the petitioners.

Sri.K.Ramakanth Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Respondents 1 and 2 seeks

two weeks’ time for securing instructions in the matter. Post after two weeks.”

The NCTE H-qrs in its letter dated 12.09.2013 received by SRC on 09.10.2013

stated as follows:-

“….after perusal of the Hon’ble High Court order dated 05.08.2013 it is seen that the

Hon’ble High Court directed to reconsider the case of the petititoners afresh in the

light of the report submitted by the State Govt. and take an appropriate decision for

grant of recognition to the institution established by the 1st petitioner herein for

commencing the Bachelor of Physical Education course for the academic year 2013-

14 at the earliest from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

The following has been observed in the matter:

1. No show cause notice has been given on the final deficiencies. 2. Proposal was initially refused without receipt/consideration of mandatory

recommendations from the State Govt. 3. In case, the recommendations dated 06.04.2013 were considered by the SRC,

then the court was not briefed about the same thereby issued orders for its consideration.

4. When statutory remedies are available under section 18, no orders are likely to pass by the Hon’ble High Court and as such the case was not properly defended.

Since, the SRC, NCTE has already implemented the interim orders dated

05.08.2013, we have no other option but to file a detail affidavit in the matter for

disposal of the case in favour of NCTE.

Accordingly, a letter to Shri.K.Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate sent on 13.11.2013

along with brief of the case with request to file a detailed counter affidavit.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

113

The institution has submitted its written representations series on 12.08.2013,

13.08.2013, 26.09.2013, 05.11.2013, 22.01.2014.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 24.01.2014 stating as

follows:-

“……requesting to kindly verify your records and reconsider the case as the two

objections stated by the SRC are complied and take an appropriate decision at the

earliest, that we have already lost an academic year and incurring huge expenditure

for the upkeep of the building and maintenance of the staff hired by us in anticipation

of the recognition. I once again request you to place the matter before the SRC at

the earliest as the approved building plan issued by the competent authority is

already submitted and the original FDRs submitted by us are still with you at the

earliest”.

A letter sent to the Advocate through e-mail dated 05.02.2014 requesting for latest

status of the above said case. In reply the advocate has stating as follows:-

“please go through the file and please let me know whether any thing is left in the

case. In my opinion there is nothing left.”

The Committee in its 261st meeting held on 9-10th February, 2014 considered the

Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh order dated 5/08/2013 and decided to

process the case as directed by the Court, and to be put up in the meeting.

Accordingly, the application is processed.

The SRC in its 262nd meeting held on 17th – 19th February, 2014 considered Hon’ble

High Court of Andhra Pradesh order dated 5/08/2013 and all other relevant

documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act, to

examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the

proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly

rectified by the institution, as per the norms.

Accordingly, inspection of the university was fixed between 17th – 22nd March, 2014. The inspection intimation was sent to university on 13.03.2014. The inspection of the university was conducted on 22.03.2014 and the VT Report received in the office of SRC on 27.03.2014

1. Encumbrance Certificate is not Submitted.

On 26.06.2014, the institution has submitted a written representation (copy enclosed

) stating that


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

114

‘even after submission of the report by the inspection committee in the month of

march 2014, our application was not processed further and LOI is not issued to us

and the original FDRs for Rs. 8.00 lakhs was also not returned.The said FDRs will be

converted as corpus fund with the joint signature of RJD ,A.P.School Education

,Kakinada..

That due to delay we again had to approach the Hon’ble high court by way of writ

petition and the same was numbered as W.P.No.s 16007/2014.’

A copy of the court order from the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad

for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No. 16007 of

2014 filed by the institution where in ,1st respondent – Chairman, NCTE (HQ), 2nd

respondent - SRC,NCTE3rd respondent – State of A.P and 4th respondent is The

Commissioner and Director of School Education, Govt. of A.P is enclosed.

The institution has prayed for a direction or writ more particularly a writ of

mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to process our application duly taking into

consideration the report of the inspection Committee and the recommendations of

the State Government at an early date and grant recognition to the petitioners

institution for starting the B.P.Ed program for the academic year 2014-2015 treating

the application as an old one and declare the inaction of the respondents in not

processing the application at an early date as illegal , arbitrary and contrary to the

Principles of natural justice and equity and may be pleased to issue any other writ

or direction which the Hon’ble High Court deems just and proper under the

circumstances of this case

WPMP.No. 19844 of 2014

Petition under section 15A CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the

affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass

interim order directing the respondent to process our application duly taking into

consideration the report of the inspection Committee and the recommendations

of the State Government at an early date and grant permission for B.P.Ed program

for the academic year 2014-2015 treating the application as an old one pending final

disposal of the writ petition No. of 2014 by the Hon’ble High Court.

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 17.06.2014 is as under ;

Shri.K. Ramakanth Reddy, learned standing Counsel for National Council for

Teacher Education (NCTE) would point out that the next Southern Regional

Committee of NCTE meeting is slated for 1st and 2nd July, 2014 at Bangalore

and the case file of the petitioner colleges of Education is also being

placed for consideration of the said Committee.

I hope and trust that the applications of the petitioners colleges will be


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

115

considered fairly and in accordance with the norms specified in the

Regulations framed by the NCTE and appropriate final decision will be

taken in accordance with law and communicated to the petitioners

immediately.

With this , the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

As per the Hon’ble High Order, Hyderabad, the Committee in its 262nd meeting

held on 17-19th Feb, 2014, decided to cause inspection of the said institution,

accordingly, inspection of the institution was done on 12.03.2014.

The Committee considered the matter, decided that as per the Court Order we

had caused inspection on 13.03.2014, but, in in view of the Supreme Court

Order, communicated to this office on 27.03.2014, the case can not be

processed further. Further, the Committee advised SRO to ask the Lawyer to

file a review petition explaining this difficulty to the Court.

45) APS07517

B.Ed

Pallavan

College of

Education,

Vellore,

Tamilnadu

TN

Pallavan College of Education, No. 1, Bharathiyar Salai, Vellore, Pin-632001, Tamilnadu Pallavan College of Education, No. 1, Bharathiyar Salai, Vellore, Pin-632001, Tamilnadu was granted recognition for B.Ed course on 03.02.2007 with an annual intake of 100 students, with the condition to shift to own premises within 3 years. The institution vide its letter dated 03.08.2012 has submitted DD bearing no. 951530

dtd. 31.07.2012 for Rs. 50,000/- towards shifting of premises. The SRC in its 230th

meeting held on 16th-17th August 2012, considered the request of the institution vide

letter dt.08-08-2012 and all other relevant documents and decided to cause

inspection, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the

norms.

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was fixed between 10th-11th September 2012. The same was intimated to the institution on 04.09.2012. The inspection of the institution was conducted on 18.09.2012. The SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21st-22nd November, 2012 considered the VT

report of the institution and other related documents along with the original file of the

institution for shifting to new/permanent premises and decided to permit shifting to

new premises is permitted, subject to the condition that submission of approved

staff list within 2 months as per NCTE norms.

Accordingly, permit shifting order was issued to the institution on 15.02.2013.

The institution has not submitted approved staff list even after stipulated period of 60

days.

The SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25th-27th October 2013, considered the matter


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

116

and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw


• After inspection of the institution on 18-09-2012 for shifting, the committee in its 235th meeting held on 21-22nd Nov, 2012, permission was accorded to the institution for shifting to the new premises, subject to the condition that submission of approved staff list within 2 months as per NCTE norms, accordingly, shifting order was issued to the institution on 15.02.2013.

Even though, the institution was given sufficient time to submit the

approved staff list within 2 months from the date of permission for shifting

was given, the institution failed to submit the approved staff list as per

NCTE norms till date. The institution has not submitted its reply even

after a lapse of stipulated 2 months and after lapse of time period of more

than 252 days (more than 8 months).


In the meantime, the institution has submitted its written representation on

05.03.2014 along with photocopy of approved staff list by Tamilnadu Teachers

Education University dated 06.01.2014.

This office has received an e-mail from Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate dated

06.03.2014 along with counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent (SRC, NCTE).

Accordingly, a letter to Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy was sent on 06.03.2014 along

with forwarding counter affidavit.

The SRC-NCTE has received an Office Memorandum from NCTE-Hqrs vide No.

F.No.89-120/2014 Appeal/A84973 dated 25.03.2014/28.03.2014 on 01.04.2014.

Accordingly, the original file was sent to NCTE-Hqrs on 16.04.2014.

In the meantime, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras court order in W.P.No.6868 of

2014 and M.P.Nos. 1 and 2 of 2014 has been received by SRC on 13.06.2014

stating as follows:-

“…..when the respondents are able to establish before this court that even

though, the petitioner college was granted time till the commencement of the

next academic session to give the approved staff list, they took ten months’

time to get the approved staff list, therefore, in my considered opinion, the

respondents are justified in their action in withdrawing the recognition.

Therefore, the question of non-issuance of show cause notice does not arise

at this stage as the conditional order of shifting has not been complied with.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

117

This court only adds that now that the petitioner college has got its own

building and also got the approved staff list, therefore, the first respondent

should take into consideration for the grant of recognition and affiliation for

the academic year 2014-15. It is always open for the petitioner to make

necessary representation in this regard. I find no infirmity or illegality to set

aside the impugned order. The writ petition is dismissed with the above

observation. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

No costs.”

Note: The original file was sent to NCTE-Hqrs on 16.04.2014.

The Committee took note of the matter,

46) APS02480

D.Ed

Hamdard

Welfare and

Educational

Association’s

Ashrafee

Teacher

Training

Institute,

Dharwad,

Karnataka

KA

Hamdard Welfare and Educational Association’s, Ashrafee Teacher Training Institute, 27/2A, Krishnapur, Jawahar Nagar, Old Hubli-580024, Dharwad Dt., Karnataka. Hamdard Welfare and Educational Association, Old Hubli, Karnataka had submitted an application on 3.2.2004 to the SRC for grant of permission to Ashrafee Teacher Training Institute, 27/2A, Krishnapur, Jawahar Nagar, Old Hubli-580024, Dharwad Dt., Karnataka for offering D.Ed.-Additional intake course of two years duration.

The institution was granted recognition on 15.12.2004 for increase of intake of 20 for D.Ed. course thus making an annual intake of 80 students from the academic session 2004-05. The matter regarding the management dispute was placed before the 216th meeting of SRC considered the matter and decided to send the copies of the relevant documents related to the complaints and the enquiry by District Registrar to DSERT & to request the DSERT for their comments. Accordingly, a letter was addressed to the Director, DSERT vide letter No.APS02480/D.Ed.-AI/KA/2011-12/39158 dated 13.03.2012 seeking comments on the above matter. But, there was no reply from the Director, DSERT.

In the meanwhile, on 1st June, 2012, a Notice was received from Sri. M.M. Hooli, Advocate dated 26.5.2012, stating that “My clients are teaching staff and non-teaching staffs of Hamdard Welfare Educational Association, Ashrafee Educational Complex, Jawahar Nagar, Near Gurunath Nagar, Old Hubli-580024 and have put in 10 to 15 years of service. As there is a dispute between the Management intersay, the salary of my clients is withheld, which is against law and ethics. My clients have given several request and reminders to all for payment of salary and backwages. But, no fruitful result have coming. My clients have decided to file an appeal before the Principal District Judge and Educational Appellate authority, Dharwad for the relief’s claimed in the said appeal petition. As you are the public officer in respect of Act purporting to be done by the Public Officer in his official capacity. A notice as required under Section 80 of CPC R/2 Section 94(1)(4) of the Karnataka Education Act 1983 as amended by act of no.8 1998 is given to you. Please note after expiry of the statutory period an appeal will be filed against you all. The proposed petition copy is enclosed herewith for your kind perusal and immediate action, so as to pay the salary and back wages of my client as prayed for. Hence this notice.”


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

118

The SRC in its 226th meeting held on 9th and 10th July, 2012 noted the matter and decided to

serve Notice for Non-payment of salaries to the teaching & non-teaching staff, as per NCTE

norms. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 21.9.2012.

In the meanwhile, a Notice was received on 12.09.2012 from the PRL District &

Sessions Judge, Dharwad in MA((EAT) 5/2012 regarding payment of salary of teaching

and non-teaching staff from Hamdard Welfare Education Society’s Ashrafee Teacher

Training Institute, Dharwad to appear before the Court on 17th September, 2012. The

letter was sent to the advocate Sri. M.B. Kanavi on 17.09.2012 along with a brief of the

institution for defending the case on behalf of NCTE.

The institution submitted its reply to the Show Cause Notice on 3.10.2012.

The SRC in its 235th meeting held during 21-22 November, 2012 considered the above matter and decided to request DSERT to verify the case and inform. Accordingly, a letter was addressed to the Director, DSERT, Karnataka vide this office letter NO.AOS02480/Court case/D.Ed./KA/2012-13/47971 dated 1.1.2013 with a request to verify the case and inform about the change of management of the institution.

Accordingly, a letter was also addressed on 17.10.2012 to the advocate for defending

the matter on behalf of NCTE.

On 2.9.2013, the Managing Trustee of Ashrafee Women Education Trust, Old Hubli vide letter dated 29.8.2013 has requested for change of management from “Ashrafee D.Ed. College , Hubli” from “Hamdard Welfare Educational Association” to “Ashrafee Women Educational Trust Hubli”.

SRC in its 254th meeting decided to remind SCERT and put up on 13th November, 2013. As per the decision of SRC, a reminder letter was sent to the Director, DSERT on 6.11.2013. On 14.11.2013, a report of the institution is received from the Director, DSERT vide letter No.Shita 2/NCERT/2013-14 dated 12.11.2013.

The Director has stated that the report received from DIET, Dharwad is submitted for information and he has stated that the matter is in the Hon’ble High Court of Dharwad in W.P.No.MA(EAT)05/2012.

The Principal, DIET, Dharwad in his letter addressed to the Director, DSERT vide letter No.Adm2/ATTIH/C.C./2013-14 dated 11.11.2013 has stated that “I Personally visited the said TTI and also consulted District Government pleader, Dharwad on 8.11.2013. The report is as under:-

1. With regard to Management Writ petition No.67001/2011 is rejected and

67002/2011 is dismissed. District Registrar of co-operative Society, Dharwad renewed upto the period 2013-14. And all concerned copies are enclosed herewith this letter.

2. Writ Petition MA(EAT)05/2012 has been filed by 1) Sri. J.A. Bangali, 2) Smt. M.B. Bettal, 3) Smt. K.M. Peerzade, 4) Sri. A.A. Pathan 5) Sri. S.G. Nadaf,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

119

the said writ petition is pending as informed by the District Government pleader, Dharwad. The next hearing date in the Court is 27.11.2013. Hence, I request the District Govt. pleader, Dharwad to give the latest position of the said petition.”

The SRC in its 256th meeting held on 04th –06th December, 2013 has considered the matter, since the matter is in Hon’ble High Court of Dharwad, the dispute be settled in the Court.

A letter dated 30.12.2013 is received by this office on 03.01.2014 from the General Secretary, Hamdard Welfare & Educational Association, Hubli along with the copy of the list of Governing Body Members of the Trust for the academic year 2013-14. A letter dated 20.12.2013 by the District Registrar, Dharwad for having received the copy of the list of Governing Body Members of the Trust for the academic year 2013-14 is also enclosed.

A letter dated 03.05.2014 is received by this office on 07.05.2014 along with court order dated 29.04.2014 of MA (EAT) 5 of 2012 stating “ the appeal filed under section 94 (1) (4) of Karnataka Education Act, 1983 is dismissed, as not maintainable.

However the Appellants are at liberty to work out their remedy before the appropriate authority “.

The Committee considered the matter, decided that the civil dispute should be

of no cosequene to SRC. In any case, it has been dismissed by the Hon’ble

High Court. No further action is required in this matter, advised to close the

case.

47) SRCAPP1335

D.El.Ed

Geethanjali

D.Ed College,

Kadapa,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Geethanjali D.Ed College, Khasara No. 25/2A, Plot No. 9-A, Street No. 01, Vidya

Nagar, Galivaripalli Post, Rajampet Taluk, Kadapa District-516115, Andhra

Pradesh.

Sri Sai Srinivasa Rural & Educational Development Society, Plot No. 9-A,

Mitaneedepalli road, Vidyanagar, Galivaripalli Post, Rajampet Taluk, Kadapa

District-516115, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition Geethanjali

D.Ed College, Khasara No. 25/2A, Plot No. 9-A, Street No. 01, Vidya Nagar,

Galivaripalli Post, Rajampet Taluk, Kadapa District-516115, Andhra Pradesh,

for D.El.Ed Course for two years duration under Section 15(1) of the NCTE Act,

1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 30.09.2011. The

institution has submitted hard copy of the application on 04.10.2011.


Government for recommendation on 18.10.2011. A reminder letter to the State

Government was sent on 16.12.2011. A deficiency letter was issued to the

institution on 29.12.2011. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on

27.02.2012.

The SRC in its 220th Meeting held on 30th-31st March, 2012 considered the reply of

the institution dated 27.02.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

120

was decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14(1) of NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 26/04/2012. The

institution submitted a written representation on 17/05/2012.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 223rd Meeting held during 29th to 31st

May,2012 considered the reply of the institution to the show cause notice and the

reply was unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:

• The gift deed land document dt. 24.02.2012 is registered after the date of on-line application, which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009 and the land registered on 28/09/2011 is in individual name; which is not permissible as per NCTE norms and also admitted by the institution in its reply to show cause notice.

• Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes.

The reply to the show cause notice was not satisfactory and was unconvincing.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of D.El.Ed course.

Accordingly, a refusal and rejection order was issued to the institution on 28/06/2012

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs and the appellate authority order in its order No. F.No. 89-546/2012Appeal/10th Meeting-2012 dated 11/12/2012 stated that

“…the Council concluded that the appeal deserved to be accepted. The case is remanded to the SRC for further processing”.

The SRC in its 239th Meeting held on 26th-27th February, 2013 considered the Appellate authority’s order dated 11-12-2012 and decided to further process the application for D.El.Ed course as per Regulations.

As per the direction of SRC the application was processed and placed before SRC in its 242nd Meeting held during 14th – 16th April,2013 and the Committee considered the matter and decided to reject the application for the following reason:-

3. Deficiency letter reply submitted by the institution is unsigned by the Correspondent/authorized person of the institution. Therefore all the information given by the institution is unauthenticated.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution Vide order No. F.No.S RCAPP1 335 / D.Ed /AP(2013-14)/51733 dated 17.05.2013.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE-Hqrs vide and the appellate authority vide order no. F.No.89-673/2013 Appeal/1st Meeting-2014 dated 06.02.2014 has stated as under ;


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

121

“…the council decided not to condone the delay and therefore, the appeal is not admitted”.

The appellate authority order was placed before SRC in its 264th meeting held on 1st – 3rd March,2014, and the Committee has noted the matter.

Further, the institution has preferred another appeal to the NCTE-Hqrs , and the original filed is sent to NCTE-Hqrs vide this office letter No.F.SRCAPP1335/D.Ed/AP/2013-14/58122 dated 15.05.2014

Appellate authority order is awaited .

In the mean time, a court order dated 07.04.2014 is received by this office on

18.06.2014 from Hon’ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at

Hyderabad in W.P.No,. 7649 of 2014 filed by the institution ,where in NCTE(HQ) is

the first respondent and SRC,NCTE is the 2nd respondent.

The prayer of the petitioner is as under ;

‘Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herewith, the High court may be pleased

to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of

Writ of Mandamus , declaring the order in F.No. 89 -673/2013/Appeal/1st Meeting-

2014, dated 06.02.2014 of the 1st respondent in not condoning the delay and

deciding not to admit the appeal filed by the petitioner by order in F.No.89-673/2013

Appeal/1st Meeting of 2014 , dated 06.02.2014 preferred against the orders of the

2nd respondent (SRC,NCTE) passed in F.No. SRCAPP1335/D.EI.Ed/AP/2013-

14/51733 dated 17.05.2013 in rejecting the application of the petitioner society for

grant of recognition to D.EI.Ed course as illegal and arbitrary and violation of Article

19(1) (g) of the constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to

condone the delay in filing the appeal and dispose of the same on merits.

WPMP No. 9520 of 2014.

Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the

affidavit filed in support of the writ petition , the High Court may be pleased to direct

the 1st respondent to reconsider the appeal preferred by the petitioners

against the order of the 2nd respondent passed in

F.No.SRCAPP1335/D.EI.Ed/AP/2013-14/51733, dated 17.05.2013.

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 07.04.2014 (copy enclosed) is as under ;

‘ In the instant case also, the order passed by the Appellate Authority is bald,

except recording its conclusion that the Council has decided not to condone the

delay. In my opinion, the decision of the Council not to condone the delay should be

based upon valid or substantial reasons. Not to condone the delay in a conclusion


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

122

by itself and it should be based upon proper reasons. For not assigning any

reasons as to why the Council did not fully get satisfied to condone the delay, the

order passed by the NCTE , deserves to be set aside and the matter deserves to

be remanded for consideration afresh by the NCTE. It is apt to remember, the Court

is not as so much concerned with the conclusion/decision rendered by an

administrative or quasi judicial authority but it is essentially concerned with the

process of reasoning which led to such a decision. The reason offered is an

indication as to the lines on which the discretion can only be described as an abrupt

and arbitrary one. Therefore, the matter deserves to be reconsidered afresh.

Hence, the impugned order is set-aside. Subject to the writ petitioner depositing a

sum of Rs.20,000/- by way of demand draft drawn on any nationalized Bank

payable at par at New Delhi payable with the Chairman, National council for

Teacher Education within three weeks from today, the same may be received and

the delay application may be taken up for condonation and thereafter the appeal be

passed thereon within a maximum period of six weeks.

The writ petition stands disposed of with this order. Miscellaneous applications if

any shall stand closed. No Costs

Note :The original file is sent to NCTE-Hqrs vide this office letter No. F.

SRCAPP1335 / D.Ed /AP/2013-14/58122 dated 15.05.2014 as per the NCTE (HQ)

letter no.89-673/2013Appeal/1st Meeting- 2014 dated 08.05.2014.

The Committee considered the matter, Hon’ble High Court, Hyderabad order

dated 07.04.2014, and decided that as per the order of Hon’ble High Court, it is

for the Appellate authority to take action. There is nothing for Southern

Regional Committee to do in this case at this stage.


48) APS02951

B.Ed

Calicut

University -

Letter from the

Registrar

University of

Calicut

KL

Letter from the Registrar University of Calicut .

A letter from the Registrar, University of Calicut , dated 06.05.2014 is received by this office on 09.05.2014.He has stated as under :-

‘University of Calicut is situated in the northern part of Kerala , considering the socio educational backwardness of the area, the University started B.Ed Centres as early as in 1982. At present we have 11 Centres .NCTE had conducted visits to these Centres and had given recognition. when NCTE withdrew the recognition of these Centres we were forced to take up this matter with the High Court. The Hon. High court directed the NCTE to go through the claim of the University in respect of each and every centre with the material furnished by them ,compare the same with the deficiencies noted by them during inspection, and reappraise whether there is any shortcoming that needs to be rectified by the University for continuance of recognition of the Centre. We have been regularly submitting the self appraisal report of all these 11 Centres , but no action has


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

123

been taken so far by NCTE Hence, I request that necessary action may kindly be taken to grant recognition to the 11 University Teacher Education Centres of the University of Calicut at an early date.

A copy (website copy)of the High Court order dated 17.08.2010 is enclosed.’

The order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in W.P.No. 33636 of 2009 dated 17.08.2010 (copy enclosed)in the 20 writ petitions, ten filed by the Calicut University and remaining ten filed by the Kerala University is as under ;

‘ NCTE should adopt a realistic approach in the whole matter and if the centres have facilities like infrastructure, lab library, teaching staff, and other facilities, they should not decline recognition for the reason of defect in title of the land of a few sq. metres of shortage in the building, which does not stand in the way of course being run. In view of the prima facie case established by the University that those facilities are available which are brought on record in these W.P.Cs and since the University has been running B.Ed courses in all the centres for the last 10 years, and since there is rush of students for admission in the University centres in preference to private and other colleges, we direct the NCTE to treat the University centres as approved centres for the current year 2010-2011, also leaving freedom to the NCTE to recall approval if any centre does not make up facilities pointed out by NCTE in terms of revised orders to be issued in terms of the direction issued above for next academic year (2011-2012) onwards.’

As per records, the recognition status of the Centers of University of Calicut As p Kerala available records :-

In respect of APS0 2951 , vide letters dated 29.06.2009 and 06.01.2010 ,this office had requested for documents pertaining to shifting of premises and payment of Rs.40,000/- as inspection fee.

Further , there is no correspondence seen in the file.

In the meantime , on 07.05.2014,the University has submitted the performance appraisal reports of the University Centres of University of Calicut.

It is observed from the Performance Appraisal Reports of Calicut University Centres that all the Centres are offering B.Ed courses without the approval of SRC,NCTE which is a violation of NCTE Act and Regulations ,2009.

The Committee considered the matter, decided that, Southern Regional Committee can not relax any Regulations as already ruled by the Kerala High Court in its recent order. Further, it is decided by the Committee that these 11 centres are to be inspected to ascertain their adherence to norms and standards. Southern Regional Office is advised that before causing inspection, however, SRO should collect all documents for verification. Thereafter, after collecting inspection fee of ₹. 50,000/- per centre, cause inspection.

49) APS01905

B.Ed

Court order dated 7th October, 2013 in W.P.No. 44573/2013(EDN-REG-P) filed

by Sri.Vishwabharathi Education Society, Near KMF Mallasandra-572107,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

124

Digvijay Rural

College of

Education,

Tumkur,

Karnataka

KA

Tumkur Tq., Tumkur Dt., Karnataka Vs. SRC, NCTE. Digvijaya Rural College of

Education, Tumkur District, Karnataka.

Digvijaya Rural College of Education, Hadavanahalli Gate, Near Mysore Cement Factory, Turuvekere Taluk-572211, Tumkur District, Karnataka had submitted an application for starting B.Ed course on 31.12.2003. The institution was granted recognition on 30.11.2004 with an annual intake of 100 students. This office was in receipt of a letter No.TY: VCPS: 2011-12:98 dated 21.05.2011 from the Vice-chancellor, Tumkur University, Tumkur by enclosing a list of 19 institutions along with their internal committee observations, requesting to initiate immediate action.

The SRC in its 206th meeting held on 09th-10th June, 2011 noted the inspection VT

Report forwarded by the Vice-Chancellor, Tumkur University vide letter dated

21.05.2011 and the deficiencies pointed out in the 19 institutions in Tumkur District

and decided to issue show cause notice under section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly,

a show case notice was issued to this institution also on 08.07.2011. The institution

submitted its reply on 09.08.2011.

The SRC in its 211th meeting considered the letter dt.21.05.2011 from Vice-

Chancellor, Tumkur University pointing out deficiencies in the 19 Tumkur University

colleges and also the reply of the above institution dated 09.08.2011 and other

documents submitted by the institution and decided to cause composite inspection

for all the courses at institution premises under Section 17 of NCTE Act, to verify

whether the institution is maintaining instructional and infrastructural facilities as per

NCTE norms. The institution is directed to submit certain documents within 30 days

of the receipt of the notice, with Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/- as inspection fee

towards the all the courses being run, in favour of “The Member Secretary, NCTE”

payable at Bangalore.

Accordingly, a letter dated 19.10.2011 was addressed to the institution regarding the

conduct of inspection between 28th October, 2011 to 2nd November, 2011. On

2.11.2011, this office has received a letter from Dr. U. V. Kumaran and Sri. S.

Bangaraiah, both VT Members stating that the management was not ready to

inspect the College during the specified date(s) and that the management had

already informed to the Regional Director, NCTE to postpone the date of inspection.

The SRC in its 215th meeting held on 12th –13th December, 2012 considered the matter and all relevant documents and decided to cause inspection to examine whether the institution fulfills all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms and on payment of Rs. 40.000/- towards inspection fee. As per the decision of SRC, The visiting team comprising of Dr. S. Thangasamy, Director and Professor, Centre for Educational Research, Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai and Dr. C. Raja Moauli, Professor, Dept. of Education, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University, Hyderabad was proposed to the institution during 6th to 8th February, 2012. Accordingly, a letter was addressed to the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

125

institution on 18th January, 2012 to be ready for inspection. Dr. S. Thangasamy, Director vide letter dated 31.1.2012 has stated that the VT members need not visit the college at Turuvekere taluk since it is a rural college. Further, there is no written letter from the institution requesting for postponement. Since the institution was not ready for inspection, a blank inspection report is submitted by the VT members. The SRC in its 224th meeting held on 14th – 17th June 2012, considered the matter and it was decided to serve Final Show Cause Notice Under NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 09.07.2012.

The institution had not submitted any reply , so far. The institution had not submitted

reply for Show Cause Notice even after the expiry of stipulated time of 21 days from

the date of issue of the notice.









The SRC in its 246th meeting held during 2nd to 4th June 2013 considered the non-

reply of the institution to the issue of show cause notice dt. 09/07/2012 and with

reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of

mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to withdraw the

recognition for (APS01905) B.Ed course with effect from 2013-14, in order to enable

the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed course, if any, to complete their final year

course.

It was made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission

subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board /

body be informed accordingly. Further, decided to return Endowment funds and

Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any, after ensuring

settlement of all faculty/staff claims.

Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 25.7.2013.

On 12.12.2013, a Court order dated 7.10.2013 is filed by Sri Vishwabharathi


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

126

Education Soceity, Sri. Vsihwabharathi Group of institutions, Near KMF Mallasandra-572107, Tumkur Tq, Tumkur Vs. the State of Karnataka and others wherein the SRC, NCTE is the 4th respondent.

The extract of the Court order dated 7.10.2013 received on 12.12.2013 is as under:-

“3. A notice was issued by the 4th respondent to the petitioner at Annexure G1 dated 9.7.2012 to showcause as to why the recognition should not be withdrawn. The petitioner was granted 21 days time from the date of receipt of the said notice to file a reply. The petitioner has filed its reply as per Annexure H dated 26.7.2012. This reply was received by the 4th respondent on 27.7.2012. However, the 4th respondent has passed the impugned order without considering the reply.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that along with the reply, the petitioner has produced the title deeds in respect of the land over which the school building has been constructed. It has also produced photoclippings of the building of the petitioner institution as per Annexures-P to P8, which shows that petitioner has in fact provided necessary infrastructure. In the impugned order, the 4th respondent has observed that petitioner has not filed reply within the stipulated time of 21 days. The material on record clearly shows that the petitioner has filed its reply as per Annexure H dated 26.7.2012. I am of the view, that respondent No.4 has to reconsider the matter.

5. In the result, the petition succeeds and accordingly, it is allowed in part. The order at Annexure J dated 25.7.2013 is hereby quashed. Consequently, the order at Annexure K dated 7.8.2013 is also quashed. Petitioner is permitted file additional reply, if it so desires, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The 4th respondent is directed to consider the reply dated 26.7.2012 and additional reply, if any and pass appropriate order thereon in accordance with law.

Liberty is reserved to the 4th respondent to make fresh inspection of the petitioner institution before passing the order as above. No costs.”

[Note: Since the original file of the institution, Digvijaya College of Education(APS01905) is not traceable, the Court order is moved in the part file].

The SRC in its 258th meeting held during 3-5 January, 2014 decided to obtain a copy of the order from our lawyer. We cannot accept documents from applicant’s lawyer. We can deal with this case after we complete attention to the ‘new’ cases by Mid February.”

As per decision of SRC, a letter was sent to the advocate on 04.02.2014. Reply from the advocate has not received so far.

Remarks of SRO:

• From the center diary report, it is observed that the institution has not submitted any reply to this office either on 26.7.2012 or on 27.7.2012 as stated by the Society. Further, the institution/Society has not approached the remedy


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

127

of appeal before the Appellate authority as per Section 18 of NCTE Act.

• From the copies of the writ petition submitted by the petitioner institution, the institution on 26.7.2012 had requested for causing inspection to the institution.

The SRC considered the Hon’ble court orders and all the relevant documents submitted by the institution and decided to cause inspection at the premises. The institution is directed to submit the following within 21 days of the receipt of the notice, all the necessary documents for land, building approval and completion certificate from a competent Govt. Engineer and other relevant documents for verification, along with Demand Draft of Rs.50,000/- inspection fee towards the B.Ed course in favour of “The Member Secretary, NCTE” payable at Bangalore.

50) APS03614

B.Ed

Annai College

of Education,

Salem,

Tamilnadu

TN

Annai College of Education, Athanur Patti, Valapadi Taluk, Salem District, Pin-636115, Tamilnadu. Annai College of Education, Athanur Patti, Valapadi Taluk, Salem District, Pin-636115, Tamilnadu had submitted an application for B.Ed Course on 09.08.2004. The institution was granted recognition on 22.11.2005 with an annual intake of 100 students, with the condition to shift to own premises within 3 years. In the meanwhile, some institutions who have been granted recognition for the

subsequent year based on belated endorsements preferred an appeal to NCTE-

Hqrs. and contended that a few institutions which have submitted belated

endorsements were granted recognition for the current academic year. SRC, in its

comments to the NCTE-Hqrs. explained that this has occurred due to oversight and

would modify such orders which have been wrongly issued. Pursuant to this, the

NCTE-New Delhi vide order no.F.No.89-156/2005-Appeal dated 28th September,

2005 remanded back the cases to the SRC, Bangalore with a direction to reconsider

the cases immediately for granting recognition from 2005-2006 at par with other

similar cases who have been granted recognition for 2005-2006.

The matter was placed before SRC in its 103rd meeting held on 27th and 28th October, 2005 and SRC after obtaining a considered legal opinion in this regard, had taken decision to review its recognition orders issued for the session 2006-2007 and to grant recognition for the session 2005-06 to those institutions who have submitted belated NOC’s/Endorsements as one time exception. SRC in its 104th meeting held on 9th November 2005 decided to extend this relaxation to the institutions which have submitted other essential documents mentioned in Appendix 1B, belatedly. Accordingly, as per Public Notice of SRC, a modified recognition order was issued to the institution on 22.11.2005 for B.Ed course from the academic session 2005-06. A complaint was received from the students of Annai College of Education, Salem


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

128

Dt. which was considered by SRC in its 190th meeting held on 29-30th March 2010 and it was decided to issue Notice to the institution and accordingly, Notice was issued to the institution on 06.05.2010. The institution submitted its reply on 08.06.2010. The SRC in its 193rd meeting held on 21st-22nd June 2010 decided to cause inspection of the institution and accordingly inspection of Annai College of Education, Athanur patti, Valapadi Taluk, Salem-636115, Tamilnadu was conducted on 19.07.2010. The SRC in its 195th meeting held on 17th-18th August 2010 considered the report of the institution and decided to serve Show cause Notice. As per the decision of SRC, Notice was issued to the institution on 24.09.2010. The institution submitted its reply on 18.10.2010. The Committee in its 198th meeting held on 24th-26th November 2010 considered the reply of the institution and decided to serve Show cause Notice for the following as the replies were not specific, highly misleading and evasive.

� Annai Matriculation School running LKG to VII Standard is functioning in the First and Second Floor of the above, partly constructed building, in front of which, only the name board of the College of Education is placed. As per the norms, the B.Ed College should have an exclusive campus and building and not sharing with any other institution.

� The new building is under construction at Umaiyalpuram which is about 10 kms from Athanurpatti.

� Records were not available & were said to be with the management/Correspondent of the College.

� There are no basic amenities like drinking water, toilet etc.”

Accordingly, notice was issued to the institution on 06.01.2011. The institution submitted its reply on 07.02.2011. The SRC in its 201st meeting hel d considered the reply submitted by the institution

and found the reply to be unsatisfactory and unconvincing and decided to withdraw

recognition for B.Ed (APS03614) course with effect from 2012-13, in order to enable

the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed course, if any, to complete their course.



order no. F.No.89-134/2011 Appeal/4th Meeting-2011 dtd. 06.07.2011 has stated as

follows:-

“ after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, VT Report and after considering oral arguments advanced during hearing, the Council reached the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

129

hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and SRC’s order dated 23.03.2011.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Orders appealed against”.

The institution moved to Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras dtd. 28.11.2012

in WP no. 21736 of 2011 reads as under:-

“------ the writ petition is therefore allowed and the impugned orders are set

aside and the matter is remanded to the SRC, NCTE, Bangalore for

reconsideration afresh, after re-inspection of the premises, which exercise

shall be done by the SRC, NCTE , Bangalore within a period of eight weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is allowed by way of remand. No costs. Consequently,

M.P.Nos.2 and 3 of 2011 are closed”

The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 9-11 March 2013 considered the Hon’ble High

Court order dated 28.11.2012 and all other relevant documents and decided to

cause re-inspection after collecting processing of Rs.50,000/-

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 09.05.2013 to submit inspection

fee of Rs.50,000/-

The institution has submitted a letter dated 11.03.2014 received on 12.03.2014

enclosing a copy of letter dated 27.05.2013 stating that they have submitted

Demand Draft of Rs.50,000/- as inspection fee.

Note: The institution stated that they are submitted original Demand draft along with

the letter dated 27.05.2013, but this office has not received the said letter dt.

27.05.2013 and original Demand draft of Rs.50,000/-.

The Committee considered the matter, advised Southern Regional Office to verify whether the amount towards inspection of ₹. 50000/- has been credited to the NCTE account. If it has been credited, proceed to cause inspection after processing the documents. If it has not been credited, the institution is to be asked to make the payment to enable further action.

51) APS02500

D.Ed-AI

Sri. K V

Teacher

Training

Institute,

Chikballapur,

Sri. K.V. Teacher Training Institute, K.T.Road, Chikballapur-562101, Karnataka Sri. K.V. Teacher Training Institute, K.T.Road, Chikballapur-562101, Karnataka was granted recognition for Elementary D.Ed-Al course of two and half years duration from the academic session 2004-2005 on 28.12.2004 with an annual intake of 80 which includes the existing intake of 60 and an additional intake of 20. On 21/01/2013, complaint letter is received on 21/01/2013 from Sri.B.R.Ramesh,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

130

Karnataka

KA

advocate, # 895, 3rd ‘A’ Main,‘D’ Block , II Stage , Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 010 regarding the substandard and non-viable institutions of teachers training in Chickballapur district.

He has stated that “I am enclosing herewith a report of DSERT pertaining to Chickballapur district. This inspection report is based on visiting teams report of DIETS. They have inspected.

These institutions and submitted information to the DSERT. The DSERT has compiled the data and have identified the deficiencies of the institutions. You are competent to issue recognition to all institutions imparting teacher education. The students who study in these substandard institutions will be the major losers and they cannot meet the needs of students at primary level. These institutions produce substandard teachers who in turn cannot come up to the expectations of the department. Hence, it becomes obligatory on you part to initiate action after verification from your end. I do hope that you would initiate at least some action and verify the infrastructure facilities of these institutions and see that the teacher education in this district is rectified and put on right lines, so that the prospective teachers are benefited. I do hope that you will look into this matter personally and do the needful. A line in reply is appreciated. More information with regard to other substandard institutions will be sent to you in due course about other districts.”

He has enclosed a copy of the evaluation report of 9 D.Ed colleges during the year 2009-2010 of DSERT along with complaint letter.

The SRC in its 241st meeting held during 29th to 31st March & 1st April 2013 considered the matter of complaint letter dt. 21/01/2013 and advised Southern Regional Office to examine the report from DSERT and put up

The SRC in its 248th Meeting held during 13th – 15th July 2013 considered the details is of ten reports of DSERT and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act, for the following deficiencies. 1. As per DSERT report, the total earmarked built up area is only 6086 sq.ft,

(563.20 sq.mts), which is less than the requirement as per NCTE norms. The institution is running basic course D.Ed and D.Ed-Al course in the same building, total built up area required for the two course as per NCTE norms is 2000 sq.mts.

2. As per VT report, the infrastructure and instructional facilities provided to existing courses are inadequate.

3. The institution has not provided provision to accommodate 100 intakes in seminar hall. The existing structure cannot be altered as the building is on lease deed.

Accordingly, a Showcase Notice was issued to the institution on 02/09/2013.The institution has submitted its reply on 23.09.2013


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

131

The SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25-27 October 2013, considered the written reply of the institution vide letter dated 23/09/2013 to the show cause notice issued based on DSERT report on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:- 1. As per DSERT report, the total earmarked built up area is only 6086 sq.ft (563.20

sq.mtrs), which is less than the requirement as per NCTE norms. The institution is running basic course D.Ed and B.Ed-Al course in the same building, total built up area required for the two courses as per NCTE norms is 2000 sq.mtrs.

2. As per VT report, the infrastructure and instructional facilities provided to existing

courses are inadequate. 3. The institution has not provided provision to accommodate 100 intakes in seminar

hall. The existing structure cannot be altered as the building is on lease deed. 4. In reply to the above deficiency points, the Chairman of the institution has

accepted the true facts of running the institution by not following NCTE norms. The D.Ed and D.Ed-Al courses are accommodated only with 563.20 sq.mtrs of building (instead of 2000 sq.mtrs as per NCTE norms) and now only they have taken the decision of constructing a new building as per NCTE norms. This shows that the institution has not followed any NCTE norms.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the D.Ed course run by Sri K.V. Teacher Training Institute, K.T.Road, Chikballapur-562101, Karnataka from the academic year 2013.14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course. But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body / Examining board / body be informed accordingly. Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any, after ensuring payments to all dues of faculty and staff. Accordingly, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 18.12.2013. Aggrieved by the orders of withdrawal, the institution has approached Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka vide W.P.No.3337/2014. In the meantime, the institution has submitted its written representation on 27.06.2014 along with High Court of Karnataka order copy in W.P.No.3337/2014 (EDN-REG-P) stating as follows:-

“…..keeping in view the contention put forth by the petitioner, it would be unnecessary for the petitioner to file an appeal against such order since the petitioner has indicated that the compliance of the requirements would be


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

132

made for the future.

Hence, all that is necessary to be clarified is that the order dated 18.12.2013 passed by respondent No.1 is to the effect of withdrawing the recognition of the petitioner with effect from the academic year 2014-15. Hence, the admissions made the academic year 2013-14 shall stand saved. In that view of the matter, there is no need to quash the order impugned in the instant petition.”

With the said clarifications, the petition stands disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate application seeking recognition after the infrastructural facilities are provided to the satisfaction of respondent No.1.”

The Committee took note of the matter, decided that the Court order is very

clear. There is no action required from our side.


Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

52) APS04374 D.T.Ed

APS05802 M.Ed

APS07393 D.T.Ed

APS06021 B.Ed

APS05907 B.P.Ed

APS07624 B.Ed-AI

APS07745 M.Ed

APS04155 B.Ed

Mother Theresa College of Education,

Illupura, Pudukottai, Tamilnadu

TN

The SRC in its 266th meeting held on 2 May 2014 considered the Hon’ble High

Court order dated 21.04.2014 and all other relevant documents and decided

as under:

1. This is a case of existing institution, i) to cause inspection for B.P.Ed

(APS05907) course and, 2). As directed by the Hon. High Court of Madras ii). to

cause composite inspection for all the other 7 courses i.e. APS07745-M.Ed,

APS04374-D.T.Ed, APS05802-M.Ed, APS07393-D.T.Ed, APS07624-B.Ed-Al,

APS06021-B.Ed, APS04155-B.Ed courses under NCTE Act, to examine whether

the Institutions fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the existing

programme.

Accordingly, inspection intimation was sent to the institution on 21.05.2014. The

inspection of institution was conducted on 02.06.2014.

The Committee considered the matter, advised Southern Regional Office to

put up the cases again on 13.07.2014 with details of cluster wise information


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

133

Consideration of Appeal Orders: (Vol – 3)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

53) APS04925

D.T.Ed

Thozhilathibar

Teacher

Training

Institute, Trichy,

Tamilnadu

TN

Thozhilathibar Teacher Training Institute, No. 43, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar,

Edamalaipatti Pudur, Trichy-620012, Tamilnadu.

Thozhilathibar Teacher Training Institute, No. 43, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Edamalaipatti

Pudur, Trichy-620012, Tamilnadu had submitted an applications for D.T.Ed Course

on 28.12.2005 and D.T.Ed-AI course on 20.11.2006. The institution was granted

recognition for D.T.Ed course on 07.09.2006 with an annual intake of 50 students

and D.T.Ed-AI course on 16.01.2008 thus making an annual intake of 100 students

which includes the existing intake of 50 and an additional intake of 50 students, with

the condition to shift to own premises within 3 years.

On the basis of Direction of MHRD to re-inspect all the institutions granted

recognition by SRC in its 116th meeting as per the recommendation of Sri. Sathyam

Committee reports, the inspection of the institution under Section 17 was carried out

on 18.12.2008. The institution has approached the Hon’ble Court in

WP.29977/2008. The matter was considered by SRC in its 170th meeting held on

16th-17th February 2009 and decided to issue show cause notice. Accordingly, a

show cause notice was issued to the institution on 04.04.2009. The institution had

submitted its reply on 15.04.2009, the same was considered by SRC in its 180th

meeting held on 29th July 2009 and SRC decided to issue notice under Section 17.

Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 01.09.2009. The

institution had submitted its reply on 26.10.2009.

The SRC considered the written representation submitted by the institution and

decided to continue the approval given to Thozhilathibar Teacher Training Institute

(D.T.Ed, APS04925) and withdraw the recognition for D.T.Ed-AI(APS08186) course

for which the land/buildings/infrastructure are not available as per the norms, as

inferred from the reply statements furnished by the institution.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter of continued recognition in respect of Thozhilathibar TTI, Trichy District, Tamilnadu was issued to the institution for D.T.Ed course on 09.02.2010(APS04925) and withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 09.02.2010 for D.T.Ed-AI course.

A complaint dated 09.09.2010 was received from Hope Foundation, which was

considered by SRC in its 196th meeting held on 15-16 September, 2010. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

134

committee considered the matter and decided to inform the complainant that he is

free to seek legal remedy as it is a civil dispute.

The legal notices dated 25.10.2010 and 18.01.2011 was considered by SRC in its

200th meeting held on 20-21 January, 2011. The Committee considered the legal

notices and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve

Show cause Notice under section of NCTE Act for the following :

1. The management has to submit all the original documents and land lease Deed agreement documents of the institution, along with the remarks on the contents of legal notice issued on behalf of the one M.T.Karunanidhi who claims to be the lessor, that the present land where the building is situated at Door No. 43, Rajiv Gandhinagar, Ekamalaipudur, Trichy-12, Tamilnadu, was partly leased to the above institution. The lease agreement was allegedly cancelled on 30.1.2007. Now the management has to file an affidavit on the authenticity of the above facts and submit the original records for verification.

2. Specific remarks on the allegation that the management/trust had concealed and suppressed the fact of cancellation of lease deed and thereby misled and violated NCTE norms and Regulations, to be submitted in the affidavit.

3. The SRC denies and takes strong exception to the mischievous, unfounded and false allegations against NCTE SRC, made out in the legal notice issued on behalf of one M.T. Karunanidhi said to be the less or of the said land; that the information on the said cancellation of the lease deed said to have taken place as early as 30-01.2007, took more than four years to reach the SRC NCTE is un-understandable.

4. Any Civil/Criminal dispute arising out of lessor and lessee deal may have to be resolved by a Court of Law and the litigant is free to proceed legally in the matter; and any attempt to involve the regulatory authority in the issue and discredit the same is unwarranted.

In the meantime, one more legal notice dated 12.02.2011 was received on

15.02.2011 from Shri. A. Kumar, Advocate which was placed before SRC in its 201st

meeting held on 22-23 February, 2011 and the Committee decided as follows:-

“To take appropriate legal action against the complainant for indulgence in sinister

campaign and casting aspersions on the NCTE, by making false and malicious

allegations.

To call for remarks of the institution on the specific allegation that the institution had

submitted some forged documents to the SRC.

To cause a composite inspection of the teacher education institutions of the above

management, on receipt of the remarks and all the related documents and filled in

questionnaire and the requisite inspection fee from the institution”.

As per the decision of SRC, letter was issued to the institution on 07.03.2011 and a


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

135

letter was issued to Advocate Counsel on 07.03.2011 to take legal action.

In response to this office letter dated 07.03.2011 and a letter to the institution as per the SRC’s decision of 201st meeting, the institution has submitted reply on 18.04.2011 stated that a case is pending in the court of the District Municif Trichirapalli in O.S. No. 1359 of 2010 and I.A. No. 567 of 2010 regarding the right of possession of the building and land by the Management and other party. The institution has not submitted D.D. of Rs. 40,000/- as an inspection along with essential documents as per the letter dated 07.03.2011. Instead the institution has submitted a copy of court order of the District Munisif of Trichirapally is as follows; The prayed that “this Hon’ble court may be pleased to grant temporary injunction retraining the defendant, his men, agents, servants, and any persons claiming under him from in any way interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property either by dispossess upon or otherwise in any manner whatsoever except under due process of law till the disposal of the suit and also pass an interim exparte injunction till the disposal of application and thus render justice”. It appears that the place where institution is being run is the property right/dispute to

which is under dispute. It also appears that interim injunction is given to the

institution to run the institution. If the institution is running there inspection as

directed by SRC can be carried out.

The SRC in its 204th meeting held on 26th-27th April 2011 considered the written

reply and other relevant documents and decided to cause composite inspection at

the premises in anticipation of inspection fee of Rs. 40,000/- per course, as

originally decided and as the Court Order is not against the NCTE inspection under

section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed between

30th May to 4th June 2011, the same was intimated to the institution on 24.05.2011.

VT report is awaited.

Meanwhile, the institution submitted letter along with rs.40000/- requesting 3 months

time for the shifting and inspection of the institution. The institution has stated as

follows:

“We received your letter on 26.05.2011, in which it has been mentioned that the

visiting team of NCTE-SRO, will come for inspection of one institution between 30th

May to 4th June and to submit the relevant documents to them.

Pertaining to this subject I wish to state that already we have sent the reply letter to

you mentioning that we have dispute over the possession of building and land where

the institution is running at present, for which a civil suit is pending in Munsif Court of

Trichirapalli and we have obtained interim injection order also till 22.07.2011. In

such circumstances, again it has been insisted by the NCTE, SRC to be ready for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

136

the inspection in between the dates from 30.05.2011 to 04.06.2011. on seeing your

letter, we have obtained the D.D also for Rs.40000/- which can be considered to

have been paid well in advance for the inspection at that time of shifting of institution

to the new building after 4 months.

Apart from this we wish to state that the necessary documents/connected records

are under the custody of court which can’t be obtained in view of the summer

vacation to the courts in Tamilnadu.

Moreover, we want to insist that already the construction of building for the shifting of

the institution is under progress and process after getting the application for

construction and the construction will be completed by 15th September 2011

approximately. Hence the shifting and inspection will be possible only after that in

view of shifting and court interim injection order.

In such circumstances, it is humbly requested that the inspection for shifting of

institution may please be post-poned after 15th September 2011 and request that 4

months time may please be given for the shifting of building, besides allowing the

institution to run in the present place and location without any disturbance to the

students till September and without prejudice, since we have for the interim injection

order of court also till 22.07.2011 which will be (can be) extended till 22.10.2011.

By and large it is shortly informed that it is subjudice, since the interim injection order

is under existence till 22.07.2011 and apart from this we request he shifting time

till 15.09.2011, for which kind of action use will be very much thankful to you.”

The SRC in its 206th meeting held on 09-10 June 2011 considered the Hon’ble High

Court order and request of the institution and decided to cause composite inspection

of the institution in the last week of September 2011. Accordingly visit was

organized on 10.08.2011 and the VT Members has stated that the inspection could

not be done due to the request for extension time period up to 15th September 2011.

Further, a letter dt.26.09.2011 was issued to the institution to remitted re-inspection

fee of Rs. 40,000/-. However VT is fixed pending receipt of inspection fee.

Accordingly, inspection was carried out on 23.11.2011.

The SRC in its 215th meeting held on 12th-13th December, 2011 considered the VT

Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve

Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Show Cause

Notice was issued to the institution on 27.01.2012. The institution had submitted its

written representation on 21.03.2012 along with DD bearing no. 071234 date.

02.02.2012 for Rs. 40,000/-.

APS04925-D.T.Ed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

137

APS07601-D.T.Ed-AI

The SRC in its 221st meeting held on 19th-20th April, 2012 considered the reply of the

institution dt. 21.03.2102 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to

serve Show cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Show

cause notice was issued to the institution on 17.05.2012. The institution had

submitted its written representation on 19.06.2012.

The SRC in its 230th meeting held on 16-17 July 2012 considered the reply of the

institution vide letter date. 19.06.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences

and it was decided to serve final show cause notice.

Accordingly, final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 10.09.2012.

The institution has submitted its reply on 11.10.2012.

The SRC in its 236th meeting held on 16-17 December, 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter date. 11.10.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under NCTE Act, for the following:

1. The institution has not submitted approved staff list from affiliating body. 2. Requisite affidavit(s) and joining reports (s) in respect of Lecturer(s) in Fine

arts & Physical Education are not submitted. 3. For two units of D.T.Ed course run by the institution, two lecturers in fine arts

and Physical education are to be appointed.

4. The institution has not appointed lecture in foundation course in any unit of D.T.Ed course.

5. No documentary proof is submitted by the institution regarding payment of salary to staff is being paid as per State/UGC/Central pay scales.

Accordingly, final show cause notice was issued to the institution on 05.02.2013. The institution has submitted its reply on 25.03.2013.(After the expiry of 21 days)

The SRC in its 249th meeting held on 24th – 26th July 2013 had considered the

written reply of the institution on the above matter and also the relevant documents

of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

• The institution has not submitted approved staff list from the affiliating body as per NCTE norms.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the D.T.Ed & D.T.Ed-Al courses run by the Thozhilathibar Teacher Training Institute, No. 43, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Edamalaipatti Pudur, Trichy-6200012, Tamilnadu from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.T.Ed and D.T.Ed-Al courses, if any, to complete their course.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

138

But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order.


Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore if any.


Note :

In the mean time, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court order dated 04.07.2013 in W.P. no. (MD) no. 14643 of 2011 M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2011 reads as under:-

The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents (The member Secretary, New Delhi and The Regional Director, Bangalore) to complete the action initiated pursuant to the letter of the second respondent (The Regional Director, NCTE/SRO, Bangalore) in F.SRO/NCTE/2010-2011/26575 dated 31.01.2011 taken on the compliant of the petitioner dated 25.10.2010 and 18.11.2010 within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

The learning Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 (The member Secretary, New Delhi and The Regional Director, Bangalore) on instructions submitted that eight weeks time may be given to the second respondent to take final decision, after hearing the petitioner as well as third respondent (Thozhilathibar Educational and Social Trust, Trichy).

In view of the said submission, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent (The Regional Director, NCTE/SRO, Bangalore) to take final decision within a period of eight weeks, after hearing the petitioner as well as the third respondent. (Thozhilathibar Educational and Social Trust, Trichy) No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 253rd Meeting held on 30th September and 1st October,2013 considered the direction from Madurai Bench of Hon’ble High Court of Madras, vide order dated 4/07/2013 and decided to write to the Lawyer that there is no provision in law for ‘hearing’ at the Regional Office level. The Lawyer to apprise the Court of this legal position and request for deletion of the direction to hear the parties.

Further, the Committee decided to take action as directed by the High Court if the approved staff list is filed within time.

As per the directions of SRC , a letter was addressed to the Shri. Shivaji advocate on 21.11.2013.

In the mean time the institution preferred an appeal before the appellate authority,NCTE-Hqrs and as per the request ,the original file has been sent to Hqrs on 26.12.2013.(copy enclosed)


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

139

Now, on 24.02.2014 , a private notice from Shri. R.Saravanan , advocate for the petitioner (Hope Foundation is received by this office stating as under ;

‘ I hereby call upon you to comply with the order passed by the Hon’ble Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in W.P.(MD) No. 14643 of 2011 dated 04.07.2013 within a period of 7

days from the date of receipt of this notice otherwise, my client will be constrained to initiate contempt proceedings against you and in such circumstance, you will be

personally held responsible for the cost and consequences thereof.’

A reminder-1 letter was sent to the Shri..A.Sivaji , advocate ,on 27.05.2014 to inform the developments of the case in W.P.(MD).No. 14643 of 2011 to this office immediately.

In the meantime, an order dated 20.02.2014 in W.P.No. 4944/2014 and M.P.No. 1 of 2014 is received from the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras which is as under ;

The short prayer of the petitioner is only to direct the first respondent to dispose of the appeal dated 12.11.2013 filed under section 18 of the National Council for teacher Education Act.

1. Heard Mr.R.Suresh kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner,Mr.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned,standing counsel take notice for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayan, learned special Government pleader takes notice for the third respondent.

2. In view of the limited nature of the prayer made, this writ petition is disposed of, without any opinion on the merits of the case, directing the first respondent (NCTE,New Delhi) to dispose of the appeal of the petitioner , dated 12.11.2013 in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution had preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014 Remanded as follows:

“….. Shri. R. Dhiuban, Administrative Officer, Thozhilathibar Teacher Training Institute, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu presented the case of the appellant institution on 12/04/2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation and in a letter dt. 12/04/2014 it was submitted that the institution is a running institution and each and every time when change of teaching faculty took place, the same has been approved by the DSCERT. For getting approval in takes some reasonable time in the office of the DSCERT. The appellant also submitted that only replaced teaching faculty are approved by te affiliating body viz DSCERT, Chennai in their proceedings L Dist. No. 9025/C4/2013 dt. 07/11/2013 by which all the teaching


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

140

faculty including the Principal and Lecturers for English, Maths, Science and Social Science have been duly approved. The appellant enclosing copies of the proceedings of the DTERT/DSCERT dt. 01/11/2006, 22/092010, 17/12/2012 and 07/11/2013 submitted that the teaching faculties employed by the appellant then and there have been approved by the affiliating body and therefore recognition should not have been withdrawn. The Council, nothing the submissions of the appellant, concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to re-examine all the documents submitted by the appellant in support of approved teaching faculty and take a fresh decision. In the meanwhile the withdrawal order may be kept in abeyance. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to re-examine all the documents submitted by the appellant is support of approved teaching faculty and take a fresh decision. In the meanwhile the withdrawal order may be kept in abeyance. The Council hereby remands back the case of Thozhilathibar Teacher Training Institute, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

54) APS07287

M.Ed

Smt. Mehra’s

M.Ed College,

Bangalore,

Karnataka

KA

Smt. Mehra’s M.Ed College,132/1,5th Cross, P&T Layout, Horamavu,

Banaswadi,Bangalore- 560043, Karnataka.

Smt. Mehra’s M.Ed College,132/1,5th Cross, P&T Layout, Horamavu,

Banaswadi,Bangalore- 560043, Karnataka was granted recognition for M.Ed course

with an intake of 25 students vide- order F.SRO/NCTE/M.Ed/2008-09/4396 dt.

30/08/2008. Enhancement of intake of 10 seats from existing 25 to 35 has been

permitted vide order F.SRO/NCTE/2012-2011/20822 dt. 20/08/2010.

A report is received on 14.9.2012 from the chairman and on behalf of Members of

Bangalore University Task Force on M.Ed. Colleges affiliated to Bangalore

University.

The reports states that “ the Task Force visited 7 M.Ed. Colleges affiliated to

Bangalore University and submitted its report to the Hon’ble Vice Chancellor on 22nd

August, 2012 and further a special meeting of Academic Council of Bangalore


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

141

University was convened to discuss and approve the report of the Task Force.

In the light of the above, the members of Task Force thought of appraising SRC on its findings for kind notice and necessary action”.

The SRC in its 233rd Meeting held on 26th – 28th September 2012 considered the report of Bangalore University, Task force of the 7 M.Ed colleges affiliated to Bangalore University vide letter dt. 14/09/2012 and it was decided to serve Show Cause Notice under NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued on 19.11.2012. The institution has submitted a written representation on 10.12.2012.

The SRC in its 241st meeting held on 29th to 31st March 2013 considered the written reply of the institution on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

1. The institution is in leased building. As per records, the building is measuring 8712 sq.ft having Ground floor, I and II floor.

2. The built up area exclusively provided for D.Ed APSO2054, D.Ed(AI)APSO5443,B.ED-APSO2262, M.Ed – APSO7287 courses is not submitted.

3. The college has not submitted the approved staff list for the year 2012-13. 4. Action is not initiated to keep computer in working condition. 5. No proof submitted for providing basic amenities (drinking water/toilets). 6. No proper reply/document proof submitted for removing the deficiencies

(2)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) pointed out in the Show Cause Notice and also (1) to (3).

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition of the M.Ed course run by the Smt. Mehra’s M.Ed College, 132/1, 5th Cross, P & T Layout, Horamavu, Banaswadi, Bangalore-560 043, Karnataka from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in M.Ed, course, if any, to complete their course.

But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order.


Further decided to return Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any.

Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 16.05.2013

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 21.05.2014 Remanded as follows:

“…… Shri M. Bernard Shaw, Administrative Officer, Smt. Meharas M.Ed College,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

142

Bangalore, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant Institution on 12/04/2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that (i) the College was started in its own building and not leased one since its inception and the documents prove that the building in ground plus four floors is measuring about 28712 sq.ft. No admissions have been made in D.Ed(basic) and D.Ed(additional)courses from 2011 and 2009 and the entire building is used for B.Ed and M.Ed only. (ii) the College has not admitted any students for the academic year 2013-2013 and as such approved staff list could not be submitted. However there are staff for the courses. (iii) All computers are in working condition and the entire system was changed due to a technical hitch. (iv) Basic amenities of drinking water and toilets are available, and (v) complete compliance report was submitted regarding the other deficiencies on 10/12/2012.

The appellant in the course of presentation gave a letter Date 10/04/2014 in which it is stated that the Council which was formed by the Bangalore University and the report which was submitted to that University which recommended to the Govt., to withdraw affiliation granted to B.Ed and M.Ed courses imparted in the college inspected was challenged before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore and the Hon’ble High Court quashed the recommendations of the Task Force committee and Bangalore University as they were of excessive jurisdiction in the eyes of law. He has enclosed a copy of the Hon’ble High Court’s judgment Date 14/06/2013. The appellant further submitted that the SRC which issued a show cause notice and which was replied to withdrew the order of recognition before the verdict of the Hon’ble High Court. The SRC who were requested to review their decision did not entertain the request. The Council noted that the SRC initiated action against the appellant institution on the basis of a report of a Task Force of Bangalore University which inspected certain colleges including the appellant college and issued a show cause notice on 19/11/2012. After considering the appellants reply date 10/12/2012 thereto SRC withdrew recognition by order date 16/05/2013 on the grounds mentioned therein. Since the actions of Bangalore University/Task Force have been questioned before the Hon’ble Court of Karnataka; NCTE and SRC were also respondents in the writ Petitions and were duly represented in the proceedings; and the Hon’ble high Court’s verdict has since become available, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to re-examine the same in consultation with their legal advisors and take further appropriate action. In the meantime the withdrawal order may be kept in abeyance.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Council concluded that the appeal deserves to the remanded to SRC with a direction to re-examine the same in consultation with their legal advisors and take further appropriate action. In the meantime the withdrawal order may be kept in abeyance.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Smt. Mehras M.Ed. college,

Bangalore, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

143


new Regulations. Advised Southern Regional Office to processthe case


(H.Q) instructions.

55) SRCAPP1940

B.Ed

Malathesha

B.Ed College,

Davanagere,

Karnataka

KA

Malathesha B.Ed. College, Plot/Khasra No.524/6, R.S.No.698/09-10, Channel RO Street, Malebennur village and Post office, Harihar Taluk, Malebennur Town, Davangere District-577530, Karnataka. Nee Vee Education Trust, Plot No.524/6, Channel Road, Malebennur village and post office, Harihara Taluk, Malebennur Town, Davangere District-577530, Karnataka had applied for grant of recognition to Malathesha B.Ed. College, Plot/Khasra No.524/6, R.S.No.698/09-10, Channel RO Street, Malebennur village and Post office, Harihar Taluk, Malebennur Town, Davangere District-577530, Karnataka for B.Ed Course of One year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 27.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 28.12.2012. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 04.02.2013/09.04.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 20.03.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 30.05.2013

The SRC in its 247th meeting held on20-22nd June 2013 considered the matter and

advised Southern Regional Office to prepare a comprehensive comparative chart of

cases B.Ed (SRCAPP198) & B.Ed (SRCAPP1940) course and put up in the 248th

meeting.

Accordingly the comparative chart is put up for consideration

The reply of the institution to the deficiency letter dated 30.5.2013 was duly considered by SRC in its 249th meeting held on 24th – 26th July 2013 and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. The Institution has not submitted Certified copy(in Original ) of the registered document issued by the Office of Sub- Registrar in favour of the society institution.

2. In the building plan, Multipurpose hall is 900 sq.ft which is less as per NCTE norms, As per NCTE norms 2000 sq. ft built up area is required.

3. Building Completion Certificate is not approved by the Government Engineer.

4. Building completion certificate ins in the name of the trust and not in the name of the institution,

5. Built up Area is as per BCC is 17.110 sq. ft and as per building plan it is 16.010 sq. ft. which is not Matching.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

144

6. Up to date Non- Encumbrance certificate issued by the Sub-Register. 7. The institution has not submitted proof for completion of three academic

session for existing D.Ed course(APS09498) granted recognition on 02.02.2010 vide order No.17584 with an intake of 50 from the academic session 2009-2010.

8. From office records, it is observed that Nee-Vee Education trust has submitted another application for B.Ed Course in the name of Bhanu Prakash P.V.(as per online application) i.e. Thungabadra B.Ed College ( (SRCAPP198) as per the documents submitted. The address of the institution proposed for B.Ed course is different. The institution has neither submitted nor replied in this regard.

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 02.09.2013

Aggrieved by the rejection order of SRC, the institution preferred an appeal to NCTE Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 29.05.2014 Remanded as follows:

“ ….. Shri P.V. Malathesha, Managing Trustee, Malathesha B.Ed. College, Davanagere, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant institution on 16-04-2014. In the appeal and during personal presentation and in letter dt. 15-04-2014 it was submitted that (i) they have submitted original land documents of the proposed B.Ed. college in both Kannada and English Versions, which are in the name of the Trust, represented by Managing Trustee, P.V. Malatesha; (ii) the proposed B.Ed. College has a multipurpose hall of 2020 sq. ft. and necessary documents and photos are submitted; (iii) building completion certificate has been approved by Karnataka PWD Engineer; (iv) building completion certificate in the name of the college is provided; (v) according to the building plan and the building completion certificate the area is 17, 110 sq. ft. but while calculating the area earlier an error was committed in showing 16,010 sq. ft. corrected documents are resubmitted; (vi) update E.C. dt. 11-04-2014 is submitted; (vii) all necessary documents about proof of, completion of three academic years of existing D.EI.Ed. course were submitted; and (viii) their Trust decided to establish two B.Ed. colleges at two different places and with different names,. viz. Maltesha B.Ed. college at Malebennur and Tungabhadra B.Ed. college at Honnali and submitted different documents.

The Council noted that SRC, before refusing grant of recognition, did not issue a show cause notice which is required under proviso to Section 14(3)(b) of the NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations. After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents available on


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

145

records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the Regulations. The Council hereby remands back the case of Malathesha B.Ed. College, Davanagere, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

56) APS02027

B.Ed

Aristotle

College of

Education,

Kolar,

Karnataka

KA

Aristotle College of Education, Andersonpet, KGF, Kolar, Karnataka was

granted recognition for secondary(B.Ed) course of one year duration from the

academic session 2004-05 with an annual intake of 100 students subject to

certain conditions on 29.11.2004. In 176th Meeting of SRC, held on 27th -28th

May 2009, it was decided to issue notice to all the institutions in Karnataka

which have not shifted to permanent premises even after the expiry of three

years time limit Aristotle College of Education, Andersonpet KGF, Kolar,

Karnataka was one of the institutions.

Further no action is seen in the file.In the mean while, Aristotle Teacher Training

Institute, Andersonpet, K.G.F-563113, Kolar Dt., Karnataka was withdrawn

recognition for offering D.Ed. course vide SRC’s order No.APS02033/

D.Ed/KA/2011-12/39210 dated 14.03.2012 for the following reasons:

• A Certificate from the Affiliating University/body to the effect that no other programme is being run/shared by the institution in the same building / Campus, along with the existing D.Ed & B.Ed is not submitted.

• The management has admitted in its reply earmarking of 15,000 sq.ft. of built up area in a separate wing of a building. Which is grossly inadequate against the requirement of 32,000 sq.ft, as per NCTE norms for both B.Ed & D.Ed courses.

• The built up area is not mentioned in the building plan.

• The blue print is not submitted.

• The management is running other programmes in the same building/premises in which Teacher Education Programme are being conducted.

• Registered land documents of land in the institute or society name to be submitted to ensure building is on own land. The land is in the name of the individual.

• Documentary proof in respect of salary to staff through Bank by Cheque and as per pay scale prescribed by UGC/Central/State Govt. is not submitted.

• No documentary proof in respect of CPF/PPF facility to staff members is


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

146

not submitted.

• Staff list for D.Ed & B.Ed submitted is not approved by competent authority

• Staff list for C.P.Ed is not submitted. The reply of the institution was not convincing and not satisfactory. Aggrieved by the withdrawal order, the institution approached appellate authority and appellate authority vide order No.F.89-248/2012 Appeal/7th Meeting-2012 A56278 dated 17.8.2012 confirmed the orders of SRC. Further, a letter was received on 3.1.2013 from Sri. Ashok Haranahalli Associates dated 14th December, 2012 stating that “ the above writ petition came up before the Court today(i.e.,on 14.12.2012) for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group. The matter was heard at length. After hearing the matter, the court directed the respondent No.1 to conduct fresh inspection of the petitioner institution and the inspection fee has to be borne by the petitioner. With this direction the matter has been disposed off.” On 8.1.2013, the institution had submitted a request for reconsideration of the grant of recognition as per the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore vide W.P.No.48401/2012. The institution had enclosed a Demand Draft of Rs.10,000/- vide No.405012 dated 2.1.2013. The institution had also enclosed the certified copy of the Court order dated 14.12.2013, wherein it is ordered as under:-“It is for the petitioner to pay the requisite fee within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, in another six weeks the respondent authority to inspect the infrastructure and etc. and with regard to the queries raised by the first respondent and pass appropriate order.” The institution had paid Rs.10,000/- as inspection fee instead of Rs.50,000/-. The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 9th – 11th March 2013 considered the Hon’ble

High Court of Karnataka order dt. 14.12.2013 and decided that, as per the Court

order required the institution to pay the inspection fee within one month. But, even 3

months elapsed after the said order the institution has not paid the proper inspection

fee of Rs. 50000/-. In the above circumstances, no further action is called for, and to

return the part-payment of Rs. 10000/- paid by the institution (instead of Rs. 50000/-)

and to close the case.

As per the decision of SRC a letter was addressed to the institution vide letter No.

F.SRO/APSO2033/D.Ed/KA/51469 dated 3/05/2013 returning of DD of Rs.10,000/-

paid by the institution

Again, a letter dated 10/05/2013 received by this office on 14/05/2013 from the

Secretary regarding the remittance of difference amount of fees of Rs.40,000/-

towards inspection for verification for continuation of affiliation.

The Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/- and Rs.10,000/- submitted by the institution was returned to the institution vide letter No.F.SRO/NCTE /APSO2033/B.Ed/KA /2013/ 52162 dated 07/06/2013.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

147

A letter dated 25 /06/2013 is received by this office on 27/06/2013 from M/S

Haranahalli & Patil regarding the W.P.No.24390/2013 filed by the institution. The

letter states that “the Hon’ble High Court directed the petitioner to submit a Demand

Draft for Rs.50,000/- within 10 days from today and the SRC to conduct inspection of

the petitioner institution within a period of 2 weeks and to reconsider the matter

expeditiously”.

In the mean while, a letter is received by this office on 02/07/2013 from the institution

along with a DD of Rs.50,000/- towards inspection fee.

The institution has also submitted certified copy of the order dated 25/06/2013 in

W.p.No.24390/2013 and W.P.No.27178-27225/2013 which is as under:-

“Under the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I have no hesitation in

holding that the issue of withdrawal or continuation of recognition has not attained

the finality. For the negligence of the first petitioner College and the peremptoriness

of the NCTE, the interest of the students(petitioner Nos. 2 to 49) cannot be made to

suffer. The ends of justice would be meant by passing the following order:

• The impugned order/communication, dated 03/05/2013(Annexure-F) is quashed.

• The petitioner No.1 is directed to pay the inspection fee of Rs.50,000/- to the NCTE within ten days from today.

• The NCTE shall hold the inspection within two weeks from the date of the receipt of the inspection fee.

• If there are any deficiencies in the infrastructure of the petitioner, the NCTE shall call upon the petitioner to remove the same in a time – bound manner.

• On the petitioner removing the deficiencies or not removing the deficiencies within the prescribed time frame, the NCTE shall take a final decision of either continuing or withdrawing the recognition.

• The competent authority shall approve the admissions of the students petitioner Nos.2 to 49 subject to their meeting the eligibility criteria in all other respects.

• The competent authority, on satisfying itself that the petitioning students meet the eligibly criteria in all other respects, shall permit them to appear for the forthcoming examination of D.Ed course.

• The petitioner is directed not to make admissions to D.Ed course for the academic year 2013-14 and the subsequent academic years without the NCTE’s order of recognition. The memo filed by the first petitioner institution undertaking not to make admissions from the academic year 2013-14 without obtaining the NCTE’s recognition, is placed on the record”

The DD of Rs.50,000/- is taken into account vide receipt No.17063 dated

04/07/2013.

Further, a letter dated 26/06/2013 received by this office on 09/07/2013 from the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

148

Director, DSERT which is as under:-

“ with reference to the above cited subject Aristotle D.Ed college, Andersonpet

requesting for the approval of admission for the academic year 2012-13. Institution

approached to the Hon’ble High Court with respect to withdrawal of recognition

W.P.No.48401/2012, where in Director, NCTE is the first respondent. Kindly, inform

us about the action taken by NCTE with respect to the Hon’ble High Court order

dated 14/12/2012 in W.P. No. 48401 immediately”.

The SRC in its 248th meeting considered the Hon’ble High Court Order and the letter

from the D.S.E.R.T and decided to cause composite inspection and inform SCERT

that, since the ‘fee’ has been paid only now, inspection (as directed by the Court on

14.12.2012) is being done now.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the Director, D.S.E.R.T on 18.07.2013.

The inspection of the institution was scheduled for 24th July, 2013 and the same was

intimated to the institution vide this office letter F.No.APSO

6127/2033/2031/2017/52831 dated 22.07.2013.

Accordingly, the inspection(composite inspection) of the institutions was carried out

on 24.07.2013 and the VT reports were received by this office on 25.07.2013.

A comparative statement of the VT reports of the four institution was placed before

SRC.

The Southern Regional Committee considered the VT report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to withdraw recognition for all courses w.e.f. 2013-14 for the following deficiencies:-

1. Institution has submitted Land documents and it is in individual name. 2. Building plan not approved by competent authority. 3. Building Completion Certificate is not issued by competent authority. 4. C.P.Ed. is not a stand alone programme.

Based on the above points the Southern Regional committee in its 250th meeting

held on 11th to 13th August 2013 had decided to withdraw the recognition of the

D.Ed (APS06127), D.Ed (APS02033), C.P.Ed (APS02031) and B.Ed (APS02027)

courses run by Aristotle Education Trust from the academic year 2013-14, in order

to enable the ongoing batch of students, if any, to complete their course.






(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

149

NCTE, Bangalore if any.

Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order was issued to the

institution on 30.09.2013




“….. Sh. L. Syed. Shahzadha, Secretary, Aristotle Teachers Training Institute KGF,

Kolar, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant Institution on 11/04/2014. In

the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that “earlier the land

was standing in the name of the Secretary of the Trust and the said land is the Trust

property. In this regard the Secretary has executed Registered Sale Deed dated

25/11/2013 in favour of the Trust, hence the land and building belongs to the trust

who is the absolute owner. The Authority to approve the building plan is the City

Municipality at K.G.F. within whose local jurisdiction the building is situated. The

CMC KGF has approved the building plan as per law. The Authority to give building

completion certificate is the City Municipality at K.G.F. within whose local jurisdiction

the building is situated. The CMC KGF has given the building completion certificate.

Appellant is not continuing the C.P.Ed. program due to lack of admissions.

The Council noted that the Southern Regional Committee (SRC), based on the

observation and findings of the composite inspection carried out on 24/07/2013,

decided to withdraw recognition for B.Ed (APS02027). Committee further noted that

the appellant Institution was not given reasonable opportunity for making a written

representation under the proviso to section 17(1) of the NCTE Act. Committee,

therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue Show

Cause Notice under section 17(1) before passing a reasoned order.




to issue Show Cause Notice under section 17 (1) before passing a reasoned order.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Aristotle College of Education B.Ed., Kolar,

Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated.The matter is placed before

SRC for decision and direction.





(H.Q) instructions.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

150

57) APS02033

D.Ed

Aristotle

Teacher

Training

Institute, Kolar,

Karnataka

KA

Aristotle Teacher Training Institute, Andersonpet, K.G.F-563113, Kolar Dt.,

Karnataka was granted recognition on for elementary (D.Ed course) of one

year duration on 29.11.2004.

Recognition of the College was withdrawn for offering D.Ed. course vide SRC’s

order No. APS02033/D.Ed/KA/2011-12/39210 dated 14.03.2012 for the following.

reasons : -

• A Certificate from the Affiliating University/body to the effect that no other programme is being run/shared by the institution in the same building / Campus, along with the existing D.Ed & B.Ed is not submitted.

• The management has admitted in its reply earmarking of 15,000 sq.ft. of built up area in a separate wing of a building. Which is grossly inadequate against the requirement of 32,000 sq.ft, as per NCTE norms for both B.Ed & D.Ed courses.

• The built up area is not mentioned in the building plan.

• The blue print is not submitted.

• The management is running other programmes in the same building/premises in which Teacher Education Programme are being conducted.

• Registered land documents of land in the institute or society name to be submitted to ensure building is on own land. The land is in the name of the individual.

• Documentary proof in respect of salary to staff through Bank by Cheque and as per pay scale prescribed by UGC/Central/State Govt. is not submitted.

• No documentary proof in respect of CPF/PPF facility to staff members is not submitted.

• Staff list for D.Ed & B.Ed submitted is not approved by competent authority

• Staff list for C.P.Ed is not submitted.

Aggrieved by the withdrawal order, the institution approached appellate authority and appellate authority vide order No.F.89-248/2012 Appeal/7th Meeting-2012 A56278 dated 17.8.2012 confirmed the orders of SRC. Further, a letter was received on 3.1.2013 from Sri. Ashok Haranahalli Associates dated 14th December, 2012 stating that “ the above writ petition came up before the Court today(i.e.,on 14.12.2012) for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group. The matter was heard at length. After hearing the matter, the court directed the respondent No.1 to conduct fresh inspection of the petitioner institution and the inspection fee has to be borne by the petitioner. With this direction the matter has been disposed off.” On 8.1.2013, the institution had submitted a request for reconsideration of the grant of recognition as per the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore vide W.P.No.48401/2012. The institution had enclosed a Demand Draft of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

151

Rs.10,000/- vide No.405012 dated 2.1.2013. The institution had also enclosed the certified copy of the Court order dated 14.12.2013, wherein it is ordered as under:-“It is for the petitioner to pay the requisite fee within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, in another six weeks the respondent authority to inspect the infrastructure and etc. and with regard to the queries raised by the first respondent and pass appropriate order.” The institution had paid Rs.10,000/- as inspection fee instead of Rs.50,000/-. The SRC in its 240th meeting held on 9th – 11th March 2013 considered the Hon’ble

High Court of Karnataka order dt. 14.12.2013 and decided that, as per the Court

order required the institution to pay the inspection fee within one month. But, even 3

months elapsed after the said order the institution has not paid the proper inspection

fee of Rs. 50000/-. In the above circumstances, no further action is called for, and to

return the part-payment of Rs. 10000/- paid by the institution (instead of Rs. 50000/-)

and to close the case.

As per the decision of SRC a letter was addressed to the institution vide letter No.

F.SRO/APSO2033/D.Ed/KA/51469 dated 3/05/2013 returning of DD of Rs.10,000/-

paid by the institution

Again, a letter dated 10/05/2013 received by this office on 14/05/2013 from the

Secretary regarding the remittance of difference amount of fees of Rs.40,000/-

towards inspection for verification for continuation of affiliation.

The Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/- and Rs.10,000/- submitted by the institution was returned to the institution vide letter No.F.SRO/NCTE /APSO2033/B.Ed/KA /2013/ 52162 dated 07/06/2013.

A letter dated 25 /06/2013 is received by this office on 27/06/2013 from M/S

Haranahalli & Patil regarding the W.P.No.24390/2013 filed by the institution. The

letter states that “the Hon’ble High Court directed the petitioner to submit a Demand

Draft for Rs.50,000/- within 10 days from today and the SRC to conduct inspection of

the petitioner institution within a period of 2 weeks and to reconsider the matter

expeditiously”.

In the mean while, a letter is received by this office on 02/07/2013 from the institution

along with a DD of Rs.50,000/- towards inspection fee.

The institution has also submitted certified copy of the order dated 25/06/2013 in

W.p.No.24390/2013 and W.P.No.27178-27225/2013 which is as under:-

“Under the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I have no hesitation in

holding that the issue of withdrawal or continuation of recognition has not attained

the finality. For the negligence of the first petitioner College and the peremptoriness


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

152

of the NCTE, the interest of the students(petitioner Nos. 2 to 49) cannot be made to

suffer. The ends of justice would be meant by passing the following order:

• The impugned order/communication, dated 03/05/2013(Annexure-F) is quashed.

• The petitioner No.1 is directed to pay the inspection fee of Rs.50,000/- to the NCTE within ten days from today.

• The NCTE shall hold the inspection within two weeks from the date of the receipt of the inspection fee.

• If there are any deficiencies in the infrastructure of the petitioner, the NCTE shall call upon the petitioner to remove the same in a time – bound manner.

• On the petitioner removing the deficiencies or not removing the deficiencies within the prescribed time frame, the NCTE shall take a final decision of either continuing or withdrawing the recognition.

• The competent authority shall approve the admissions of the students petitioner Nos.2 to 49 subject to their meeting the eligibility criteria in all other respects.

• The competent authority, on satisfying itself that the petitioning students meet the eligibly criteria in all other respects, shall permit them to appear for the forthcoming examination of D.Ed course.

• The petitioner is directed not to make admissions to D.Ed course for the academic year 2013-14 and the subsequent academic years without the NCTE’s order of recognition. The memo filed by the first petitioner institution undertaking not to make admissions from the academic year 2013-14 without obtaining the NCTE’s recognition, is placed on the record”

The DD of Rs.50,000/- is taken into account vide receipt No.17063 dated

04/07/2013.


Director, DSERT which is as under:-

“ with reference to the above cited subject Aristotle D.Ed college, Andersonpet

requesting for the approval of admission for the academic year 2012-13. Institution

approached to the Hon’ble High Court with respect to withdrawal of recognition

W.P.No.48401/2012, where in Director, NCTE is the first respondent. Kindly, inform

us about the action taken by NCTE with respect to the Hon’ble High Court order

dated 14/12/2012 in W.P. No. 48401 immediately”.

The SRC in its 248th meeting considered the Hon’ble High Court Order and the letter

from the D.S.E.R.T and decided to cause composite inspection and inform SCERT

that, since the ‘fee’ has been paid only now, inspection (as directed by the Court on

14.12.2012) is being done now.

Accordingly, a letter was sent to the Director, D.S.E.R.T on 18.07.2013.

The inspection of the institution was scheduled for 24th July, 2013 and the same was


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

153

intimated to the institution vide this office letter F.No.APSO

6127/2033/2031/2017/52831 dated 22.07.2013.

Accordingly, the inspection(composite inspection) of the institutions was carried out

on 24.07.2013 and the VT reports were received by this office on 25.07.2013.

A comparative statement of the VT reports of the four institution was placed before

SRC in its 250th meeting held on 11th to 13th August 2013

The Southern Regional Committee considered the VT report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to withdraw recognition for all courses w.e.f. 2013-14 for the following deficiencies:-

1. Institution has submitted Land documents and it is in individual name. 2. Building plan not approved by competent authority. 3. Building Completion Certificate is not issued by competent authority. 4. C.P.Ed. is not a stand alone programme.

Based on the above points the Southern Regional Committee decided to withdraw

the recognition of the D.Ed (APS06127), D.Ed (APS02033), C.P.Ed (APS02031) and

B.Ed (APS02027) courses run by Aristotle Education Trust from the academic year

2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students, if any, to complete their

course.





NCTE, Bangalore if any.






“….. Sh. L. Syed. Shahzadha, Secretary, Aristotle Teachers Training Institute KGF,

Kolar, Karnataka presented the case of the appellant Institution on 11/04/2014. In

the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that “earlier the land

was standing in the name of the Secretary of the Trust and the said land is the Trust

property. In this regard the Secretary has executed Registered Sale Deed dated


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

154

25/11/2013 in favour of the Trust, hence the land and building belongs to the trust

who is the absolute owner. Authority to give building completion certificate is the

City Municipality at K.G.F. within whose local jurisdiction the building is situated.

The CMC KGF has given the building completion certificate. Appellant is not

continuing the C.P.Ed. program due to lack of admissions.

The Council noted that the Southern Regional Committee (SRC), based on the

observation and findings of the composite inspection carried out on 24/07/2013,

decided to withdraw recognition for D.Ed. Committee further noted that the

appellant Institution was not given reasonable opportunity for making a written

representation under the proviso to section 17(1) of the NCTE Act. Committee,

therefore, concluded to remand back the case to SRC with a direction to issue Show

Cause Notice under section 17(1) before passing a reasoned order.




to issue Show Cause Notice under section 17 (1) before passing a reasoned order.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Aristotle Teachers Training Institute,

Kolar, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

58) APS02340

D.Ed

Citizen Teacher

Training

Institute, Kolar,

Karnataka

KA

Citizen Teacher Training Institute, Mayur Circle, Tolgate, Shidlaghatta, Kolar District-562105, Karnataka. Recognition was granted to Citizen Teacher Training Institute, Mayur Circle, Tolgate, Shidlaghatta, Kolar District-562105, Karnataka, for Elementary (D.Ed) course of two & Half years from the academic session 2005-2006 with an annual intake of 50 students on 13.02.2006 with a condition to shift to its own premises/building within three eyars from the date of recognition (in case the course is started in rented premises). On 21/01/2013, complaint letter is received on 21/01/2013 from Sri.B.R.Ramesh, advocate, # 895, 3rd ‘A’ Main,‘D’ Block , II Stage , Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 010 regarding the substandard and non-viable institutions of teachers training in Chickballapur district.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

155

He has stated that “ I am enclosing herewith a report of DSERT pertaining to Chickballapur district. This inspection report is based on visiting teams report of DIETS. They have inspected these institutions and submitted information to the DSERT. The DSERT has compiled the data and have identified the deficiencies of the institutions. You are competent to issue recognition to all institutions imparting teacher education. The students who study in these substandard institutions will be the major losers and they cannot meet the needs of students at primary level. These institutions produce substandard teachers who in turn cannot come up to the expectations of the department. Hence, it becomes obligatory on you part to initiate action after verification from your end. I do hope that you would initiate at least some action and verify the infrastructure facilities of these institutions and see that the teacher education in this district is rectified and put on right lines, so that the prospective teachers are benefited. I do hope that you will look into this matter personally and do the needful. A line in reply is appreciated. More information with regard to other substandard institutions will be sent to you in due course about other districts.” A copy of the evaluation report of 9 D.Ed colleges during the year 2009-2010 is enclosed along with the complaint letter. The Committee considered the matter of complaint letter dt. 21/01/2013 and advised

Southern Regional Office to examine the report from DSERT and put up

The SRC in its 248th meeting held on 13th – 15th July 2013 considered the matter and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act, for the following: 1. As per DSERT report, the total earmarked built up area is only 1348.02 sq.ft,

which is less than the requirement of 1500 sq.mts as per NCTE norms. 2. As per the records, the total earmarked site area is only 4655.178 sq.ft, which is

less than the requirement as per NCTE norms. 3. As per VT report, the institution is not functioning in its own building. In view of the above and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to the institution as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an opportunity to the institution to make a written representation within 21 days from the date of receipt of the Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken including the withdrawal of application for recognition, based on the records available, with no further notice.

Accordingly, a Showcase Notice was issued to the institution on 27/08/2013.The

Institution submitted its reply vide letter dated 17.09.2013

The SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25th -27th October 2013 considered the written

reply of the institution to the show cause notice vide letter dated 17-09-2013 and

also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for

the following reasons:-


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

156

• As per the land documents submitted, the land is in the name of an individual, which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations.

• Building completion certificate submitted by the institution is not approved by competent Govt. authority.


D.Ed course run by the Citizen Teacher Training Institute, Mayer Circle, Tolgate,

Shidlaghatta, Kolar District-562105, Karnataka from the academic year 2013.14, in

order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete

their course.











“……Shri N Shivanna, Principal, Citizen TTI, Kolar District. Karnataka

presented the case of the appellant institution on 17-04-2014. In the appeal and

during personal presentation it was submitted that "as per the records of the

Institution, such as Sale Deed copy, Building completion report, Encumbrance

Certificate and Infrastructure details, the built up area is 1548 Sq mtr i.e., 1038

Sq. mtr Ground Floor and 510 Sq mtr First Floor. Copy of the above said

documents produced as Annexure —Al, A2, A3 and A4. As per the records and

documents submitted by the Institution, the total area is 8621 Sq. mtr which is more

than the requirement of NCTE norms. The committee has misconceived as Sq, ft

instead of Sq.mtr The Institution is running in its own building as per the records

produced at Annexure Al, A2, A3 & A4. The committee has mis-conceived the

record of the Institution and documents are in the name of individual But, the

documents produced by the Institution Annexure Al. A2. A3 and A4 are in the name

of the Institution i.e.. Sri Ramanjaneya Education Trust which is running the D.Ed..

College. The Institution is represented by its President, Sri S. Ramanjaneya

Reddy. Hence his name is appearing in the representative capacity. The Building

completition certificate is issued by the AEE PWD Department as per the Annexure

— A2 The appellant named above, begs to prefer this memorandum of appeal under

section 18 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 on the following


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

157

facts and grounds. 1. The appellant was granted recognition by the Southern

Regional Committee. Bangalore for Teacher Education Course under section 14 /

15 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (73 of 1993) on 13-02-

2006. 2 The Regional Committee has withdrawn the recognition vide its order

dated 1712-2013 made in No. F.SRO/NCTE/APS02340/D.Ed./KA/2013-14/55463.

a copy of which is attached herewith for the grounds stated therein. The appellant

submits that the Regional Committee erred in deciding the matter on the following

grounds. 3. That the Regional Committee had issued a show cause notice dt. 27-

08-2013 to the appellant seeking the reply with documents on the three points /

issues before passing the order of withdrawing the recognition dated 17-12-2013

as below. i) As per DSERT report the total earmarked built up area is only

1348.02 Sq. ftFT which is less than the requirement of 1500 Sq mtr as per NCTE

norms. ii) As per the records, the total earmarked site area is only 4655.178 Sq. ft.

which is less than they require. 4 That the appellant in response to the show

cause notice dated 27-08-2013 submitted the reply dated 13-09-2013 clarifying the

issues / deficiencies stated in the show cause notice. It is as per the records of

the Institution, the total built up area is 1548 Sq. mtr i.e., the Ground Floor is 1038

Sq. mtrs and the First Floor is 510 Sq. mtr. The said reply was submitted along with

sale deed copy, Building Completion Report, encumbrance certificate and

infrastructure details which are produced. 5. That the land is in the name of the

appellant institution The sale deeds and the encumbrance certificates

produced by the appellants un-equivocally show that the land and the building are

in the name of the appellant institution. The completion certificate of the building

issued by the competent authority is produced 6. The Regional Committee has

mis-conceived about the area of the institution and the built up area and also the

running of the institution in its own building and given an incorrect report contrary

to records produced in respect of the deficiencies raised by the Regional

Committee. 7. That the management quota of 25 admissions of the students of the

institution has been approved by the Government for the year 2013-14 The copy of

the said approval order and the list of the 25 students are produced as Annexure —

C and E. 8. The appellant institution started from the academic year 2005-06. The

essential requirement of physical infrastructure in so far as total land area

requirement was 5000 Sq. mtrs. and the floor area of the building was 1000 Sq.

mtrs. The desirable requirement of the area of the land was 15000 Sq. mtrs. and

floor area of building was 1500 Sq mtrs. as on the date of 2005-06 academic

year as per NCTE (Amd) Regulations 1998. The appellant therefore, prays that

the order appealed against may be set-aside and appropriate relief granted to the

appellant.

The Committee further noted that the appellant Institution submitted reply to the

above show cause notice which as received in the office of SRC on 17/09/2013.

The SRC after considering the reply to the above SCN decided to withdrawal


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

158

recognition for conducting D.Ed course on following grounds: i) land is in the name

of an individual, which not permissible as per NCTE Regulations; ii) Building

Completion Certificate is not approved by the competent Govt. authority. Appeals

Committee observed that the grounds on which withdrawal order dated 17/12/2013

was issued were not communicated to the appellant Institution through the show

cause notice dated 27/08/2013. The Show Cause Notice dated 27/08/2013 was

entirely on different grounds and the appellant Institution in its reply addressed only

to the points raised in the Show Cause Notice. It was incumbent on part of the SRC

to have communicated to the Institution the grounds on which the withdrawal order

was to be issued. Appeals Committee, therefore concluded to remand back the

case to SRC with a direction to issue a fresh Show Cause Notice indicating the

proposed grounds of withdrawal and extend a reasonable opportunity to the

appellant Institution to furnish a written representation.

After perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit documents available on



to issue a fresh Show Cause Notice indicating the proposed grounds of Withdrawal

and extend a reasonable opportunity to the appellant Institution to furnish a written

representation.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Citizen Teacher Training Institute,

Kolar District, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above.





(H.Q) instructions.

59) SRCAPP198

B.Ed

Bhanu Prakash

P. V,

Davanagere,

Karnataka

KA

Bhanu Prakash.P.V,Khasar No.465,Plot No.465/ALM57,SH Road, Honnali

Village,Post,Taluk and Town, Davanagere District, Pin Code-

577217,Karnataka.(SRCAPP198) and Malathesha B.Ed college, Plot/Khasra

No. 524/6,R.S.No. 698/09-10,Channel RO Street, Malebennur Village and Post

Office, Harihar Taluk, Malebennur Town, Davangere District –

577530,Karnataka (SRCAPP1940)

Bhanu Prakash P V, Plot/Khasra No. 465/ALM57,SH Road,Honnali Village and Post Office,Honnali Taluk and Town, Davangere District – 577217,Karnataka had applied for grant of recognition to B.Ed course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

159

NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 07.01.2013 . The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 04.02.2013/04.05.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 23.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 30.05.2013.

The SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20-22nd June 2013 considered the matter and

advised Southern Regional Office to prepare a comprehensive comparative chart of

cases B.Ed (SRCAPP198) & B.Ed (SRCAPP1940) course and put up in the 248th

meeting.

Accordingly the comparative chart is put up for consideration.

SRCAPP198


considered and the reply is unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still

persist as under:

1. The copy of the land document submitted in in favour of Managing Trustee, P.V. Malatesha bin P. P.Veerabasappa, Nee- Vee Education Trust. Registered Land Document Certified in Original in favour of Society/ institution is not submitted.

2. Approved Blue Print of Building plan is not submitted.As per Application in the name of institution is Bhanu Prakash P. V. and the building plan is in the name of sri Thungabadra B.Ed College.

3. Copy of Building Completion Certificate submitted is not approved by Government Engineer.

4. Land Usage Certificate states that the Constructed building can be used for running the B.Ed College Proceedings of the Revenue Department for Conversion of land from agricultural purpose is not submitted.

5. Two sets FDR’s of 5 lakhs and Rs 3 lakhs are submitted. The signature of Manager is different in both FDR’s. It is not known whether the FDR’s are Original or not.

6. The Institution has not submitted details of running institutions for teacher education.

7. The institution has not submitted details of other applications submitted in this office,

8. Up to date Non – Encumbrance certificate in original is not submitted.

The reply to the Deficiency letter is not satisfactory and unconvincing.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

160

based on a collective application of mind, the committee in its 249th meeting held on

24th – 26th July 2013 had decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and

reject the application of the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.

Accordingly, a rejection order was issued to the institution on 02.09.2013


Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 29.05.2014 Remanded as

follows:

“….. Shri P.V. Mahathesha, Managing Trustee, Bhanu Prakash P.V, Davanagere,

Karnataka presented the case of the appellant Institution on 16/04/2014 in the

appeal and during personal presentation and in a letter dt. 15/04/2014 it is submitted

that (i) they have submitted original land documents in both Kannada and English

Versions in the name of the Trust, represented by Managing Trustee P.V.

Malathesha, (ii) approved blue print of building plan is in the name of Tungabnhadra

B.Ed, College, which comes under the Trust and Bhanuprakash is a Trustee; (iii)

they have submitted building completion certificate approved by Govt. engineer; (iv)

the land comes under Town Panchayat limits; (v) two sets of FDRs (dt.17/01/2014)

are submitted; (vi) their Trust has a D.Ed.college at Malebennur; (vii) the Trust

applied for two B.Ed. College at different places; and (viii) up to date E C dt.

11/04/2014 is submitted.

The submission of the appeal is delayed by two months and 28 days beyond the

prescribed time limit of 60 days. The appellant in his letters dt. 03/02/2014 and

16/04/2014 submitted that he got bone fracture and accident; due to severe health

problem he could not communicate in proper time; as the College of Education is

fully under his control nobody can be involved in it; and after he slowly recovered he

was able to appeal. The appellant enclosed a copy of a certificate dt. 17/01/2014

issued by Chigateri Distt. Hospital, Davanagere certifying that Shri Bhanuprakash

was suffering from spinal injury and was an in-patient from 20/08/2013 to 10/01/2014

the Council nothing these submissions decided to condone the delay and consider

the appeal.

The Council noted that SRC, before refusing grant of recognition, did not issue a

show cause notice which is required under the proviso to section 14 (3)(b) of the

NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved


appellant and take further action as per the Regulations.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

161




to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the

Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Bhanu Prakash P.V, Davanagere,

Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

60) SRCAPP1970

B.Ed

Ramalingeshwa

ra B.Ed

College,

Davanagere,

Karnataka

KA

Ramalingeshwara B.Ed College, Plot/Khasra No.121/A[ALMSR]/47/06-07],Sri

Matha Street, Kengapura Village, Kanivebilachi Post Office, Channagiri Taluk

and Town, Davangere District - 577231

Ramalingeshwara Educational Trust, 121/A, Harnalli – Kengapura Road, Kengapura

village, Kanivebilachi P.O, Channagiri Taluk and Town, Davangere District – 577231

had applied for grant of recognition to Ramalingeshwara B.Ed College , Davangere

for B.Ed course of one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to

the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 28.12.2012 and physical

application has been received in the office of SRC on 28.12.2012.

The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 04.01.2013/09.05.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 10.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 30.05.2013. The reply of the institution vide letter dt. 30.05.2013 to the deficiency letter was duly

considered by SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th -22nd June 2013 and the reply is

unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persist as under:

1. The institution has submitted photocopy of the Land document. As per Kannada version , the land is in the name of the Trust but as per the English version of the gift deed submitted, the land is in favour of Smt. Mariamma, Founder Trustee (individual name), which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.

2. As per the building plan submitted the built up area is 20,400 sq. ft./1897.2

sq.mts The institution should have a built up area of 3000 sq. mts for running


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

162

D.Ed (APS0 9053) and proposed B.Ed course as per NCTE regulations, 2009.

3. Building Completion Certificate submitted is for Khasra No. 465/ALM57 ,S.H. Road Honnali Village and Post ,Taluk and Town and the land is in the name of, The Managing Trustee, NEE-VEE Education Trust, Davangere.The institution has submitted BCC of a different trust which is misleading.

4. Building Completion Certificate in the name of Ramalingeshwara B.Ed

college is not submitted. 5. The institution has suppressed the facts that, as per records, the institution is

running a D.Ed course (APS09053) also in the same Sy.No. granted recognition on 22/09/2008. Earmarked area for the existing and proposed course is not mentioned in the building plan.

6. The size of the multipurpose hall is indicated as 800 sq. ft in the building plan which is less than the requirement of 2000 sq.ft as per NCTE norms.

7. As per Building License, the license is for only 12 months, since the license has been issued on 12.05.2011, the license period is already over.

8. Notarized Land Usage Certificate submitted is for Tungabhadra B.Ed College at S.H.Road, Honnali, Honnali Taluk and not for the proposed Ramalingeshwara B.Ed College, Plot/Khasra No.121/A[ALMSR] /47/06-07],Sri Matha Street, Kengapura Kanivebilachi Post Office, Channagiri Taluk and Town, Davangere District – 577231

9. The institution is submitting documents of different institution which is misleading.

10. As per the notarized photocopy of Non Encumbrance Certificate submitted, the land is in the name of Smt. Mariamma (individual name) Founder Trustee which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009.

11. Two sets of FDRs of Rs. 5 lakhs and Rs. 3 lakhs are submitted. The contents of the FDRs are different .The signature of Manager is different in both FDRs. It is not known whether the FDRs are original or not

Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected & based on a collective application of mind, the committee decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to refuse and reject the application of the institution for recognition of SRCAPP1970- B.Ed course. Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order was issued to the





(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

163


“…… Shri Manu, Prakash, Manager, Ramalingeshwara B.Ed, College, Davangare,

Karnataka presented the case of the appellant Institution on 16/04/2014. In the

appeal and during personal presentation and in a letter dt. 12/04/2014 it was

submitted that (i) the Institution has submitted photocopy of the land document in

both Kannada and English Versions, but in English version the land was in favour of

Smt. Mariayamma, Founder Trustee but it was a typing error. The document in

Kannada version is correct; (ii) as per the building plan the built up area is 20,400

sq.ft/1897.2 sq.mts, which is for the proposed B.Ed. College only. D.Ed. course is

managed by another educational Society which is located in a different land and

building; (iii) building completion certificate for Khasra No. 465/ALM57 is not

concerned to B.Ed. College and they are unaware of it; For B.Ed. College the

certificate is for plot no.421/A(ALMSR/47/06/07); (iv) Building Completion Certificate

is in the name of Ramalingeswara B.Ed. College: (v) their Trust is not managing

D.Ed. College; (vi) by breaking the wall between two rooms the multipurpose hall

has been made into a 2000 sq. ft. one; (vii) the permission of local panchayat was

taken for construction of the building; (viii) notarized land use certificate submitted

was for the plot for B.Ed. College only; (ix) they have not submitted documents of

any other Institution; (x) updated Encumbrance Certificate is dt. 14/02/2014; and (xi)

FDR’s submitted are dt.20/01/2014.

The submission of the appeal has been delayed by three months and four days

beyond the prescribed time limit of 60 days. The appellant in her letter dt.

04/02/2014 submitted that she was suffering from myocardial infraction (heart

problem) and nobody else was able to take any action. The appellant submitted a

medical certificate dt. 02/02/2014 issued by Chigateri Distt. Hospital, Davanagere in

which it is certified that she was an in-patient in the hospital from 25/08/2013 to

20/01/2014 due to myocardial infraction. the Council noting the submissions of the

appellant decided to condone the delay and consider the appeal.

The Council noted that SRC, before refusing grant of recognition, did not issue a

show cause notice which is required under the proviso to Section 14(3)(b) of the

NCTE Act. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that the matter deserved


appellant and take further action as per the Regulations.




to issue a show cause notice to the appellant and take further action as per the

Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Ramalingeshwara B.Ed. College,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

164

Davangare, Karnataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

61) APS07199

B.Ed

Akshaya

College of

Teacher

Education,

Tumkur,

Karnataka

KA

Akshaya College of Teacher Education, Plot No. 161, Baddihalli Village, Oordigere Hobli, Tumkur District-572102, Karnataka

Akshaya College of Teacher Education, Plot No. 161, Baddihalli Village, Oordigere

Hobli, Tumkur District-572102, Karnataka had submitted an application for starting

B.Ed course on 29.05.2006. The institution was granted recognition on 04.12.2008

with an annual intake of 100 students.

This office was in receipt of letter No.TY:VCPS:2011-12:98 dated 21.05.2011 from the Vice-

Chancellor, Tumkur University, Tumkur by enclosing a list of 19 institutions with the

committee observations by conducting inspections.

The SRC in its 206th

meeting held on 9-10th June, 2011 noted the inspection report of the Vice-

Chancellor, Tumkur University, dt. 21.05.2011 and the deficiencies in the 19 institutions in Tumkur

District and decided to issue show cause notice under section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a show

cause notice was issued to the institution on 22.07.2011. The institution had replied vide letter dt.

16.08.2011.

The SRC in its 211th meeting held on 21-23 September, 2011 considered the letter

dt.21.05.2011 from Vice-Chancellor, Tumkur University pointing out deficiencies in

the 19 Tumkur University colleges and also reply of the above institution dt.

16.08.2011 and other documents submitted by the institution and decided to cause

composite inspection for all the courses at premises Under Section 17 of NCTE Act,

to verify whether the institution is maintaining instructional and infrastructural

facilities as per NCTE norms. The institution was directed to submit the following

within 30 days of the receipt of the notice, with Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/-

inspection fee towards the all the courses being run, in favour of “The Member

Secretary, NCTE” payable at Bangalore.

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was carried out on 29.10.2011.

In the meantime, Tumkur University vide their letter received on 17.10.2011 has conducted re-visits to the institution on 18.8.2011 and made certain observations.

In the meantime, R.O.,NCTE, HQ vide letter dated 3rd November, 2011 had forwarded a complaint dated 30.7.2011 made by Sri. V.N. Ramesh, No.45, 3rd Cross, Ashok Nagar, B.H.Road, Tumkur against 5 institutions(including this) with


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

165

direction to seek the comments from the institution on the complaint. The complainant brought to the notice of NCTE about the gross irregularities in the functioning of Divya B.Ed. College and also other B.Ed. Colleges(including this) in Tumkur. He alleged that inspite of good reputation of Tumkur University affiliated teacher education colleges, a few black-sheep like Divya College of Education, Nayala College of Education, Akshaya College of Education, Bharathi College of Education and Indira College of Education are bringing a bad name to other colleges in Tumkur. He had requested to initiate immediate action in the better interest of the students career and lives. Note:- The institution was also offering D.Ed. course from 6.11.2007 and requested for closure of D.Ed. course vide their letter dated 15.9.2011 for closing down of the D.Ed. College. The SRC in its 211th meeting held on 21-23 September, 2011 considered the Institutions’ request for closure of D.Ed course and decided to permit the closure by withdrawing the recognition for (APS07009) D.Ed course with effect from 2013-2014, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete their final year course. Accordingly, withdrawal order for D.Ed. course was issued on dated 29.10.2011.

The SRC Considered the VT Report, VCD and all the relevant documentary

evidence and decided to serve Show cause Notice under section 17 of NCTE act.

For the following deficiencies.

1. The Institution was granrecognition in temporary premises to run B.Ed course on 04.12.2008 with a condition that it should shift to its own permanent premises in 3 years. i.e., on or before 04.12.2011. Three year periods is already lapsed. The Institution is still running in temporary premises and not shifted to new premises even after a lapse of stipulated 3 years and after lapse of time period of more than 3 years and 01 month.

2. The Institution was granted recognition in a temporary premises to run B.Ed course on 04.12.2008 with a condition to shift to permanent premises within 3 years. The institution was functioning at the time of recognition in the address “Akshaya College of Teacher Education, Plot No. 161, Baddihalli Village, Oordigere Hobli, Tumkur District-572102, Karnataka”.

3. But, as per VT report, dt. 29.10.2011, the inspection of the institution was conducted at the address “Akshaya College of Teacher Education, Ashok Nagar, 2nd cross, SIT Main Road, Tumkur-572102, Karnataka”, where the institution was functioning. The management neither informed SRC nor taken permission for shifting to new address where the inspection was done. This is a clear indication of carelessness and negligence on the part of management. This is against the NCTE regulations. The management has to clarify for the above lapses.

4. Approved building plan by the competent civil authority is not submitted. The institution is required to submit fresh blue print and it should be clearly mentioning the Khasara no, plot no, proposed course, land total area, built up area duly approved by competent authority with resolution in all respects. If the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

166

institution is running other teacher education courses / other technical courses in the same premises, the institution is required to mention earmarked area for each course.

5. As per VT report, the total built up area is only 7400 sq.ft, which is not adequate as per NCTE norms.

6. Building completion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer is not submitted.

7. Original Land usage certificate from competent Govt. authority is to be submitted.

8. Non-encumbrance certificate from a competent Govt. authority is not submitted. 9. Byelaws of the Society are not submitted by the management. 10. The Principal is not qualified as per NCTE norms. Experience certificate and

percentage of marks are not mentioned. 11. The post of lecturer in foundation courses (one post) is vacant, not filled up. 12. One post of Methodology courses is vacant, not filled up. 13. Part time post of Lecturer in Art Education (one post) and Director of Physical

Education (one post) is not filled up. 14. The staff list is not approved by the affiliating body.

15. The management is paying salary to the staff by cash instead of through Bank Cheque.

The institution submitted reply vide letter dated 06.07.2012 received by this office on

11.7.2012

The Southern Regional Committee in its 230th Meeting held on 16th – 17th July 2012,

considered the reply of the institution vide letter dated 11.07.2012 and all the

relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show Cause

Notice under NCTE Act and Final Show Cause Notice was issued on 31/08/2012.

1. As per records available in the file, the institution vide its initial application dated 29.5.2006 had applied for B.Ed. course at Baddihalli village(p-68-69/c). As per VT report (p-105/c), the inspection was also conducted at Baddihalli village. Thereafter, after consideration of VT, the application was refused and order was issued at Trust address(p-107/c). Further, on reversal of SRC order by appellate authority vide order dated 10.11.2008(p-109/c), Recognition was granted to the institution vide order dated 04.12.2008(p-365/c) at Baddihalli village where the inspection was conducted.

2. On having received the recommendations of Tumkur University, the SRC had proposed the inspection of the institution at Baddihalli village(p-419-423/c). However, as per VTR, the institution was conducted at Trust address instead of location where the initial recognition was granted by SRC.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

167

3. From the above, it appears that the institute has been working at different location where the recognition was granted without approval of SRC.

4. Now, in response to Final Show Cause Notice dated 6.6.2012, the institution is proposing to shift the institution at another location. Moreover, there was no condition mentioned in the recognition order dated 4.12.2008 (as per the regulations prevailed at that time) for shifting of the building nor any documents were produced regarding the land purchased at Lingapura village at the time of grant of recognition to the institution

5. Building Completion certificate for Lingapura Tumkur having built up area 21,548.8 sq.ft. is submitted and is not approved by the competent authority.

6. Built up area is 2617.sq.mtrs. at the proposed B.Ed. college at Lingapura Grama, Kora Hobli, Tumkur approved by the Panchayat Development Officer, Obalapura Grama Panchayat, Tumkur Tq. Is submitted. Site area is mentioned as 8781.68 sq.mtrs.

7. But, the land at Lingapura Grama, Kora Hobli was not mentioned at the time of making application.

8. The Principal appointed is not qualified as per NCTE norms. 9. Copy of the appointment order/s is produced. Joining report is not produced.

Consolidated salary is paid. 10. Principal is identified to teach methodology course. 11. Art teacher &Director of Physical Education is identified. Joining report is not

submitted. 12. Approved staff list is not submitted.

The institution submitted reply vide letter dated 06/07/32012, 24/09/2012 and

05/10/2012

.As per records available in the file, the institution vide its initial application dated

29.5.2006 had applied for B.Ed. course at Baddihalli village(p-68-69/c). As per VT

report (p-105/c), the inspection was also conducted at Baddihalli village. Thereafter,

after consideration of VT, the application was refused and order was issued at Trust

address(p-107/c). Further, on reversal of SRC order by appellate authority vide

order dated 10.11.2008(p-109/c), Recognition was granted to the institution vide

order dated 04.12.2008(p-365/c) at Baddihalli village where the inspection was

conducted.

On 05/10/2012, the institution submitted a proposal to shift the institution to

Lingapura Village from II Cross , Ashoknagar. A certificate issued by the Obalapura

Gram Panchayath President and Secretary dated 15/10/2012 stating that Akshaya

Education Trust has taken prior permission for construction of 1st Floor, II Floor and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

168

III Floor having 7182.9 sq.ft each at Tumkur Taluk, Kora Hobli, Obalalpura Grama

Panchayath is completed. The Sy. No., location of the building and the course

offered by the Trust is not mentioned in the certificate.

The SRC in its 236th meeting Held on 16th -17th December, 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letters dated. 05/10/2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and i decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under NCTE Act, Accordingly, a Final Showcase Notice was issued to the institution on 05/02/2013 for the following deficiencies.

1. A photocopy of the building plan is submitted for Lingapura Village. Approved blue print of the building from competent authority is not submitted.

2. Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer in prescribed format is not submitted.

3. Approved staff list from Tumkur University is not submitted.

Accordingly, a Final Showcase Notice was issued to the institution on

05/02/2013.The Institution submitted its reply vide letter dated 25.02.2013.

The SRC in its 242nd meeting held on 14th – 16th April 2013 considered the written

reply of the institution on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the

institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

1. Photocopy of building plan submitted is for Lingapura Village and not for

Baddihalli Village.

2. Building completion Certificate approved by Assistant Executive Engineer is submitted, but total built up area is not mentioned in Building Completion Certificate.

3. The institution approval of Tumkur University is not submitted. The institution was also offering D.Ed. course from 6.11.2007 and requested for

closure of D.Ed. course vide their letter dated 15.9.2011 for closing down of the

D.Ed. College

As per records available in the file, the institution vide its initial application dated

29/05/2006 had applied for B.Ed course at Baddihalli Village (p-68-69/c. As per VT

report (p-105/c), the inspection was also conducted at baddihalli Village. Thereafter.

After consideration of VT. The application was refused and order was issued at trust

address(P-107/c). Further, on reversal of SRC order by appellate authority vide


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

169

order dated 10/11/2008(p-109/c), Recognition was granted to the institution vide

order dated 04/12/2008(p-365/c) at Baddihalli Village where the inspection was

conducted.

The Contention of the institution stating that the address was wrongly mentioned is

incorrect as the institution was inspected at the Baddihalli address and the report of

the same is attested by the Managing Trustee of Akshaya Education trust.

Now, on 05/02/2013, the institution has submitted a proposal to shift the institution to

Lingapura Village from II cross, Ashoknagar. A certificate issued by the Obalapura

Gram Panchayat President and Secretary dated 15/10/2012 stating that Akshaya

Education Trust has taken prior permission for construction of 1st Floor, II Floor and

III Floor having 7182.9 sq.ft each at Tumkur Taluk, Kora Hobli, Obalapura Grama

Panchayat is completed. The Sy.No., location of the building and the course

offered by the Trust is not mentioned in the certificate.

Based on the above points the committee had decides to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed course run by Akshaya College of Teacher Education, Plot No. 161, Baddihalli Village, Oordigere Hobli, Tumkur District-572102, Karnataka, from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed course, if any, to complete their course. But it is made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further




NCTE, Bangalore, if any.



The Institution also decided a court case in the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in

W.P No 9261-9269 of 2014 dated 16/04/2014. The same was placed before SRC in

its 267th Meeting held on 12th – 13th May, 2014 meeting held on 12th -13th May

2014 and the Committee decided to await appellate order.




“….. The Council felt that it has to be ascertained first where the Institution has

actually been functioning since its inception-was it at the address 2nd cross, Ashok

Nagar, Tumkur, which also happens to be the address of Askhaya Education Trust

or Somewhere else. the Council, for this purpose, suggests that a team of two

members to be constituted by the NCTE., to visit all the three places, namely,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

170

Baddihalli, 2nd cross, Ashok Nagar ( Tumkur) and Lingapura and give a

comprehensive factual report about the location from which the appellant Institution

has been functioning and the details of the building reported to have been

constructed in july 2012 at Lingapura. The entire process should be completed

within sixty days and till that time the order may be kept in abeyance. The

inspection may be conducted after payment of inspection fee by the appellant.

The Council, in their meeting held on 19.04.2014 perused the report of a two

member Committee that conducted an inspection of the appellant Institution on

12.03.2014 in pursuance of the suggestion contained in para 4 above. The Council

noted that the inspection team has recorded existence of a number of vital

deficiencies both-instructional and infrastructural in the functioning of the appellant

Institution, which are violative of the provisions of the NCTE Regulations 2009.

Further it appears that the Institution, which was functioning from the premises at 2nd

cross, Ashok Nagar, Tumkur has shifted to a new location at Lingapura without

obtaining prior approval of the SRC as required under the provisions of clause 8(11)

of the NCTE Regulations, 2009. In these circumstances, the Council concluded that

the Report of the Inspection conducted U/s 13 of the NCTE Act may be sent to the

SRC by the concerned section of NCTE who got the inspection done with a direction

to issue a fresh Show Cause notice to the appellant Institution based on the findings

in the report and other relevant materials and take further action as per the

Regulations. In the meantime the order of withdrawal shall be kept in abeyance.





(H.Q) instructions.

62) APS02155

B.P.Ed

Bapuji

Educational

Society,

Davanagere,

Karnataka

KA

Bapuji Education Society’s Bapuji College of Physical Education, BIET

Campus, Davangere – 577004, Karnataka.

Bapuji Education Society’s Bapuji College of Physical Education, BIET Campus,

Davangere – 57704, Karnataka was granted recognition on 10/10/2005 for B.P.Ed

course with an annual intake of 50 students from the academic session 2005-06.

With the condition to shift to Own Premises.

The Institution has submitted shifting proposal on 26/11/2011.

A letter was sent to the Institution to submit essential documents on 04/01/2012.

• The Institution has submitted reply along with shifted fee of Rs. 40,000/- which was placed before SRC in its 222nd meeting held on 9th -10th May 2012. And the Committee decided to cause shifting inspection after collecting Rs. 10,000/- balance amount.

• The inspection of the Institution can intimated on 29/05/2012. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

171

inspection of the Institution was conducted order on 11/06/2012.

• The VT report was placed before SRC in its 237th meeting held on 5th – 6th January 2013 and the Committee consider the V.T report, VCD and all the relevant documents and it has decided to issue Show Cause Notice.

As per the decision of SRC, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution vide

order no. F.No.SRCAPP2155/B.P.Ed/KA/2012-2013/49547 dated 14/03/2013 with a

request to submit written representation within 21 days from the date of receipt of

Notice along with necessary documents.

Till date, there is no communication from the institution regarding reply to the Show

Cause Notice issued.


Principal requesting for time for submission of reply to the Show Cause Notice.

The Principal has stated that “ adverting to the subject & reference above I write to

request your kind self to give time to submit all the relevant records. As such in

Karnataka local body elections were recently and Assembly elections are on to held

on 5th May 2013. Our required documents are pending with the local Municipal

Corporation and officers are busy with the election work. Who cannot attend other

than election work. Therefore I humbly request your kind self to extend time for

replying with proper documents & oblige”.

The Committee considered the Non-reply of the institution to the show cause notice

issued on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the institution and

decided to withdraw recognition for the following reason:-

1. The institution has not replied to show cause notice served to the institution vide letter dated 14/03/2013.

Based on the above point the committee in its 253rd meeting held on 30th September

& 1st October 2013 had decides to withdraw the recognition of the B.P.Ed course

run by Bapuji Education Society’s Bapuji College of Physical Education, BIET

Campus, Davanagere-577004, Karnataka from the academic year 2014-15, in order

to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.P.Ed, course, if any, to complete their

course.


admission subsequent to the date of issue of this order.The Affiliating body /

Examining board / body be informed accordingly.





(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

172





“….. The Council noted that the SRC, after getting an inspection of the new

premises to which the Institution wanted to shift, conducted on 11/06/2012, issued a

show cause notice to the appellant on 14/03/2013 which was to be replied within 21

days. The appellant in his letter dated 04/04/2013, stating that the local Municipal

Corporation Officials were busy with election work, requested for extension of time

for replying to the show cause notice with proper documents. The SRC without

sending any response to the request of the appellant in their 253rd meeting held on

30th September and 1st October, 2013, decided to withdraw recognition due to non-

receipt of a reply to the show cause notice and issued the order on 13/12/2013. The

appellant in the course of personal presentation submitted that he has all the replies

to the show cause notice.

The Council, nothing that the show cause notice contained as many as 14 grounds

and the appellant requested for some more time for sending a reply as the period of

21 days allowed was not adequate, concluded that the matter deserved to be

remanded to the SRC with a direction to consider the reply to the show cause notice

to be submitted by the appellant within ten days from the date of receipt of the

orders on the appeal and take a fresh decision. In the meantime the withdrawal

order will remain in abeyance.




to consider the replay to the show cause notice to be submitted by the appellant

within ten days from the date of receipt of the orders on the appeal and take a fresh

decision. In the meantime the withdrawal order will remain in abeyance.

The Council hereby remands back the case of Bapuji College of Physical Education,

Davangere, Karanataka to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.





(H.Q) instructions.

.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

173

63) SRCAPP219

T.P.T

GMRS Telugu

Pandit College,

Ranga Reddy,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

GMRS Telugu Pandit College, Plot No. 441, Mujahid Pur Village and Post Office, Pargi Taluk, Kulkacherla City, Rangareddi District – 501502, Andhra Pradesh. Scheduled Tribe Educational Development Society, Plot No.441, Mujahid Pur Road, Mujahid Pur Village and Post Office, Pargi Taluk, Kulkacherla City, Rangareddi District-501502, Andhra Pradesh had applied for grant of recognition to GMRS Telugu Pandit College Plot/Khasara/Street No. 441, Mujahid Pur Village and Post Office, Pargi Taluk, Kulkacherla City, Rangareddy District – 501502, Andhra Pradesh. For T.P.T Course of two years duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE online on 31.12.2012 and physical application has been received in the office of SRC on 04.01.2013. The application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State Government for recommendation on 31.01.2013/28.03.2013 (Reminder). A deficiency letter was issued to the institution on 05.04.2013. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 04.06.2013.


considered by SRC in its 250th Meeting held on 11th - 13th August,2013 and the reply

was unconvincing and not satisfactory, deficiencies still persisted as under:

• Building Plan is not approved by Competent Authority. Under the above grounds and with reference to the totality of information collected &

based on a collective application of mind, the Southern Regional committee decided

as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for

recognition of T.P.T course

As per the decision of SRC, a rejection order vide F. No. SRCAPP219

T.P.T/AP/2013-14/54093was issued to the institution on 30/9/2013.


Appellate Authority, NCTE ,Hqrs.

The appellate authority order F.No.89-747/2013 dated 21/05/2014 received by this

office on 16-06-2014 has order as under:-

Sh,V.R amolu. Correspondent, GMRS Telugu Pandit College, RangaReddy, Andhra

Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 12.04.2014 in the appeal

and during personal presentation it was submitted that they submitted two sets of

Building plan approved by competent Authority to SRC, NCTE, Bangalore.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

174

'The Council noted that the appellant, in response to the deficiency letter dated

05/04/2013 submitted, inter-alia, a building plan,which was approved by the Village

Secretary, who is the Village level officer under Kulkachera Mandal,Ranga Reddy

Distt. This plan is available in the file of the SRC. In the circumstances, the Council

concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the SRC with a direction to

process the application further as per the Regulations.




to process the application further as per the Regulations.

The Council hereby remands back the case of GMRS Telugu Pandit College,

Rangareddy, Andhra Pradesh, to the SRC,NCTE, for necessary action as indicated

above.






64) SRCAPP179

B.Ed

Sri Upaveeraja

Guru

Educational

Society,

Chitradurga

District,

Karnataka

KA

Sri Upaveeraja Guru Education Society, Plot no.45/2AP2-P1, Brahmavidyanagara,

Madhure Village and Post, Hosdurga Taluk, Chitradurga District-577527, Karnataka

has applied for grant of recognition to Purushotamanandapuriswamiji, Plot

no.45/2AP2-P1, B.V.Nagar Street, Madhure Village and post, Hosadurga Taluk,

Chitradurga District-577527, Karnataka for B.Ed course of one year duration under

section 14 of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE

online on 31.12.2012. the Institution has submitted hard copy of the application on

04/01/2013.

The letter to the State Government is dispatched Vide F.No.SRCAPP

179/B.Ed/KA/2013-14/48540 dated 04.02.2013.

• The land is registered in the name of Shri Shri Shri Purushothamanandapuri Mahaswamiji,President,Bhageerath Peeta and hence the land is in individual name and not in the name of Institution/Society.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 240th meeting held on 09th -11th March 2013 reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [ 7 1–A (i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009.

1. The land is registered in the name of Shri Shri Shri Purushothamanandapuri


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

175

Mahaswamiji,President,Bhageerath Peeta and hence the land is in individual name and not in the name of Institution/Society. As per 8, 7 (i) of NCTE Regulations 2009

“No institution shall be granted recognition under these Regulations unless the

institution or society sponsoring the institution is in possession of required land on

the date of application. The land free from all encumbrances could be either on

ownership basis or on lease from Government or Government institutions for a

period of not less than 30 years. In cases where under relevant State or Union

Territory laws the maximum permissible lease period is less than 30 years, the State

Government or Union Territory Administration law shall prevail. However, no building

shall be taken on lease for running any teacher training course”.

Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, rejection order was issued to the institution

on 13.05.2013


Hqrs and the NCTE Appellate Authority in its order dated 29.05.2014 remanded as

follows:

“….. Shri Devendrappa T.M., Professional Assistant, Sri Bhagiratha B.Ed. College,

Chitradurga, Karnataka Presented the case of the appellant institution on

16/04/2004. In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that

the land is in the name of the Society and not in the name of individual. In a letter dt.

15/04/2014, the appellant submitted that earlier the land documents were in the

name of Shri Purushottamanandpuri Mahaswamy but they made an amendment

deed at Sub-Registra’s Office and executed on 11/04/2014 in the name of Sri

Upaveera Jagadguru Vidyasamsthe represented by its president Sri

Purushottamanandpuri Mahaswamy.

The submission of the appeal has been delayed by six months and 18 days beyond

the prescribed time limit of 60 days. The appellant, in his letter dt. 02/02/2014,

submitted that they came to know only now from other colleges that in the NCTE

Regulations, there is a chance to appeal to Delhi within 60 days, but the SRC order

did not convey the regulation to them for making an appeal. The Council noting that

the NCTE Act, Regulations Rules etc, including the provisions relating appeals are in

the public domain, concluded that the justification given by the appellant for delay in

appeal cannot be accepted. The Council decided not to condone the delay. The

appeal is therefore not admitted.



Council decided not to condone the delay and therefore, the appeal is not admitted.



(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

176

Consideration of Replies to Show Cause Notice: (Vol – 3)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

65) AOS00301

B.Ed

Sri Kaginele

Mahasamsthan

a Kanaka

Gurupeetha

College of

Education,

Mysore,

Karnataka

KA

Sri Kaginele Mahasamsthana Kanaka Gurupeetha College of Education, Mysore, Karnataka.

Sri Kaginele Mahasamsthana Kanaka Gurupeetha College of Education, Mysore,

Karnataka was granted recognition by SRC for offering B.Ed course with an intake of

100 students on 27.11.1996 for a period of two years.

SKMKG College of Education, Mysore, Karnataka was granted provisional

recognition for one year vide order No.F/SRO/NCTE/98-99/581 dated 09.06.1998.

The institution was granted conditional recognition for one year(1999-2000) to

Secondary Course vide order No.F/SRO/NCTE/1999-2000/8944 dated 14.06.1999.

The College was granted recognition for B.Ed course of one year from the academic

session 2000-2001 with an annual intake of 100 vide order

no.F.KR/B.Ed/New/30/SRO/NCTE/2000-2001/1531 dated 09.08.2000.

A complaint dated 20.08.2009 was received from Dr. P.R. Nair, Retd. Professor of Education, Mysore – 12, Karnataka stating that the Principal of the College is not eligible for the post and the University has rejected her appointment. It was also stated that a writ petition No.487831/04 is pending before the Karnataka High Court. The complainant has submitted the details of each person. The complainant has requested to investigate since the Salary to the employees are not being paid as per norms and also violating the reservation rules.

SRC considered the matter in its 184th meeting held on 26th –27th October 2009 and

decided to direct the complainant to submit affidavit and also call for remarks from

the institution. Accordingly, a letter dt.22.12.2009 has been sent to the complainant

and the letter has been received back undelivered. Further, a letter was also sent to

the institution on 19.01.2010. The reply submitted on 08.02.2010 was considered by

SRC in its 189th meeting held on 25-26 February 2010 and decided that no further

action is required/necessary.

Another, complaint dated 18.02.2010 has been received from Ms. Sobana.S.

Lecturer, KMKG College of Education against the institution and has alleged that

she has not been paid salary as per NCTE norms and neither implementing relevant

law/rules though her appointment has been approved by the University.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

177

The complainant has stated that due to injury she was unable to move and had

applied for leave on medical grounds and till date the institution had not paid salary

for the vacation period also. The institution is harassing fully qualified staff by

adopting unfair means. The Principal’s appointment is in violation of NCTE norms

and is an ineligible person for continuing as Principal of the college. The Principal

had moved the court and the case pending and misleading the affiliation committee.

Further, the complainant has requested SRC to look into the irregularities and grant

justice with regard to salary. Hence, the matter was placed before SRC in its 190th

meeting held on 29th –30th March 2010 and decided to call for remarks from the

institution and an affidavit from the complainant. Accordingly, letters were issued on

07.05.2010. The SRC noted that the complainant has not submitted any affidavit till

date.

The institution had submitted a written representation on 30.06.2010 and had stated

that the complaintee is in the habit of writing letters to higher authorities like your

establishment, University of Mysore, to the Vice-chancellor and mislead them,

without providing any documental evidences. All this act is based purely on jealous

and prejudice in mind for the deprivation of the aspired post.

The above matter was placed before SRC in its 194th meeting held on 221st –22nd

July,2010. The SRC has noted the above matter.

On 25.4.2012, a letter is received from Dr. Sobana.S., Lecturer in Education, Sree

Kaginele Mahasamsthana Kanakaguru Peetha College of Education, Mysore stating

that “I had on 25.4.2012, in person, registered a complaint in the form of an affidavit ,

with your respectful self, with a request to take speedy action on the injustice meted

out to me at my college. I am herewith enclosing a copy of the same so as to

remind your respectful self to do the needy and oblige by doing this without any

further delay, for which I will be ever grateful”.

In the meanwhile, a letter was also received from NCTE, HQ on 28.5.2012 forwarding a copy of the complaint of Dr. Sobana.S. dated 25.4.2012 and requested SRC to take action against the aforesaid institution and furnish action taken report to NCTE, HQ within 30 days. Hence, the above complaint matter was placed before 222nd meeting of SRC held on 9-10 May, 2012. The SRC considered the matter and decided to seek comments from the management regarding the complaint against the appointment of Principal in Sree Kaginele Mahasamsthana Kanakaguru Peetha College of Education Mysore, and also to send a copy of this to the University. Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, a letter was addressed to the Hon. Secretary, Sree Kaginele Mahasamsthana Kanakagurupeetha College of Education, Adichunchanagiri Road, Kuvempunagar, Mysore-23, Karnataka on 5.6.2012.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

178

On 28.8.2012, again a letter is received from Dr. Sobana.S. to take action against the institution. But, there was no reply from the institution.. The letter of Dr. Sobana was again placed before SRC in its 233rd meeting held on 26-28 Sept, 2012 wherein the Committee considered the matter and advised SRO to further examine the case of complaint received from the complainant for further needful action. Further decided to examine whether, any violation of rules/regulations/norms of NCTE is involved and should decide whether at all SRC has any jurisdiction in the matter. The SRC in its 236th meeting held on 16th – 17th December considered the complaint

of Dr. Sobana Lecturer of said institution and all the relevant documentary

evidences and it was decided to serve Notice Under NCTE Act .

Accordingly, a notice was issued on 05.02.2013. The institution has submitted a

written representation on 28.02.2013

In the mean while a Complaint has been received on 25/02/2013 from Humayun

Rasheed,No.148,9th Cross, Shivaji Road,N.R.Mohalla,Mysore-570007 with a request

to initiate immediate action against the management and to ensure rule of law

prevails/maintain by the state government in colleges of Education regarding -

1. Violation of NCTE norms in Sri Kaginele Mahasamsthana Kanaka Gurupeetha College of Education and Karnataka Government.

2. Non payment of salary and Monetary benefits as per NCTE norms to employees.

An affidavit, narrating the non-payment of salary, provident fund contribution to fully

eligible employees ,non elevation of a senior and eligible person to the post of

principal, appointment of ineligible persons to the principal post and others with other

engagements by the Management and Karnataka Government, approval for such

appointment was enclosed.

The Committee considered the complaint received on 25/028/2013 against the said college and decided to send a reminder to Vice-Chancellor of Mysore University and a copy to DSERT for their comments and needful action. Accordingly, letters were addressed to the Vice Chancellor, Mysore University and

the Director, D.S.E.R.T on 01.06.2013.

Another reminder letter was sent to the Vice Chancellor, Mysore University on

21.12.2013

The University has replied to the letter on 06.01.2014 which is as under ;


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

179

‘The Committee visited the Shri Kaginele Mahsamsthana Kanakaguru Peeta College

of Education, Mysore on 11.10.2013;

The Committee brought to the notice, allegations submitted by NCTE by Dr.Sobhana

and Shri. Humayun Rasheed

The allegations pertaining to (a) appointment of Principal violating NCTE norms (b)

non payment of salary and monetary benefits as per NCTE norms.

The Committee verified the records/documents made available and queried the

Principal.

The Committee made the following observations ;

a) As per the records provided, Smt. S. B. Uma Rajashekar, Principal does not

possess the required qualification as per NCTE norms. Further, she has not

been appointed through due process of selection nor the appointment has

been approved by University of Mysore.

b) With respect to non payment of salary and monetary benefits as per NCTE

norms to Shri.Humayun Rasheed , the college has produced a copy of the

High Court Judgment in which it is observed that the request of petitioners

as per the NCTE norms can be considered from 17.12.2012.

Dr.Shobhana has retired from service and the Principal has stated that her salary

and other monetary benefits have been settled , but the documents furnished in this

respect is not clear .As per the records provided, the last drawn salary of Dr.

Sobhana was Rs. 10,852/-(Oct ,2012).The college was admitted to Grant-in-aid on

17.12.2012 and Dr.Sobhana’s name is not found in the list of approved faculty.

In the meanwhile, Mr.Humayun Rasheed ,S/o. of late Muxharus Samad, 9th Cross,

Shivaji Road, N. R. Mohalla, Mysore – 570007 has filed a writ petition at the Hon’ble

High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in W.P.No. 3137/2014 (S-RES), where in SRC

, NCTE is the seventh respondent.

This office is in receipt of a notice dated 30.01.2014 from the Hon’ble High Court of

Karnataka, in W.P.No.3137/2014 where in

‘The Hon’ble High Court has directed to appear in Court in person or through an

advocate duly instructed or someone authorized by law to act for you in this case, at

10.30 a.m in the forenoon within 5 days of the service of this notice to show cause

why rule nisi should not be issued.’

The petitioner has prayed to stay the operation of the order Annexure-R dated 17.12.2012 Copy of the order from State of Karnataka represented by its Principal Secretary, recognizing the 4th respondent-Smt. Uma Rajashekar, as the principal of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

180

the institution in the interest of Justice and equity.

A letter is addressed to the advocate Mr. Dinesh Kumar on 01.03.2014 to defend

the case in the interest of SRC,NCTE .

The SRC in its 266th Meeting held on 02nd May, 2014 considered the complaint

received on 25/02/2013 and the findings of the inquiry conducted by the Committee

constituted by the Mysore University against the said college and also all the

relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice

under NCTE Act.

As per the decision of SRC Show Coues notice was issued the Institution on

26/05/2014. The Institution has submitted the reply on 19/06/2014

The Committee considered the matter, reply of the institution on the above

matter vide letter dated 19/06/2014, and also the relevant documents of the


• The institution has had more than 2 years time to take action on the complaint matter.

SRC can not go on extending the time-limit. The request for extension of time is rejected.

Based on the above points the committee decides to withdraw the recognition

of the B.Ed course run by the Sri Kaginele Mahasamstana Kanaka Gurupeetha

College of Education, Mysore, Karnataka from the academic year 2014-15, in

order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed, course, if any, to






SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any, after ensuring payments to all dues of faculty

and staff.

66) APS09054

B.Ed

Venkata Rathna

College of

Education,

Kurnool,

Venkata Rathna College of Education Kurnool District-518002, Andhra

Pradesh

Sri Shiridi Sainath Educational Society, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh has

submitted in the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition to

Venkata Rathna College of Education, No. 87/1364, Maruthi Nagar, Kallur, Kurnool

District-518002, Andhra Pradesh for B.Ed Course for one year duration under


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

181

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

section 14(1) of the NCTE Act. 1993 and received in the Southern Regional

Committee, NCTE on 08/10/2007.

The application was processed and recognition was granted for offering B.Ed course

with an annual intake of 100 students on 18/01/2008 at Venkata Rathna College of

Education, No. 87/1364, Maruthi Nagar, Kallur, Kurnool District-518002, Andhra

Pradesh.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 19/02/2013 stating as

follows:

“I humbly submit that I have already submitted a letter to Regional Director, SRC-NCTE, Bangalore, bearing No. 122483 Dt. 27/11/2012 and bearing No. 123138 Dt. 27/12/2012 in addition to the above letter. I am herewith enclosing a copy of the NCTE-Recognition dated 2008 of APS0 9054 of Venkata Ratna College of Education, Kurnool for your kind reference.

In addition I am herewith submit the photos of labs, library and class rooms of above building is purely utilized on rented basis till the new construction of building is made by the Shri Shridi Sainath Educational Society.

I request the honourable authorities to kindly permit us to use the present shifted building for running of Venkata Ratna College of Education (Doctor’s colony area) as per regulation stipulated during 2006. I am already enclosing an affidavit submitted for the construction of new building by the management.

May I request you sir to kindly issue necessary permission orders for the same, for which kind of act, I shall remain grateful to you”.

The SRC in its 250th meeting held on 11-13th August, 2013, considered the above

matter and decided to submit comparative statement for APS09054, APS06270 and

APS06268 in the meeting.

Accordingly, a comparative statement was prepared and placed before SRC in its

253rd meeting held on 30th Sept, 2013 and 1st Oct, 2013 and it has decided to

deferred to next meeting.

The SRC in its 254th meeting held on 25-27th Oct, 2013 considered the written representation of the institution vide letter dated 19/02/2013, all the relevant documents of the institution and decided and advised Southern Regional Office to collect inspection fee, there after to Cause Inspection of the New Premises for shifting. If the new building is on a different land, VT to be asked to collect land documents, building plan & building completion certificate and to verify the details at the time of inspection. Further, the Committee advised Southern Regional Office to complete the exercise before 30th Nov, 2013. Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed between 28th Nov – 2nd Dec, 2013.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

182

As per the direction of SRC, the inspection of the institution was conducted on 22.11.2013 and the VT report received in the office of SRC on 01/01/2014.

The SRC in its 259th meeting held on 17th-19th January 2014, considered the VT report, VCD, and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice Under NCTE Act for the following -

1. Certified copy of the Lease deed land documents from Govt. authority is not submitted. The institution has submitted lease deed documents not certified by the competent authority.

2. Building plan from authorized Govt. authority is not submitted.

3. Building completion certificate in the prescribed format from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted.

4. Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the purpose of educational institution is not submitted. Proceedings from the revenue divisional office not submitted.

5. The Affidavit in Rs.100/- stamp paper in the prescribed format with precise location of land details with Notary attestation is not submitted.

6. Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively from a Nationalised Bank is not submitted.

7. As per VT report, the size of the multipurpose hall is only 1000 sq.ft, which is less than the requirement of 2000 sq.ft. as per NCTE norms.

8. As per VT report, the building is still under construction (lease land), which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009. The total built up area is only 8807.06 sq.ft.

As per 8 (10) of regulations 2009, which reads:

“At the time of inspection, the building of the institution shall be


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

183

complete in the form of a permanent structure on the land possessed by the

institution in terms of sub-regulation (7) of Regulation 8, equipped with all

necessary amenities and fulfilling all such requirements as prescribed in the

norms and standards. The applicant institution shall produce the original

completion certificate issued by the competent Government Authority or local

body authority, approved building plan in proof of the completion of building

and built up area and other documents to the visiting team for verification. No

temporary structure or asbestos roofing shall be allowed in the institution,

even if it is in addition to the prescribed built up area”.

1. As per VT report, Furniture provided is inadequate and to be strengthened. 2. As per VT report, no qualified Principal is appointed by the college. 3. As per VT report, all the facilities provided to the college needs to be

strengthened. 4. As per VT report, separate faculty rooms are not available. 5. As per VT, other labs & physical Education needs to be strengthened. 6. AS per VT, Physical Education instructor is not available.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 11.02.2014. The

institution has submitted its written representation on 03.03.2014.

The Committee considered the matter, reply of the institution vide letter dated

03.03.2014 to the show cause notice issued, and also the relevant documents

of the institution and decided not to permit for shifting to the new building for

the following reasons:-

i). Land & Building are on private lease.

ii). Building plan is not approved by the competent authority.

iii). Building completion certificate is not in prescribed format.

iv). Validity of FDRs has expired.

Consideration of Complaint Cases: (Vol – 3)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

67) APS02244

B.Ed

Vinootan

Shikshana

Seva Samsthe

Rural College of

Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samsthe Rural College of Education, Koppal, Koppal

District-583231, Karnataka.

Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samsthe®, Alwandi, Koppal District had submitted an

application for B.Ed course of one year on 07.06.2007 for the grant recognition to

Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samsthe Rural College of Education, Koppal, Koppal

District-583231, Karnataka. The institution was granted recognition on order no.9215


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

184

Education,

Koppal,

Karnataka

KA

dated 09.02.2004 for offereing B.ED course with an annual intake of 100 students.

In the meantime, a letter is received by this office from the Registrar, Vijayanagara Sri

Krishnadevaraya University, Jnana Sagara Campus, Vinayaka Nagar, Cantonment,

Bellary-583105 on 24.04.2014 regarding status of Rajeev Gandhi B.Ed., College as per

records. The details of the letter is as under:

"Rajeev Gandhi Rural Education & Multipurpose Trust, Dadegal, Koppal

is running a B.Ed., College at Dadegal, Koppal District, Karnataka from

2006-07. On perusal of the reocrds submitted by the college, NCTE has

granted recognition to Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samsthe Rural College of

Education, Koppal-583231 for B.Ed., course(APS02244) from the academic

session 2004-05 vide letter No.FSRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2004-05/9215 dated

09.12.2004(encl 1). The same recognition letter and NCTE code is being

use by Rajeev Gandhi College of Education B.Ed., Dadegal, Koppal

(APS02244)(encl2-Letter head of the college). The trust has not submitted

any letter from NCTE regarding the transfer of the college. They have

submitted a letter obtained from Government of Karnataka(encl 3)

The name of Rajeev Gandhi Rural College of Education B.Ed., Dadegal,

Koppal, Karnataka is not found in the list of B.Ed., Colleges hosted on the

NCTE Website, but the name of Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samsthe Rural

College of Education, Koppal -583231(APS02244) is found on the website.

The matter has been reported by the LIC team sent by University to inspect

the college (encl 4)

Kindly inform the university about the status of the of Rajeev Gandhi

College of Education B.Ed., Dadegal, Koppal as per NCTE records, so as to

enable the university to take further action on the college".

The matter was placed before the SRC in its 267th meeting held on 12th-13th May 2014.

But the committee could not consider the matter.

In the mean time another letter is received by this office from the Registrar, Vijayanagara

Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Jnana Sagara Campus, Vinayaka Nagar, Cantonment,

Bellary-583105 on 15.05.2014 regarding recognition to Rajeev Gandhi College of

Education(B.Ed). The details of the letter is as under:

"NCTE has granted recongition to Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samsthe Rural

College of Education, Koppal, Koppal District-583231, Karnataka for B.Ed.,

Course from the academic session 2004-05 wide letter

No.FSRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2004-2005/9215, Dated 09.12.2004(College Code-

APS02244). Later with effect from 2006-07 academic session the institute was

transferred to Rajeev Gandhi Rural Education & Multipurpose trust, Koppal

which is running the institution the name of Rajeev Gandhi Rural Education

college of Education(B.Ed) at R.D.T.E. Building, Near Dadegal, Gadag Road,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

185

Koppal-583231. How ever on enquiry it is found that the transfer was effected

with out taking approval from NCTE. NCTE has not visited the location and has

not approved the building . The college of Education is being run in a building

where Diploma College, M.Com., NSW., & BSW Courses are also run by

another management. Presently the primesis is used by two trusts for different

courses.

The college was earlier affiliated to Gulbarga University, Gulbarga. After the

formation of Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Bellary, the college

got affiliation to Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University with effect from

2010-11 academic session.

Rajeev Gandhi Rural College of Education (B.Ed) at R.D.T.E. Building, Near

Dadegal, Gadag Road, Koppal- 583231 is being run with out any grant of

recognition from NCTE. This is a violation of NCTE rules and regulations. Hence

appropriate action may be taken in this regard."

In the meanwhile, a letter is received by this office from the President, R.G.R.E.M. Trust

(R) Koppal on 21.05.2014 regarding transfer of Gramina Shikshana Mahavidyalay B.Ed,

Koppal from Vinootan Shikshana Seva Samste Alwandi Taluk and District Koppal to

Rajiv Gandhi Rural Education and Multipurpose Trust(R), Koppal. The details of the

letter is as under:

"The Vinoothan Shikshan Seva Samste Alwandi is running Grameen

Shikshan Mahavidyalaya. B.Ed., Koppal since from 2004-2006. The said

organization(Samsthe) is resolved to handover the said colleges in favour of

Rajiv Gandhi Rural Education & Multipurpose Trust, Koppal. Due to Financial

and Administrative difficulties, Vinoothana Shikshana Seva Samsthe, Alwandi

has resolved the same in their Exeutive Body Committee vide resoultion No.2

dated 24.04.2006 to handover the same in the name of RajivGandhi Rural

Education & Multipurpose Trust. The copy of the said resolution is herewith

enclosed for the kind consideration of Hon'ble authority.

The instituton has humbly prayed to transfer the Grameena Shikshan

Mahavidyalaya B.Ed., Koppal in favour of Rajiv Gandhi Rural Education &

Multipurpose Trust, Koppal at the earliest.

I] Handed Over Institution

1. Vinoothana Shikshana Seva Samsthe, Alwandi, Koppal, Karnataka Rural College of Education, B.Ed., Koppal, APS0 No.2244.

II] Taken Over Institution

1. Rajiv Gandhi Rural Education & Multitpurpose Trust, Koppal, Karnataka Priyanka College of Education B.Ed., College, Koppal."


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

186

The Committee considered the matter, it is noticed that, this case was decided

in the 268th meeting held on 4-5th June, 2014 and advised Southern Regional

Office to pursue action accordingly.

Further, the Committee advised SRO to take additional action as follows:

i). Inform the University that Rajeev Gandhi Rural Education & Multipurpose

Trust has no valid recognition for the B.Ed Course.

ii). Issue Show Cause Notice to Rajeev Gandhi Rural Education &

Multipurpose College for Legal action against them.

68) APS02587

D.Ed

Rashmidar Teja

D.Ed College,

Karimnagar,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Rashmidhar Teja D.Ed College, Korutla, Karimnagar-505326, Andhra Pradesh.

The Pavithra Rao Educational Society, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh

is running Rashmidhar Teja College of Education, Korutla, Karimnagar District-

505326 Andhra Pradesh which has been granted recognition by SRC-NCTE has

submitted an application to start Elementary (D.Ed) course by deriving the benefit of

above said regulation on 03.02.2004.

The application for starting Rashmidhar Teja D.Ed College, Jagtiyal Revenue

Division, 1-1-251, Bheemunidubba New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar District-

505326, Andhra Pradesh was considered by SRC-NCTE under section 15 of NCTE

Act, 1993.

Accordingly the inspection of the institution was fixed 18th March, 2005 the same was intimated to the institution on 09.03.2005. Accordingly inspection of the institution was conducted on 18.05.2005

The report of inspection team and other documents furnished by the institution along with the application were considered by the Southern Regional Committee in its 95th meeting held on 2nd July, 2005 the Regional Committee observed that the institution has made satisfactory arrangements in respect of infrastructural and instructional facilities for starting D.Ed course and decided to permit the institution to start Elementary (D.Ed) course from the session 2005-06.

Accordingly, recognition order was issued to the institution on 04.08.2005.

Meantime a compliant has received through RTI on 01.08.2011. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 12.08.2011 and to know the veracity of the compliant the complainant to submit an affidavit of Rs. 100 Non judicial Stamp paper the complaint in brief is as follows:


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

187

1. As per F.SRC/NCTE/D.Ed/2005-2006/2190, date 04.08.2005 Code: APS02587 which has been granted recognition by SRC-NCTE to start Elementary (D.Ed) course by devouring benefit of above said regulation due to approved staff list of D.Ed. consisted my name S.No. 9. (It is enclosed along with aforesaid orders).

2. F.SRO/NCTE/2009-2010/12373, date 06.05.2009 according to Rashmidhar Teja Elementary Teacher Education, Korutla, Dist. Karimnagar D.Ed Course staff list of teaching consisted my name S.No.9.

3. Accordingly to F.SRO/NCTE/2009-2010/17904, date 03.03.2010 with reference to the above please find enclosed herewith the copy of approved staff list of Rashmidhar Teja Elementary Teacher Education, Koratla, Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh (APSO2587) for D.Ed course as per records available with us consisted my name S.No.9.

4. As per F.SRO/NCTE/RTI/AP27566 date 11.03.2011. it is to inform that the information available as per office records has been sent to you vide P.I.O letter, dated 03.03.2010. if you are not satisfied you may kindly visit this office for personal inspection of the file concerned with prior appointed.

Above item S.No. 04 only my name consist D.Ed. staff list S.No. 9 is authentic for recognition D.Ed course and to run the college for authentic. No other staff list is bogus and wrong. These are enclosed for your kind justification sir.

5. Rc.No.625/DED/D3/TE/SCERT/2006, dt. 28.02.2007 staff list is bogus and wrong. It is proofed this as per item S.No. 1 to 4 this wrong and bogus information has been submitted various concerned officer in the state. All these information accords to be present in your before when you are permitted to me.

6. F.APISRO/NCTE/2009-2010/15990, dated 07.10.2009 D.N. Srinivasappa, Regional Director (I/c) to Rashmidhar Teja College of Education, Korutla you may without any further delay return the original certificates to Sri G.V. Narayan Rao.

7. F.SRO/NCTE/2009-2010/15398, dated 28.08.2009 Sri D.N. Sreenivasappa under Secretary/ P.I.O National Council Teacher Education, Bangalore Addressed to correspondent that G.V. Narayan Rao regarding the faculty appointment in your institution and original certificates in deposited with your institution may be returned to him. Therefore you are instructed to send reply and return the original certificates to RTI applicant and under intimation to the under signed. If you fail to provide the information, appropriate action under the provision of R.T.I Act 2005 as well as under NCTE Act Rules and Regulation appropriate action shall be initiate against you.

“Prayer: return my original Certificates un-authorized kept with K.V. Hanmanth Rao, Correspondent at once.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

188

Conclusion: from January, 2005 till today not return of my original qualification certificates un-authorized kept with K.V. Hanmanth Rao, correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja College of Education, Korutla, Keeping we husband and wife mental agony, physical diabetes and B.P. due to my age 71 years wife age 66 years old age attacking old age diseases continuously stop recognition of APSO 2587.”

The institution has submitted reply on 29.09.2011 which is as follows:-

“Sir we have been running a B.Ed college since 2001. In addition to start D.Ed course we applied to your office. Your office team inspected this college in 2004 at that time Mr. Narayan Rao appeared before the team for the lectureship approval by that time his age was 2 months less to 60 years. He faced the interview and went away. He gave us only the Xerox copies of the certificates.

After long waiting, the A.P. colleges association has approached Hon’ble High Court for kind intervention and justice. The Hon’ble High Court issued suitable orders to verify and approvel lecturers list by personal verification duly obtaining fresh incumbent list.

Then SCERT asked us in 2007 once again to send the proposed staff list for the approval. Nine members proposed list was sent for approval. We didn’t send Mr. Narayan Rao name as he had crossed 65 years of his age.

Accordingly fresh list submitted to Director SCERT and we got the permission of D.Ed course on 28.02.2007 we started it in 2008 with the SCERT approved staff. In 2009 Mr. Narayan Rao came to college and asked for salary and certificates. We told him that his name was not sent and originals certificates were not given to college.

Since then he has been complaining to all the concerned and unconcerned departments repeatedly. Many enquiries by many departments were done and nothing was found against this college management so far. Even though he has been approaching for enquiries and intentionally he is wasting the valuable time of us and other departments.

I am surprised to see in your letters that Mr. Narayan Rao is the lecturer of this college and asking to return the certificates.

Sir, is it possible to become a lecturer in private D.Ed college without the SCERT approval. Therefore I request you to check up once again with your office records whether Mr. Narayan Rao name has been approved by SCERT. And no original Certificates were kept with this college office.Mr. Narayana Rao failed to submit the receipt of certificates submission in this college when he was asked bhy the enquiry officers.

Hence the issue of returning certificates doesn’t arise.

Copies of D.Ed staff list approved by SCERT submitted.”

In earlier, staff list the name Shri G.V. Narayana Rao, Lecturer has appeared, but the staff list is not approved by SCERT. A.P (at page 235).


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

189

The SRC in its 215th meeting held during 12th-13th December, 2011, considered the

written reply of the institution vide letter Dt.29.09.2011 and decided to inform the

Institution that SRC NCTE is not in possession of any certificates of Mr. Narayana Rao.

On 01-04-2014,a copy of the letter addressed to the institution vide letter Rc.No.75/D/TE/SCERT/2010 dated 11-03-2014 is received from the G.Gopal Reddy, Director, SCERT, which is as under:-

"The attention of the Correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja D.E.D college, Jagtiyal Revenue Division, 1.1.251, Bheemunidubba, New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar District-505326 is invited to the references 2nd read (Letter No. Nil dated: 15.02.2013 of the Correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja D.E.D College, Jagtiyal Revenue Division, 1.1.251, Bheemunidubba, New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar District-505326) and 3rd read (this office Proc. No.75/D/TE/SCERT/2010-1, Dated:13.03.2013). In it the staff selection committee has been constituted with the District Educational officer, Karimnagar and the Principal, Gove. DIET, Karimnagar as departmental officers and instructed to furnish the report of selections made, But, no report is received from the end of the selection committee till date. It seems that the said institution is being functioned since last academic year, in lack of complete faculty as per the NCTE Norms, 2009 and deviation of the terms and conditions prescribed by the Regional Director, NCTE, SRC, Bangalore in the reference 1st read (F.SRC/NCTE/D.Ed/2005-2006/2190. Dated 04.08.2005 of the Regional Director, NCTE, SRC, Bangalore).

Hence, the Correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja D.Ed College, Jagtiyal Revenue

Division, 1.1.251, Bheemunidubba, New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar District-

505326 is directed to explain the reason as to why the matter should not be brought

to the notice of the National Council of Teacher Education, Bangalore, for taking

further course of action.

The explanation should be reached to this office by 20.03.2014, without fail."

On 19-05-2014, a copy of the letter addressed to the institution

Rc.No.75/D/TE/SCERT/2010 dated 08/05/2014 is received from G.Gopal Reddy,

Director, SCERT, is as under:-

"The attention of the Correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja D.Ed.College, Jagtiyal

Revenue Division, 1.1.251, Bheemunidubba, New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar

District - 505326 is invited to the reference 7th read ( Staff Selection Report

of the Committee for complete faculty to the college concerned received by this

office on 29.03.2014). and he is informed that the staff so selected for full faculty to

the college concerned should be in terms of G.O. Ms. No.92 Education Department,

Dated:06.11.2007, but not in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 65 Education Department, Dated:

10.11.2013. The G.O.Ms. No. 65 Education Department, Dated 10.11.2013 is not

being under implementation, due to certain clarification is yet to be received from the

respective authorities. Hence the State Selection Report dated: 20.03.2014 is


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

190

herewith returned and the Correspondent concerned is directed to take necessary

immediate action, as per the orders issued in the reference 3rd read (This office

Proc.No. 75/D/TE/SCERT/2010-1, Dated: 13.03.2013) and 4th read (This office

Proc.No. 75/D/TE/SCERT/2010-2, Dated: 13.03.2013).

Further the Correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja D.Ed. College, Jagtiyal Revenue

Division, 1.1.251, Bheemunidubba, New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar District-

505326 is informed that the reply to this office show cause notice received in the

reference 6th read (Letter No. 103/RTETE/K/2013-2014, Dated:18.03.2014 of the

correspondent of the college concerned) is not satisfactory and the reply not

received by this office in stipulated period. Further the reply reveals that the

institution is not functioned with complete faculty, as per the conditions and norms of

the NCTE, SRC and as per the state government rules, in the academic year 2012-

2013. As such it is a question that, how the institution has managed to impart the

D.Ed. course througout the academic year 2012-2013.

The Correspondent, Rashmidhar Teja D.Ed. College, Jagtiyal Revenue Division,

1.1.251, Bheemunidubba, New Bus Stand, Korutla, Karimnagar District-505326 is

directed to show cause, as to why necessary action should not be taken for de-

affiliation of the institution as per rules in vogue.

The reply should be reached to this offic with one week, from the date of receipt of

this order."

The Committee considered the matter, report from Director SCERT, dated

11/03/2014 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to

serve Show Cause Notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• As per the report of Director SCERT, Hyderabad, the staff selection Committee has been constituted with the District Educational Officer, Karimnagar and the Principal, Govt. DIET. Karimnagar as departmental officers and instructed to furnish the reportof selectionsmade. But, no report is received from the end of the selection Committee till date. It seems that the said institution is being sanctioned since last academic year, in lack of complete faculty as per the NCTE norms 2009 and deviation of the terms andconditions prescribed by the Regional Director. NCTE, SRC, Bangalore.







recognition, based on the records available with no further notice


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

191

69) APS09429

B.Ed

Sri Sai Rural

Educational

Society,

Srikakulam,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Sri Sai Rural Education Society, Near R.T.C. complex, Srikakulam, Andhra

Pradesh.

Sri Sai Rural Education Society, Near R.T.C Complex, Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh

was granted recognition for B.Ed Course with an annual intake of 100 students on

27.03.2008.

A complaint has been received by this office on 16/06/2014 from students of S.S.R.

College of Education, Andhra Pradesh on 11.06.2014 against Sri Sai Rural

Education Society, Near R.T.C Complex, Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, regarding

the irregularities in the college.

The Complainant has stated as under:-

1. " We the previous and present students of S.S.R. College of Education

bring the following facts to your kind notice for immediate and necessary action. i.e. Two batches (2012-13 and 2013-14)students met at one place and decided to make a complaint regarding the failures of our College.

2. The S.S.R. College of Education is located at Near R.T.C Complex, Back side of District Court Srikakulam, as a proof of evidence herewith submitting the cover page of record showing the address of the institution. The S.S.R. College of education got recognition in the year 2011 by NCTE (SRC). The Management of the above said college is always looking after the financial matter but doesn't cate about the academic class work of the students. For year 50% students were failed due to lack of proper teaching staff. In the year2012-13 out of 100 student 50 to 60 students were failed.

3. Now the S.S.R. College of Education building is given lease to NRI Academy a leading corporate Junior collge in Andhra Pradesh all the room of the above said college is filled with the students of Junior college and Degree Student of S.S.R Degree College. We theStudents of S.S.R. College of Education have no rooms for conducting class work. From the starting of the year we did not face single class and the year came to end. We bring the matter to one of the professor of Dr. Br. Ambedkar University. He advice us to make complaint to NCTE. We believe NCTE and also request you to please make a careful enquiry regarding the matter. We alsorequest you to please withdraw the permission, to save the lives of coming students teachers.

4. We the students of S.S.R. College of Education are sorry to say that

we do not know how to write a lesson plan and how to teach

lesson. The Director of the above set college Sri Prathap Garu


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

192

advised the students not come to college and he also said the student the B.Ed.

classes are waste of time.

Therefore, we humbly request you to keep the above facts into consideration and

request you Sir/Madam make a careful enquiry regarding the matter and to withdraw

the recognition."

No documentary proof submitted along with the complaint.

The Committee considered the matter, noted that the coplainst is anonymous

but, with verifable (specific) allegations. Advised Southern Regional Office to

send the complaint to the affiliating University for verification, for appropriate

action by them and for necessary advice to SRC.

Consideration of Shifting Cases: (Vol – 3)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

70) APS03617

B.Ed

R.V.S College

of Education,

Dindigul,

Tamilnadu

TN

R.V.S. College of Education, RVS Nagar, Kulathur, P.Paratpatti, Dindigul-624005, Tamilnadu R.V.S. College of Education, RVS Nagar, Kulathur, P.Paratpatti, Dindigul-624005, Tamilnadu had submitted an application for B.Ed Course on 24.12.2004. The institution was granted recognition on 31.08.2006 with an annual intake of 100 students. The Directions of MHRD to re-inspect all the institutions granted recognition by SRC

in its 116th meeting as per the recommendation of Sri Sathyam Committee reports.

The inspection of the institution was carried out on 17.12.2008.

The VT report was considered by SRC in its 170th meeting held on 16th -17th

February 2009 and it has decided to issue Show Cause Notice. Accordingly, Show

Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 02.04.2009 for certain deficiencies.

The institution had submitted its reply on 18.05.2009.

The SRC in its 178th meeting held on 13th -14th July 2009 and SRC decided to issue

notice under NCTE Act. The notice was issued to the institution on 17.08.2009.

The institution has submitted written representation on 01.09.2009.

The SRC in its 183rd meeting held on 22nd September 2009 decided to seek

clarification. Accordingly a clarification letter was issued to the institution on

03.11.2009. The institution submitted its reply on 24.11.2009.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

193

The SRC in its 188th meeting held n 28th-29th January 2010 decided to call for

clarification. Accordingly, clarification letter was issued to the institution on

02.03.2010. The institution submitted its reply on 15.03.2010.

The SRC in its 190th meeting held on 29th-30th March 2010 considered the reply of

the institution and has decided to continue the recognition accorded to the institution.

Accordingly, continue recognition was issued to the institution on 18.05.2010.

The institution vide its letter dated.21.11.2013 and has stated that

“ We are presently running the B.Ed College at Dindigul, the following address.

RVS College of Education, RVS Nagar, N.Paraipatti Post, Karur Road, Dindigul-624 005.

Due to some administrative compulsions the college is being shifted to a new premises to the following address.

RVS College of Education RVS Nagar, RVS Mettu hostel, Kullathur Post, Karur Road, Dindigul-624005.

The new campus is situated very close to the existing building. The land where the new building is situated is in the name of RVS Educational Trust and the above building is owned by us. The building is constructed as per the NCTE norms and is having all infra structure facilities for running the B.Ed College.

We request you to kindly send all our future correspondence in the new

address mentioned above”.

The SRC in its 259th meeting held on 17th -19th January 2014, considered the matter,

letter from the institution dated 21-11-2013 and all relevant documents of the

institution and decided that:

1. Collect the Inspection fee of Rs. 50000/- first. 2. The institution is to be directed to submit the following within 21 days of the

receipt of the notice, Duly filled in Questionnaire along with all the necessary documents for land, building approval and completion certificate from a competent Govt. Engineer, FDRs, up-to-date non-encumbrance certificate and other relevant documents. All the documents to be fully analysed and to put up in April 2014 for all the 3 courses run by the institution Viz, D.T.Ed, B.Ed & M.Ed courses.

3. After collecting the inspection fee and all documents as mentioned above, to

arrange for causing inspection of the institution for shifting. 4. The institution has shifted to new premises without the prior permission of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

194

SRCNCTE, Bangalore. This is against 8 (11) of NCTE Regulations 2009, which reads as under:

“In case of change of premises, prior approval of the Regional

Committee concerned shall be necessary, which could be accorded

after due inspection of the institution at the new site. Application for

change of premises, in triplicate, in the specified format along with

other relevant documents shall be submitted by the Institution to the

Regional Office for prior approval of change of premises. The change

can be permitted to a site which, if applied initially, could have

qualified for establishment of an institution as per specified norms of

National Council for Teacher Education. The change shall be

displayed on website thereafter. The application for change of

premises shall be accompanied by a demand draft of Rs. 50,000 (or

as revised from time to time) of a Nationalised Bank drawn in favour

of the Member Secretary, National Council for Teacher Education and

payable at the city where the Regional Committee is located. The fee

may also be paid online at the bank designated by National Council

for Teacher Education”.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution on 05.03.2014. The institution has

submitted its written representation on 17.03.2014




• Building Completion Certificate is not in the prescribed format.

• Building Completion Certificate is not approved by competent authority,

• Inadequate teaching staff. In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to








(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

195

Consideration of Request for Withdrawal: (Vol – 3)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

71) APS06053

D.Ed

Smt. Arunadevi

Vasantarao

Patil Teacher

Training

Institute,

Belgaum,

Karnataka

KA

Smt. Arunadevi Vasantarao Patil Teacher Training Institute, Raibag-591317, Belgaum District, Karnataka Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Belgaum District, Karnataka has submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant of recognition to Smt. Arunadevi Vasantarao Patil Teacher Training Institute, Raibag-591317, Belgaum District, Karnataka for Elementary (D.Ed) course of two years duration with an annual intake of 50 (fifty) students granted on 24.05.2007. Now, the institution has submitted its written representation on 19.05.2014 stating as follows:-

“…Smt. Arunadevi Vasantarao Patil Teacher Training Institute (D.Ed) Kannada Medium for Women, Raibag, Belgaum District (APS06053) was started by our Management during the academic year 2007-08, the Diploma in Education (D.Ed). The management has decided to close the said course from the academic year 2014-15.

The Endowment Fund of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs. Five Lakhs only) deposited in Fixed deposit with Canara Bank, Branch-Gokak in the joint names of (1) The Secretary, Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Raibag and (2) The Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher Education, Bangalore, which is due for maturity payment on 06.08.2017. it is decided to encash the said deposit. So, you are kindly requested to sign the above said Fixed Deposit Receipt for Pre-Mature Encashment and discharge.”

The Committee considered the Institutions request for closure of D.Ed course


(APS06053) D.Ed course with effect from 2014-2015, in order to enable the

ongoing batch of students in D.Ed, course, if any, to complete their final year

course.





SRC NCTE, Bangalore. after ensuring settlement of all staff claims.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

196

72) APS07059

D.Ed

B M Sanikop

Teacher

Training

Institute,

Belgaum

District,

Karnataka

KA

B.M. Sanikop Teacher Training Institute D.Ed College,Itagi, Khanapur Taluk,

Belgaum District-591112, Karnataka

Southern Regional Committee, NCTE granted recognition to B.M. Sanikop Teacher

Training Institute, Itage, Khanapur Taluk, Belgaum District-591112, Karnataka for

Elementary(D.Ed) course of two years duration with an annual intake of offering 50

students and recognition was granted to the Institution on 23/08/2007.

Now, a letter dated 12/06/2014 is received by this office on 19/06/2014 from the Institution requesting to withdraw recognition of the D.Ed Course and return the FDR’s

“ Due to non available of students to admit for the D.Ed course in the academic year 2013-14, the management of the above institution decided to close the course of D.Ed from the academic year 2014-15. So we request you to permit the withdrawal of FDRs.”





course.






73) APS04735

D.Ed

Athani Vidya

Vardhaka

Samsthe D.Ed

College,

Belgaum,

Karnataka.

KA

Athani Vidya Vardhaka samasthe D.Ed College, Satti Road, Athni-591304, Belgaum District, Karnataka.

SRC, NCTE was granted recognition to Athani Vidya Vardhaka samasthe D.Ed College, Satti Road, Athni-591304, Belgaum District, Karnataka.for Elementary(D.Ed) course of two years duration with an annual intake of offering 50 students and recognition was granted to the Institution on 12/04/2007.

A letter dated 24/05/2014 is received by this office on 28/05/2014 from the Institution requesting to withdraw recognition of the D.Ed Course.

“ Due to non available of students for the D.Ed course in the academic year 2013-14, the management of the above institution decided to close the course of D.Ed from the academic year 2014-15, and decided to withdraw recognition for the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

197

following reasons:-

In the year 2012-13 no admission of students.

In the academic year 2013-2014 only for 16 students are admitted. So for NCTE norms is annual intake of 50

Teaching Staff are not available in our Institution.

In view of above reasons we are here by requesting you to transfer from 16 students who were admitted for the academic year 2013-2014 to be transfer to any other colleges.





course.





SRC NCTE, Bangalore. If any, after ensuring settlement of all staff claims.

74) APS07948

D.Ed

Shri. Bharatesh

Vidya Mandal,

Belgaum,

Karnataka.

KA

Shri Bharatesh Vidya Mandal, Belgaum District, Karnataka has submitted an

application to the SRC, NCTE for grant of recognition to Bharatesh Teacher

Training Institute, Bellad-Bagewadi-591305, Hukkeri Taluk, Belguam District,

Karnataka for Elementary (D.Ed) course of two years duration with an annual

intake of 50 Students and recognition was granted to the Institution on

01/10/2007.

A letter dated 06/06/2014 is received by this office on 12/06/2014 from the Institution requesting to withdraw recognition of the D.Ed Course.

“ Due to non available of students for the D.Ed course in the academic year 2013-14,(Only 7 students are admitted) the management of the above institution decided to close the course of D.Ed from the academic year 2014-15, and decided to withdraw recognition.

We are here by requesting you to transfer from 7 students who were admitted for the academic year 2013-2014 to be transfer to, C.S. Tubachi Education Society, Hukkeri, Belgaum District, Karnataka.”

Note of SRO: the status of the C S Tubachi Education Society is as follows(APS01584):


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

198

C S Tubachi Education Society is running D.Ed college in the name and style of V N Heddur Shetti D.Ed college, Hukkeri – 591309, Belgum District, Karnataka which was granted recognition from NCTE on 30.11.2004 with a condition to shift to its own premises within three years from the date of recognition.

A Shifting Proposal was received from the institution and a letter was sent to the institution on 09.06.2009 with request to submit the shifting documents.

Till date the institution has not submitted any reply even after laps of five years.

The above matter is placed before SRC for decision and direction.





course.






Consideration of Other Cases: (Vol – 3)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

75) APS08574

B.Ed

Srinivasa

Educational

Society, Ranga

Reddy, Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Srinivasa Educational Society, Sy. no. 209, Sheriguda Village, Ibrahimapatnam

Mandal, H.M.D.A. Rangareddy District, Pin-501510 Andhra Pradesh.

Srinivasa Educational Society, Sy. no. 209, Sheriguda Village, Ibrahimapatnam

Mandal, H.M.D.A. Rangareddy District, Pin-501510 Andhra Pradesh had submitted

an application to the Sourthern Regional Committee of NCTE for grant recognition to

Sri Chakra College Education Sy. no. 209, Sheriguda Village, Ibrahimpatnam

Mandal, H.D.M. A. Rangareddy, Andhra Pradesh for (B.Ed) course of one years

duration with an annual intake of 100 students.

Recognition was granted to Sri Chakra College Education Sy.no.209, Sheriguda,

Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, H.D.M. A. Rangareddy, Andhra Pradesh vide

F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed/2012 dated 03/09/2012 for conducting (B.Ed) course of one


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

199

years duration with an annual intake of 100 students.

A letter dated 08.04.2014 received from the Principal Sri Chakra College of

Education, Sheriguda, IBPTM, Rangareddy District, HMDA, Andhra Pradesh is

received by this office on 07.05.2014 stating that this college has got approved the

Teaching staff i.e.one Principal and six Lectures (1+6) through the selection

committee held at Osmania University for the year 2012-2013 and are glad to submit

that the same faculty continued for this academic year 2013-2014 also. The list of

working in this institution is herewith enclosed for your kind perusal.

Staff list is not approved by the affiliating University.




• Staff list submitted by the Institution is not as per NCTE norms; and, it is not approved by the affiliating body.









Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

76) APS01086

D.Ed

Fazfari Teacher

Training

Institute,

Malappuram,

Kerala

KL

Fazfari Teacher Training Institute, M.A.F.M. Orphage and Arabic College

Committee, Padinhattummuri,Malappuram District, Kerala.

Fazfari Teacher Training Institute, M.A.F.M. Orphanage and Arabic College

Committee, Padinhattummuri, Malappuram District, Kerala was granted recognition

for Elementary course vide order- F.KL/ELE/N/28/SRO/NCTE/2004-2005/4569

dated 5/7/2004 from the academic session 2004-2005 with an annual intake of 50

students with a condition to shift to its own premises within three years from the

date of recognition(in case the course is started in temporary premises)

From the records it is observed that a letter seeking information on shifting of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

200

premises from temporary to permanent building on completion of 3 years from the

date of recognition vide order F.SRO/NCTE/2007-08/8428 dated 21/8/2007 was

issued to the institution.

A draft letter addressed to the institution for shifting the institution to the permanent

building/location is available with file. The letter is not dispatched.

Further, there is no record regarding shifting of the institution to the permanent

building/ location

1. A letter has been received on 17.12.12 from the manager, Fazfari TTI, Padinhattummuri, Malappuram, Kerala regarding the request for permission to withdraw the interests of Endowment and Reserve Funds.

2. Another letter has been received on 3.1.2013 from the manager, Fazfari TTI, Padinhattummuri, Malappuram, Kerala regarding for permission letter to withdraw the interests of Fixed Deposits.

The SRC in its 241st meeting held on 29th – 30th March 2013 considered the matter and letter from the institution vide letter dated 17-12-2012 & 03-01-2013, and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 16/05/2013.The

institution has submitted a written representation on 23/05/2013.

The SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th – 22nd June, 2013 considered the matter

and decided to inform the institution to send the copy of their detailed report dated

10/09/2007 and resubmit in the next meeting.

Since, the institution has already submitted a copy of the letter dated 10/09/2007

which is resubmitted to this office on 23/05/2013 regarding detailed report of shifting

of premises from temporary to permanent building.

The SRC in its 253rd meeting held on 30th September & 01st vOctober 2013

considered the matter, institutions letter dated 10/09/2007, 23/05/2013 and all

relevant documents and decided to cause inspection at the New Premises under

NCTE Act, to examine infrastructural and instructional facilities provided, whether

the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the existing


by the institution, as per the norms. Inspection fee of Rs. 50000/- to be collected

within 4 weeks before causing inspection, V.T. should be asked to check on the

deficiencies in particular.

As per the decision of SRC, the inspection fee letter was sent to the institution on

11.11.2013, The institution has submitted a reply on 13.11.2013 along with DD of

Rs. 50000/-

The inspection was scheduled during 8th and 11th January 2014 and the same was


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

201

informed to the institution .

Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was carried out on 09.01.2014

1. The Southern Regional Committee in its 259th meeting held on 17-19th Jan,

2014 duly considered VT report, VCD of institution and all the relevant

documents of the institution and deficiencies still persist as under:

2. Total built up area shown is only 883 sq.mtrs, which is less than the requirement of 1500 sq.mtrs or 16000 sq.ft. as per NCTE norms 2009.

3. The institution has not submitted Building completion certificate in a prescribed format approved by Govt. Engineer.

4. Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the purpose of educational institution is not submitted. Proceedings from the revenue divisional office not submitted.

5. U-to-date non-encumbrance certificate issued by the competent authority is not submitted.

6. Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund respectively from a Nationalised Bank is not submitted.

7. The staff list submitted by the institution is not in accordance with 2009 regulations.

8. Staff qualification given is defective. 9. Staff list submitted is not approved by the affiliating body.



Regulations 2009, to reject the application of the institution for recognition of

D.Ed course.

The Committee decided to reject the application instead of withdrawal of recognition.

The matter is kept for reconsideration of the Committee.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 260th meeting held on 29th – 31st

January,2014 ,considered the matter, decided to modify the decision from reject

(taken in 259th SRC meeting) to withdrawal of recognition from the academic year

2014-15. Accordingly, Southern regional is advised to modify the decision of

rejection to withdrawal of recognition and send the withdrawal of recognition letter to

the institution.

As per the decision of SRC , a withdrawal order was issued to the institution

on 19.02.2014.A corrigendum was issued on 28.02.2014.

On 28.04.2014, a letter from Shri.V.M.Kurian , advocate was received by this office ,

requesting for the statement of facts with respect to W.P.(C).No. 8573 of 2014 filed


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

202

by Fazfari Teachers Training Institute in the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at

Ernakulam.A copy of the affidavit filed by the institution was enclosed.

A letter was addressed to the Shri. V.M.Kurian, advocate on 07.05.2014 requesting

him to file the statement of objections for dismissal of the writ petition.

Now, on 30.06.2014, a letter dated 09.06.2014 is received from the Special

Secretary to Government ,General Education (D) Department,Thiruvananthapuram

with a copy of the interim order of the High court in W.P.No. 8573 of

2014.SRC,NCTE is the first respondent ,State of Kerala is the second respondent,

The Director,SCERT is the third respondent.

The Hon’ble High Court order dated 11.04.2014 in W.P.No. 8573/2014 filed by the

institution in Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam is as under ;

‘Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that In the circumstances stated in the

affidavit filed along with the W.P© the High court be pleased to stay the operation of

the exhibit-7 order pending final disposal of writ petition.

This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit

filed in support of WP(C ) and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Rajesh

Vijayendran, advocate for the petitioner, and of the Standing Counsel for R1

(SRC,NCTE),Government pleader for R2, the Court passed the following ;

Heard learned Counsel on both sides. In view of the admitted fact that before

the recognition granted to the petitioner Teacher Training Institute was withdrawn, a

show cause notice setting out the grounds for such withdrawal was without notice to

the petitioner. I am of the opinion that Ext.7 order is liable to be stayed. There will

accordingly be an interim order as prayed for.

The Committee considered the matter, decided and advised Southern

Regional Office to ask our Lawyer to get the ‘stay’ vacated. Southern Regional

Committee had given show cause notice earlier to the institution. Regulation

7.12 rules out any further opportunity to Institutions for removal of

deficiencies after VT Inspection.

77) APS02091

B.Ed

Vivekananda

College of

Education,

Bangalore,

Karnataka

KA

Vivekananda College of Education, Dr. Raj Kumar Road, 2nd Stage, Rajajinagar,

Bangalore-560055, Karnataka.

Janatha Education Society’s Vivekananda College of Education, Dr. Raj Kumar Road, 2nd Stage, Rajajinagar, Bangalore-560055, Karnataka was granted recognition for B.Ed. course vide this office Order No.F.SRO/NCTE/B.Ed./2004-2005/8671 dated 25.11.2004 with a condition to shift to its own premises within 3 years.The institution vide letter dated 8.12.2011 had requested for renewal of Fixed Deposit Receipts which expired on 17.6.2011.

On going through the file, it was seen that the institution was granted recognition in


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

203

leased premises. From the Visiting team report dated 9.10.2004, it was observed that the management was offering MBA, P.G. Courses, Pharmacy College, Law College, Degree Colleges, Schools etc. The institution is also sharing the Labs. with some other College. As per MIS, the institution is not running any other course recognized with NCTE. In order to ascertain the maintenance of extant, NCTE regulations, norms and standards of 2009 by the institution, a proposal was placed before SRC to get the institution inspected under Section 17 of NCTE Act. The SRC in its 216th meeting of SRC held on 11th -12th January, 2012 considered the VT and VCD of the institution and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Notice was issued to the institution on14.3.2012 for the following deficiencies:- 1. The institution was given recognition on 25.11.2004 in a temporary leased

premises with a specific condition that the institution should move to a permanent premise within a period of three years i.e., on or before 25.11.2007. Even after a lapse of time period of 7 years & 02 months, the management has yet to start the construction of its own building/move to its own building.

2. As per VT report, the institution is functioning in a multistoried building; the third floor is earmarked for B.Ed programme. The management is also offering MBA, P.G. courses, Pharmacy College, Law College, Degree College & Higher schools in the same building. The labs are being shared with other colleges. This is against and gross violation of the NCTE norms.

The institution vide its letter dated 30.3.2012 submitted its written representation The SRC in its 221st meeting held on 19th –20th April 2012 considered the reply of the institution dated 30.03.2102 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act and accordingly, a Final Show Cause Notice was issued to the institution on 21.05.2012 for the following deficiencies:- 1. The institution was given recognition on 25.11.2004 in a temporary leased

premises with a specific condition that the institution should move to a permanent premise within a period of three years i.e., on or before 25.11.2007. Even after a lapse of time period of 7 years & 04 months, the management has yet to start the construction of its own building/move to its own building. The institution stated that a new building was constructed in the leased land from Govt of Karnataka, which was not brought to the notice of SRC.NCTE till date.

2. Approved blue print of the building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

3. Original building competion certificate from competent Govt. authorized engineer is not submitted.

4. Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the purpose of educational institution only is not submitted. Proceedings of Revenue Divisional Officer not submitted for conversion of land from agricultural to educational purposes.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

204

5. Original Affidavit in the prescribed form on Rs. 100/- stamp paper duly attested by oath Commissioner or notary public, is not submitted.

6. Staff details duly approved by the affiliating body is not submitted. The institution submitted its representation on 12.06.2012.

The SRC in its 236th meeting held on 16th –17th December 2012,considered the reply of the institution vide letter dated 12.06.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Final show cause notice was issued on 05.02.2013. The institution

has submitted its written representation on 25.02.2013

The SRC in its 242nd meeting held on 14th - 16th April 2013 considered the written



• As seen from building plan,Multi purpose hall is having 1294.83 Sq.ft. which is less as per NCTE norms. As per NCTE regulations, 2009 institution must have Multi purpose hall of size of 2000 Sq.ft.

• As seen from the seal of the building plan, Ground Floor is meant for car parking only and shall not convert for any other purpose. From the building plan it is observed that Ground Floor is having 255.16 Sq.mts. Hence,the remaining 5 floors with built up area of 255.16*5=1,275.8 Sq.mts is less as per NCTE norms. As per NCTE regulations 2009, the instittuion should have 1500 Sq.mts for offering B.Ed course.

• As per BCC,the total area mentioned under roofing is 1530.96 Sq.mts. The column under area is left blank.

• BCC is approved by Asst.Director (Town Planning) West Zone,BBMP. BCC should be approved by the Government Engineer.

• Staff list approved by Bangalore University is not Submitted.


B.Ed course run by Vivekananda College of Education, Dr. Raj Kumar Road, 2nd

Stage, Rajajinagar, Bangalore-560055, Karnataka, from the academic year 2013-

14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed course, if any, to


It was made clear that the institution is debarred from making any further

admissionsubsequent to the date of issue of this order. The Affiliating body /

Examining board / body be informed accordingly. Further decided to return

Endowment funds and Reserve fund deposited with SRC NCTE, Bangalore, if any.

As per the decision of SRC, the recognition of the institution was withdrawn vide

order no. F.No.APS02091/B.Ed/KA.2013-14/51731 dated 17.05.2013.

In the Meantime the institution had filed an appeal under Section 18 of NCTE Act,

before the appellate Authority, NCTE, New Delhi against the With drawl order of


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

205

SRC.

The appellate authority vide order No.F.No.89- 476/2013/Appeal/14th Meeting-2013 dated 30.10.2013 has made the following observations :-

“The Council noted that the appellate institution was granted recognition for B.Ed course on 25.11.2004 with a condition to shift to its own premises within 3 years. Committee noted that V.T, report wich is being referred to in the show cause notice dated 05.02.2013 is not available on SRC file. The withdrawal order dated 17.05.2013 is mainly on grounds of the inadequacy of multipurpose hall. Total built up area combined together on all the floors after excluding ground floor, approval of B.C.C. by the Assistant director( Town Planning) and non submission of staff list approval. Committee noted that the appellant has highlighted earlier portion in the building plan which was approved in November 2008 to indicate that size of multipurpose hall is adequate and that parking facilities is shifting to outside place and ground floor is permitted to be used as class room. If this has been the position it should have been reflected in the Visiting Team report. The approval of Bangalore University on the appointment of principal and six other members of faculty is dated 17-07-2013 whereas the SCN was issued to the appellant institution an 05-02-2013 and withdrawal order is dated 17-05-2013. Committee concluded that post withdrawal developments cannot be taken as valid proof of having complied with the deficiencies pointed out in the show cause notice. In the above circumstances, the Council concluded that SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the SRC confirmed.

After perusal of the documents, Memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on record and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the SRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of SRC confirmed.

The Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against”

The SRC in its 255th meeting held on 13-15 November 2013, considered the appellate authority order and decided that committee has noted the matter.

In the meantime, a W.P.No.51932/2013 (EDN-REG-P) filed by Janatha Education Society Vivekananda College Premises, Dr.Rajkumar Road, Rajajinagar II stage, Bangalore-560055 v/s NCTE and others in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore.

This office has received a court notice dated 22.11.2013 in W.P.No.51932/2013 which is as under:-

“to appear before the court in person or through advocate duly instructed or through some one authorized by law to act for you in this case, at 10

In the meantime, a W.P.No.51932/2013 (EDN-REG-P) filed by Janatha Education Society Vivekananda College Premises, Dr.Rajkumar Road, Rajajinagar II stage, Bangalore-560055 v/s NCTE and others in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka,


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

206

Bangalore.

This office has received a court notice dated 22.11.2013 in W.P.No.51932/2013 which is as under:-

“to appear before the court in person or through advocate duly instructed or through some one authorized by law to act for you in this case, at 10.30 a.m. in the forenoon within 5 days of the service of this notice to show cause why rule nisi should not be issued.

If you fail so to appear on the said date or an subsequent date to which the matter may be posted as directed by the court, without any further notice, the petition will be dealt with, heard and decided on merits in your absence.

Interim Order

Pending issue of Rule nisi in the aforesaid writ petition it is hereby ordered by this court on Friday The 22nd Day of November 2013

By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy as follows:

Emergent notice regarding rule.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is also permitted to serve the standing counsel for the respondent. Stay of Annexures ‘U’ and ‘V’ till the next date of hearing.

The petitioner has prayed

(i) To quash the withdrawal order bearing F.No.2091/B.Ed/KA/2013-14/51731 dated 17.05.2013 passed by the 2nd respondent(NCTE, Bangalore)

(ii) To quash the order bearing No.ACA-3/A4/B.Ed/M.Ed/Sam.na/2013-14 dated 29.10.2013 passed by the 3rd respondent(the Registrar, Bangalore University)

(iii) To quash the order F.No.89-47/2013 Appeal/14th Meeting-2013 dated 30.10.2013 passed by the 4th respondent.

(iv) Grant such other relief or reliefs. Issue such other direction or directions or pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems necessary under the facts and circumstances of the above case in the interest of justice and equity.

A letter was addressed to the Member Secretary, NCTE (HQ) on 28.11.2013 with a request for guidance in the matter.

The SRC-NCTE has received an interim court order in W.P.No.51932/2013 from the Honb’e High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore on 09.06.2014. The court order stating as follows:-

Order on IA,4/14 : Notwithstanding that there is an order of stay of withdrawal of recognition and a direction to the Central Admission Cell to send the list of names, also having been complied with, the University refuses to approve the admissions made on the ground that since the recognition has been


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

207

withdrawn, affiliation has not been renewed. This shall not be a ground on which the university shall refuse approval of admissions. Subject to the result of the petition and also subject to the students of the petitioner-institution complying with all the academic eligibility criteria. The admission of the students shall be approved.

The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a further direction that since the examinations are schedules to be held on 02.06.2014, the University also be directed to furnish the hall tickets to the examination and thereby avoid a further proceedings for such a direction.

The learned counsel for the respondent would submitthat if once admissions are approved and if the eligibility criteria is satisfied, it would follow that the University would also issue the hall tickets. All this would be subject to the result of the writ petition.

IA.4/2014 is allowed accordingly.”

The Committee considered the matter, Hon’ble High Court , Karnataka, order

dated 03.06.2014, decided and advised Southern Regional Office that, if not

already done, ask our Lawyer to get the ‘stay’ vacated. Also, the University is

to be informed.

Consideration of Complaint Cases: (Vol – 4)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

78) APS00248

APS04500

B.Ed

B.Ed-AI

Rabindranath

Tagore College

of Education,

Ranga Reddy,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Rabindranath Tagore College of Education,Chevella Revenue Division,

Kummera Village Rangareddy - 501 503 Andhra Pradesh

Rabindranath Tagore Educational Society had submitted an application for grant of

recognition to B.Ed Course in the name and style of Rabindranath Tagore College

of Education,Chevella Revenue Division, Kummera Village Rangareddy - 501 503

Andhra Pradesh on 13.12.2001.

The institution was granted recognition for the conduct of B.Ed course vide this office

order dated 03.07.2003 with a condition to shift to its own premises within three year

s from the date of recognition ( in case the course is started in rented premises).

The matter of shifting of premises as per Regulations 2002 to permanent structure

within three years from the date of issue of recognition was placed in 178th meeting

of SRC held on 13th – 147th July, 2010 where in the committee observed from the

records of the institutions were accorded recognition in the rented premises and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

208

they had not yet shifted to permanent premises/building. In view of non shifting of

colleges to permanent building the committee decided to issue show cause notice

under section 17 of NCTE Act and obtain shifting fees and other document for

causing inspection for shifting.

As per the direction of Regional Committee , a Show Cause Notice was issued with

request to submit following documents within 21 days of receipt of the letter.

• Demand Draft of Rs.40000/- towards inspection fee in favour of “The Member Secretary, NCTE” payable at Bangalore should be submitted.

• Land document of new building/location for having own land in the name of the Institution/Society/Trust.

• Building plan of the new building duly approved by the Government authority.

• Building Completion Certificate from the Government authority in the Prescribed format ( Format enclosed )

• Land usage Certificate from the concerned Government authorities stating that the land is exclusively permitted / sanctioned for educational Purposes only should be submitted.

• Encumbrance Certificate from the competent Government should be submitted.

• Fixed Deposits Receipts of Rs. 5 Lakhs Kept in JOINT ACCOUNT with SRC in Nationalized Bank for a period of 5 years towards Endowment fund in ORIGINAL should be submitted.

• Fixed Deposits Receipts of Rs. 3 Lakhs Kept in JOINT ACCOUNT with SRC in Nationalized Bank for a period of 5 years towards Reserve funds in ORIGINAL should be submitted.

• Certificate of registration / Bye-law of the Society/Trust should be submitted.

• The affidavit in Rs. 100/- stamp paper In the prescribed format with Notary attestation should be submitted regarding land and building.

As per the records in the file and as per the statement enclosed the institution has

not submitted reply even after lapse of more than one year.

The Southern Regional committee in its 201st meeting held on 22nd – 23rd February

2011 considered the matter and decided to Withdraw the recognition for the above

17 institutions in Andhra Pradesh as all the above 17 institutions in Andhra Pradesh

as all the above 17

institutions which were given conditional recognition in temporary premises failed to

shift to permanent premises within the prescribed time limit of three years as per the

norms, and also they had failed to respond to Show cause Notices issued by SRC,

NCTE long back during 2008-2009.

Accordingly the application of Sri Rabindranath Tagore College of Education, Chevella Revenue Division, Kummera Village Rangareddy - 501 503 Andhra


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

209

Pradesh was rejected vide order 07.04.2011. The institution preferred an appeal before the NCTE Hqrs., where in NCTE Hqrs vide order dated 03.08.2011 has directed as under :

“After perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, VT report and after considering oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the council reached the conclusion that there was adequate ground to accept the appeal and reverse the SRC’s order dated 07.04.2011 with a direction to the conduct an inspection of the institution and take appropriate action thereafter. Accordingly, the appeal is accepted and the order of the SRC dated 07.04.2011 is reversed”.

The SRC in its 210th Meeting held 22nd – 23rd August 2012, on considering the Appellate authority order dt.03.08.2011 and all the relevant documents of the institution , decided to cause inspection at the premises under Section 17 of NCTE Act. The institution was directed to submit all the necessary documents for land, building approval and completion certificate from a competent Govt. Engineer and other relevant documents along with Demand Draft of Rs.40,000/- inspection fee towards the B.Ed course in favour of “The Member Secretary, NCTE” payable at Bangalore within 30 days of the receipt of the notice

Accordingly, a letter was issued to the institution informing them to submit Rs. 40,000/- towards inspection fees. And the institution submitted its reply with the DD of Rs. 40000/-. (NCTE Receipt no. 16502 dated 06.01.2012).

The SRC 233rd Meeting held on 26th – 28th September 2012, considered the written reply and other relevant documents submitted by the institution and decided to cause Shifting inspection at the new premises and to ascertain availability of infrastructural and instructional facilities Under NCTE Act.

As per the direction of SRC, the inspection of the institution was conducted on 16.11.2011 and the VT Report was received in the office of SRC on 19.11.2012.

The SRC in its 236th meeting held on 16th-17th December 2012,considered the VT report, VCD and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under NCTE Act, for the following:

• Original certified copy of the land documents from Govt. authority is not submitted.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

210

• In the building plan submitted, plinth area is not mentioned.

• Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted.

• Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted.

• Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted.

• Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank in joint account and in favour of Society/college/institution name is not given.

• As per VT report, Science lab, Psychology lab , Educational Technology lab & other labs needs to be strengthened.

• As per VT report, multipurpose hall size is only 1432 sq.ft, which is less than the requirement of 2000 sq.ft. as per NCTE norms of 2009.

• As per VT report, only 842 related to education are available in the library, which is inadequate as per NCTE norms.

• As per VT report, science lab is being shared with attached School/college, which is not permissible as per NCTE norms.

• As per VT report, in the questioner, the institution is having two unit of B.Ed and one unit of D.Ed.

• As per VT report, two courses are running in the proposed building and the built up area in VT report is 16332 sq,ft is less than regulation for both B.Ed and D.Ed courses.

• Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 05.02.2013 and reposted on 19.02.2013. The institution submitted its written representation on 18.03.2013.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 244th Meeting held on 9th – 11th May,2013, considered the written reply of the institution on the above matter and also the relevant documents of the institution and decided to withdraw recognition for the following reasons:-

7. Approved building plan issued by competent civil authority is not submitted.

8. Original building completion certificate from competent Govt. engineer is not submitted. The institution has submitted the BCC approved by Private Engineer not by Govt. Engineer, which is not permissible as per NCTE regulations 2009.

9. Original FDRs of Rs. 5 & 3 lacs towards endowment and reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank in joint account is not submitted.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

211

Bassed on the above points the committee decided to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed (APS00248), B.Ed-Al (APS04500) D.Ed (APS02531) courses run by the Rabindranath Tagore College of Education, Chevella Revenue Division, Kummera Village Rangareddy – 501 503, Andhra Pradesh from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in B.Ed (APS00248), B.Ed – Al (APS04500) & D.Ed (APS02531) courses, if any, to complete their course.

Accordingly, as per the decision of SRC, a withdrawal order of recognition was issued to the institution vide F.No. APS0248/B.Ed/AP/2013-14/52165 on 7-06-20103.

The Institution has filed court case in the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in WPMP No. 20366 of 2013 in WP No. 16789 of 2013 dated 14-06-2013.

The petitioner has prayed for suspension of proceedings issued by the 1st respondent (SRC, NCTE) in favour of second petitioner institution for B.Ed,B.Ed-A.I and D.Ed courses during the 244th meeting of SRC, pending disposal of W.P.No. 16789 of 2013 on the file of the High Court.

The Hon’ble Court, while directing issue of notice to the respondents herein to show cause as to why this application should not be complied with made the following order .(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be receipt of notice in the case)

ORDER

“Interim Suspension”.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 248th meeting held on 13-15th July, 2013 considered the Hon’ble High Court “Interim Suspension” dt. 14-06-2013 and decided that the Lawyer to be asked to file an appeal and to get the stay vacated. A court notice dated 14.06.2013 from the Hon’ble High court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in W.P.No. 16789 of 2013 seeking personal appearance or by advocate on 16th July, 2013 is received by this office on 01.07.2013. The decision of SRC was intimated to the advocate on 22.08.2013 to file an appeal and get the stay vacated.

In response to this office letter dated 22.08.2013 the advocate has submitted a reply dated 26th Aug, 2013 stating that the r stay vacate petition has been filed to get stay vacated and Stay Vacate petition number is W.V.M.P. no. 1847 of 2013. Since the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

212

stay vacate petition is filed, there is no need to file any separate appeal to get stay vacated.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 252nd meeting held on 13th -14th September, 2013 considered the matter; Advocate reply dated 26th August, 2013 and decided to pursue the ‘Stay-vacate’ petition and to await Hon’ble Court Order.

The decision of 252nd meeting of SRC was conveyed to Shri.Ramakanth Reddy, advocate on vide this office letter F.SRO/APS00248-b.Ed/NCTE/2012-13/54357 dated 15.10.2013

In the meanwhile, on 26.05.2014 ,a complaint has been received from the B.Ed and D.Ed students of Rabindranath Tagore College of Education, Rangareddy District, Andhra Pradesh .Their grievance is as under ;

‘We the students from Rabindranath Tagore College of Education located at Kummera village , Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, herewith we are submitting complaint against the college ,below issues ;

1. Qualified teaching staff are not available physically for B.Ed and D.Ed course.

2. Library books are not available as per the course curriculum, whatever books are

available are dumped with second books.

3. Drinking water not available. 4. Collecting fees from more than prescribed fees and not issuing receipts for

paid fees. 5. Scholarships are not providing to the students. 6. Teaching classes and academic activities are nil. 7. Physical director or instructor not available. 8. Laboratories are poor & academic activities are not conducting as per University & SCERT prescribed schedule.

9. Mentally disappointing students.

Herewith, we are requesting your authorities, kindly do the surprise inspection automatically everything will be known to you, If your authorities issued prior intimation they will provide all the things on the day only, after completion of inspection everything will be gone so in this regard kindly take serious against the said college, justify the education system. It is to bring to your kind notice that every year this management will fill up admission on their own, hence it belongs to Minority , but we came to know that all the Majority Minority Members and certificates are bogus. Due to improper activity NCTE cancelled this college MED Course also ,hence keeping in the view of the serious lapses kindly take serious action on this issue.’

A letter was addressed to Shri.Ramakanth Reddy, advocate on 23.06.2014 seeking information regarding the case status of vacation of stay in W.P.No. 20366 of 2013 in


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

213

16789 of 2013

On 30.06.2014,a letter dated 25.06.2014 has been received from the advocate ,Shri. Ramakanth Reddy. stating that the vacate stay petition W.V.M.P.No.1847/2013 in W.P.M.P.No. 20366/2013 in W.P.No. 16789/2013 will be listed next week probably and further developments in the matter will be informed to this office.

It is observed from the records that

• Recognition of M.Ed course (APS04495) was withdrawn vide this office order dated 24.07.2009.

• The SRC in its 244th meeting held on 9th – 11th May,2013,decided to withdraw the recognition of the B.Ed (APS00248), B.Ed-Al (APS04500) D.Ed (APS02531) courses run by the Rabindranath Tagore College of Education, Chevella Revenue Division, Kummera Village Rangareddy – 501 503, Andhra Pradesh from the academic year 2013-14 As per the decision of SRC ,withdrawal order was issued to the institution for B.Ed course on 07.06.2013.Withdrawal orders have not been issued to the B.EdA.I(APS04500) and D.Ed course (APS02531).

• In the meantime,the institution has approached the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.16789 of 2013.The petitioner has prayed for suspension of proceedings issued by the 1st respondent (SRC, NCTE) in favour of second petitioner institution for B.Ed,B.Ed-A.I and D.Ed courses during the 244th meeting of SRC, pending disposal of W.P.No. 16789 of 2013 on the file of the High Court.

• The Hon’ble Court, vide order dated 14.06.2014 ,while directing issue of notice to the respondents herein to show cause as to why this application should not be complied with made the following order .(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be receipt of notice in the case) ‘Interim suspension’.Letters were addressed to Shri. Ramakanth Reddy , advocate on 11.07.2013 ,22.08.2013 , 15.10.2013 23.06.2014 regarding vacation of stay.

• It is observed that the institution has not availed the remedy of preferring an appeal before the appellate authority as per section 18 of the NCTE Act.

The Committee considered the matter, advised Southern Regional Office to ask our Lawyer to pursue the ‘stay’ vacation application. Further, our Lawyer is to be informed also about the complaint received from the B.Ed & M.Ed students of the said college and a copy of the complaint is to be sent the Lawyer.

79) SRCAPP1834

B.Ed

Anna Arivagam

College of

Anna Arivagam College of Education, Pudumottur Village, Jingalkadhirampatti Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District-635201, Tamilnadu

Annai Arivagam Educational Trust, Pudumottur Village, Jingaikadhirampatti Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Pin-635201, Tamilnadu had


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

214

Education,

Dharmapuri,

Tamilnadu

TN

submitted an application for grant of recognition to Anna Arivagam College of Education, Pudumottur Village, Jingalkadhirampatti Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District-635201, Tamilnadu for B.Ed courseof 100 students from the academic session 2014-15. The institution has granted recognition on 03.03.2014 Now, the TNTEU has submitted its written representation on 23.06.2014 stating as follows:-

“…..The institution shall make admission only after it obtains affiliation from the examining body in terms of clause 8(12) of the NCTE (Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations 2009. The above said Anna Arivagam College of Education has not fulfilled the above mandatory provisions stipulated in the NCTE Regulations 2009 so far. But they have calling applications for the admissions into B.Ed degree course for the academic year 2014-15 through their advertisement in the Tamil daily “Dinakaran” dated 30.03.2014 without obtaining Affiliation from this University. Further, it is understood from the above advertisement that the college has started admitting the students for B.Ed degree course, 2014-15 from 30.03.2014, which is highly irregular and also against the existing Rules and Regulations. The action of the above Anna Arivagam College of Education is gross violation of Clause 8(12) of National Council for Teacher Education Regulations, 2009 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University Act, 2008. If the students admitted with the above violations and without the affiliation of this university, they will not be permitted to appear B.Ed degree Examination to be conducted by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University. The consequences of the above situation may leads to agitations among the students due to frustration if not permitted for examination. Further it may leads to law and order problems in that area as happened in few districts during the academic year 2013-2014 for the similar type of violations. Under the above circumstances, the authorities of the Anna Arivagam College of Education is hereby warned that they shall stop admitting the students forthwith in B.Ed degree course by violating the Regulations and without affiliation of this University. The Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher Education, Bangalore is requested to note the above violations of the Anna Arivagam College of Education.”

The Committee considered the matter, written representation from TNTEU

dated 23.06.2014 and decided that Southern Regional Office is to ascertain

facts from the college and report in the 271st meeting.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

215

Consideration of Other: (Vol – 4)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

80) APS06304

B.Ed

Christian

College of

Education,

Chittoor,

Andhra

Pradesh

AP

Christian College of Education, II-250/E/4/3A, Reddy’s Colony, Mananpalle, Chittoor District-517325, Andhra Pradesh

Christian College of Education, II-250/E/4/3A, Reddy’s Colony, Mananpalle, Chittoor District-517325, Andhra Pradesh had submitted application for granted of recognition to B.Ed course on 08/03/2006.

The application was processed and recognition was granted for offering B.Ed course

with an annual intake of 100 students on 12/04/2007 at Christian College of

Education, II-250/E/4/3A, Reddy’s Colony, Mananpalle, Chittoor District-

517325, Andhra Pradesh with a condition that the institution shall shift to its own

premises / building within three years from the date of recognition (in case the

course is started in rented premises)

The institution has submitted its written representation along with DD of Rs.40,000/-

stating as follows:

“NCTE – accorded permission to start B.Ed., College in the name of Christian

College of Education bearing No. APS0 6304 in Madanapalle, Chittoor District

Andhra Pradesh by following the norms of NCTE in the Door No. II-250/4/3A,

Reddy’s Colony, Madanapalle.

Now we want to shift the college premises nearer to the earlier place which is quite

convenient and also suitable to the norms of NCTE. Further we paid Rs. 40,000/- as

demand draft bearing No. 295461-SBI MPL towards the fee.

Hence we request to accord shifting permission from II-250/4/3A, Reddy’s Colony,

Madanapalle to 1-331-2, Sivalayam Street, Madanapalle”.

Old address New address

II-150/E/4/3A, Reddy’s Colony,

Mananpalle, Chittoor District-517325,

Andhra Pradesh.

1-331-2, Sivalayam Street,

Madanapalle”.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

216

The Southern Regional Committee in its 250th meeting held on 11th – 13th

,August,2013,has considered the above matter and decided to Ask institution to

submit all land and building documents and approved staff list for causing inspection

of new premises. As per the decision of SRC, a letter was sent to the institution on

30.09.2013.

The institution has submitted a written representation on 23.06.2014

The Southern Regional Committe considered the matter and all relevant

documentssubmitted by the institution towards shifting to new building and

decided to cause inspection to examine whether the institution fulfils all the

requirements as per the norms, for the existing programme, subject to the

condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as

per the norms.

Further, VT members to be informed to collect the approved staff list in

particular.

Southern Regional Office is to verify the documents relating to the new

building.

81) APS08940

B.Ed

Sandaravadhan

am College of

Education,

Cuddalore,

Tamilnadu

TN

Sandaravadhanam College of Education, Pazhachanallur & Post,

Kattumannakoil Taluk, Cuddalore District-608301, Tamilnadu

Sandaravadhanam College of Education, Pazhachanallur & Post, Kattumannakoil

Taluk, Cuddalore District-608301, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course was granted

recognition on 17.12.2007.

NCTE, Hqrs vide its letter dated 14.06.2011 has forwarded a copy of the inspection

report dated 22.09.2010 conducted under Section 13 of NCTE Act. The deficiencies

observed from the inspection report were communicated to the institution vide office

letter no.13-8/2010/NCTE/SEC13/Insp/TN-15/A35903 dated 08.02.2011 & no.13-

8/2010/NCTE/SEC13/Insp/TN-15/A35209 dated 21.04.2011, which was replied by

the institution vide its letters dated 24.02.2011 & 20.05.2011.

Keeping all the facts in view NCTE, Hqrs had requested SRC, to look into the matter

to ascertain the adherence of relevant NCTE norms & standards by the institution

and to take appropriate action in the matter under intimation to NCTE-Hqrs.

The SRC in its 207th meeting held on 23rd June 2011 considered the VT Report and

all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show Cause Notice

under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to

institution on 27.07.2011. The institution had submitted its written representation

29.08.2011.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

217

The SRC in its 213th meeting held on 06th-07th November, 2011 considered the reply

of the institution and since the reply is not satisfactory and convincing, decided to

cause inspection for all the courses on payment of Rs. 40,000/- each, as the building

is variant and confusing. The building covered by CD appears to be different from

the picture printed in the Trust’s vision document. Building Plan itself was only for

33,193 sq.ft. What is needed is 38,000 sq.ft. Staff list was in complete. Installation

of 30 computers to be checked. Staff list was in complete for B.Ed and also salary

payment details are not adequate; Bank details are required. Installation of

equipment to be checked. Accordingly, the inspection of the institution was

conducted on 19.01.2012. The institution submitted DD bearing no. 931400 dt.

19.01.2012 for Rs. 40,000/- and another DD bearing no. 931401 dtd. 19.01.2012 for

Rs. 40,000/- towards inspection fee for B.Ed and D.T.Ed course.

The SRC in its 218th meeting held on 28th February, 2012 considered the VT report,

VCD and the relevant documentary evidences and with reference to the totality of

information collected & based on a collective application of mind, decided to serve

Show Cause Notice under Section 17 of NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Show cause

notice was issued to the institution on 27.03.2012. The institution had submitted its

written representation on 19.04.2012 and 14.06.2012.

The SRC in its 231st meeting held on 22nd-23rd August, 2012 considered the reply of

the institution vide letter dt. 19.04.2012 & 14.06.2012 and all the relevant

documentary evidences and decided to serve Show Cause Notice under NCTE Act.

Accordingly, a Show cause notice was issued to the institution on 15.09.2012. The

institution had submitted its written representation on 04.10.2012 and 11.10.2012.

The SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21st -22nd November, 2012 considered the

reply of the institution vide letters dt. 04.10.2012 & 11.10.2012, and all the relevant

documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under

NCTE Act. Accordingly, a Show cause notice was issued to the institution on

01.01.2013. The institution had submitted its written representation on 23.01.2013

for which agenda was prepared for 240th meeting. In meantime the institution

submitted another letter to Show Cause Notice on 08.03.2013.

The SRC in its 242nd Meeting held on 14th-16th April, 2013 considered the written



• The faculty members are inadequate as per NCTE norms for the courses being run by the institution.

• In the building completion certificate submitted, name of the institution given is not matching with the running institution’s name.

• Land usage certificate is not notarised. Land usage certificate is in the name of other Sy.No. 118/8B is also not mentioned.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

218

• Extension of multipurpose hall size is not certified by the Competent Government authority.

• FDR No. 385981 of Rs. 3 lacs for APS08558-D.T.Ed course & FDR No. 0520191 of Rs. 3 lacs for APS08940-B.Ed course is renewed for a duration of one year only, hence both the FDRS is not renewed for 5 years.

• Staff list duly approved by the affiliating body for D.T.Ed, D.T.Ed-Al and B.Ed course is not submitted.

• Up-to-date encumbrance certificate issued by sub-registrar is not submitted and English version is not notarised.

• No documentary Proof is submitted towards appointment of Lecturer in Physical Director and Fine Arts.

• 1+6 staff is grossly inadequate for 2 units of D.T.Ed courses.

• The institution is paying consolidated salary to staff members, which is not permissible as per NCTE norms.


B.Ed course (APS08940) run by Sandaravadhanam Teacher Training Institute,

Papakudi Main Road, Kattumannarkoil Taluk, Cuddalore District–608301, Tamilnadu

from the academic year 2013-14, in order to enable the ongoing batch of students in

B.Ed course, if any, to complete their course.

Withdrawal order was not issued to the institution for B .Ed course.

Meantime, the institution moved to Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in

W.P. no. 13127 and 13128/2013 and M.P.No. 2 of 2013 dtd. 13.04.2013.

“ This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and these

respective affidavits and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon

bearing the arguments of M/S.B.RABU MANOHAR, Advocate for the

petitioner in each of the petitions the court made the following order:-

There shall be an order of interim stay”.

The SRC in its 244th meeting held on 09th -11th May, 2013 considered the matter and

decided to “inform the Lawyer to move for vacation of ‘stay’ by citing the

Supreme Court orders about strict enforcement of norms/standards”.

The Supreme Court judgment reads as under:



“An institution is not entitled to recognition unless it fulfills the conditions

specified in various clauses of the Regulations. The Council is directed to


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

219

ensure that in future no institution is granted recognition unless it fulfils the

conditions laid down in the Act and the Regulations and the time schedule

fixed for processing the application by the Regional Committee and

communication of the decision on the issue of recognition it strictly

adhered to”.

Accordingly, a letter was issued to Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy on 07.06.2013

The court order received by SRC on 03.06.2013 in the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. No. 13127 & 13128 of 2013 and M.P No. 2 of 2013 which reads as follows:-

“………. the petition will come up for hearing on 20.06.2013, you are hereby directed to appear, in person or by advocate, to show cause why the petitioner’s prayer should not be granted, in default of which, the matter will be heard and decided in your absence.

Notice and interim stay have been ordered by Court on 30.04.2013”.

A letter was issued to the advocate Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy on 11.06.2013.

A court notice dt. 30.04.2013, which was received by SRC on 17.06.2013 from the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. No. 13127 & 13128 of 2013 which reads as follows:-

“………that you, the respondent (in both WPs) above mentioned, do send for our use in the High Court of Judicature at Madras, all and singular the said records and orders with all things touching the same as fully and perfectly as they have been made by you, and now remain in your custody or power together with this our Writ before 25.06.2013.

that you, the respondent (in both WPs) herein, do appear before us

personally or by advocate on 25.06.2013 at 10.30 am and show cause why

this petition should not be complied with, and that we may cause further to be

done thereon what of right and according to law we shall see fit to be done.”

A letter was issued to the Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate on 28.06.2013.

The institution has submitted its written representation on 28.04.2014 stating as follows:-

“we have eliminated and rectified all the deficiencies pointed out in the Final Show Cause Notice dated 01.01.2013, and submitted our reply on 23.01.2013 to your good office. But it seems the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE, Bangalore tactlessly decided to withdraw recognition to our institution in its 242nd meeting (item no 70) held from 14-16 April 2013. So, we have approached the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and got an interim stay order against the decision of SRC’s 242nd meeting and submitted the court order on 06.05.2013 to the Regional Director of NCTE (SRC), Bangalore. As for as, we know that the recognition granted to our institution


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

220

is continued and still in force.

For the TNTEU and Tamilnadu government official purposes, we request you kindly to issue a letter to us stating that our college recognition is continuing as per your records as on today.”

The SRC in its 268th meeting held on 4-5 June 2014 considered the institution written representation dt. 28.04.2014 and decided that write to the lawyer to report the status of case, particularly the position relating to vacation of the stay order.

As per decision of SRC, a letter to Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate was sent on 20.06.2014.

An e-mail has been received by SRC on 30.06.2014 from the Shri.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate stating as follows:-

“During the month of April 2013 just before summer vacation batch of writ

petitions have been filed against the decision for withdrawal of recognition

taken by the NCTE and displayed in the website. Though writ will not lye

against the decision, writ petitions were entertained and stay was granted.

Many of the matters I have appeared and got dismissed the writ petitions.

Subsequently writ petitions were filed against the orders passed basing on

such decisions and many of the said writ petitions also got dismissed on

merits and some are pending.

The above mentioned writ petitions did not come up for hearing after the first

hearing on 13.04.2013. as per the court’s status report the above mentioned

writ petitions are pending. Since interim stay granted is in force it is advisable

not to take any decision till the matter is disposed. I am taking steps to get

listing the above matter for final hearing and as soon as any further

developments took place in the above matter I will bring to your knowledge

immediately.”

The Committee considered the matter, letter from the institution dated

28.04.2014 and e-mail reply from our Lawyer dated 30.06.2014, decided that,

they should take legal advise from their Lawyer. There is nothing for us to do.

82) SRCAPP2115

B.Ed

Baba College of

Education,

Thoothukudi,

Tamilnadu

TN

Baba College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.314/1,2,3, 345/2A, 346, Plot

No.115-3/9, Kayathar Village & Post, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District,

Pin - 628 952, Tamilnadu.

Bharathi Educational Service Trust, Plot No.115-1/9, Kayathar Village & Post,

Thoothukudi District, Pin - 628 952, Tamilnadu has applied for grant of

recognition to Baba College of Education, Plot/Khasara No.314/1,2,3, 345/2A,

346, Plot No.115-3/9, Kayathar Village & Post, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi

District, Pin - 628 952, Tamilnadu for B.Ed course for One year duration under


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

221

section 15(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE

online on 31.12.2012. The institution has submitted hard copy of the application on

07.01.2013.

Para 7[1-A(i)] and 7[1-A(ii)] of extant NCTE Regulations published in the Gazette of India on 31st August 2009, as amended from time to time, the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

Para 7[1-A(i)]

a)The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education

Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;

b).Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the

submission of the online application;c)

c). Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the

society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is

dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

Para 7[1-A(ii)] The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the circumstances

referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the applicant and refund the

processing fees within 30 days of the online submission of the application.

Further, 8(7)(i) of NCTE Regulations reads as under:

No institution shall be granted recognition under these Regulations unless the institution or society sponsoring the institution is in possession of required land on the date of application. The land free from all encumbrances could be either on ownership basis or on lease from Government or Government institutions for a period of not less than 30 years. In cases where under relevant State or Union Territory laws the maximum permissible lease period is less than 30 years, the State Government or Union Territory Administration law shall prevail. However, no building shall be taken on lease for running any teacher training course.

In this application the following has been observed: Land Documents is in Tamil version. As per Land Usage Certificate issued on 26.11.2002 lands owned and taken on

lease by Bharathi Educational Service Trust. The land stands in the name of Smt.

K.S Nurjehan.

As per Tamil version of land documents registered in July 2003 the land was sold to

Smt. K.S. Nurjehan for the above Trust.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

222

But, as per English version the Deed of sale is executed in favour of Trust. Since the

land is taken on lease by the Trust as per Land Usage Certificate and lease is not

permissible, clarification is required from the institution.

The SRC in its 243rd Meeting held on 29th - 30th April 2013, reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is Summarily Rejected as per [7-1-A(i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009.

1. The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application.

2. As per Land Usage Certificate issued on 26.11.2002 lands owned and taken on lease by Bharathi Educational Service Trust. The land stands in the name of Smt. K.S Nurjehan.

3. As per Tamil version of land documents registered in July 2003 the land was sold to Smt. K.S. Nurjehan for the above Trust. But, as per English version the Deed of sale is executed in favour of Trust. Since the land is taken on lease by the Trust as per Land Usage Certificate and lease is not permissible, clarification is required from the institution.

In the points mentioned above for rejection, the Processing Fees, as provided under

rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on

or before the date of submission of online application.

Whereas online application is 31.12.2012 and processing fees submitted vide

challan No.M3356220 dated 31.12.2012.

Rejection Order is held up pending reconsideration of SRC with regard to the point

of Non payment of Processing Fee.

The SRC in its 243rd Meeting held on 29th-30th April 2013, reviewed the duly

scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for

the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic

infirmities, is Summarily Rejected as per 7 [1-A(i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009

1. As per Land Usage Certificate issued on 26.11.2002 lands owned and taken on lease by Bharathi Educational Service Trust. The land stands in the name of Smt. K.S Nurjehan, which is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.

2. As per Tamil version of land documents registered in July 2003 the land was sold to Smt. K.S. Nurjehan for the above Trust. But, as per English version the Deed of sale is executed in favour of Trust. Since the land is taken on lease by the Trust as per Land Usage Certificate and lease is not permissible as per NCTE Regulations 2009.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

223


based on a collective application of mind, the SRC in its 247th meeting held on 20th-

22nd June 2013 decided as per NCTE Regulations 2009, to reject the application of

the institution for recognition of B.Ed course.

Accordingly, rejection letter was issued to the institution on 02.08.2013.


order no.F.No.89-633/2013 Appeal/1st meeting-2014 /dated 06.02.2014 has stated

as follows:-

“after perusal of the documents, Memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on

records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council

concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to re-examine the

case taking into the various submissions made by the appellant and take a fresh decision

NOWTHEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Baba College of Education,

Thoothukudi, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.”

The matter is placed before SRC along with original file for consideration and

decision.

SRCAPP2115-B.Ed Rejection letter was issued to the institution on 02.08.2013.

The institution preferred an appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority

vide order no.F.No.89-633/2013 Appeal/1st meeting-2014 /dated 06.02.2014

has stated as follows:-

“after perusal of the documents, Memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the

documents available on records and considering the oral arguments

advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves

to be remanded to SRC with a direction to re-examine the case taking into

the various submissions made by the appellant and take a fresh decision.

NOWTHEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Baba

College of Education, Thoothukudi, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for

necessary action as indicated above.”

The Committee in its 264th meeting held on 01-03 March, 2014 considered the

Appellate authority order dated 06.02.2014 directing to re-examine the case and to

take fresh decision. Accordingly, it is decided to process.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

224





instructions.

Consideration of replies to SCN Cases: (Vol – 4)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

83) SRCAPP1788

APS02249

B.Ed

D.T.Ed

Lords and

Angels College

of Education for

Women,

Thoothukudi,

Tamilnadu

TN

Lords and Angels College of Education for Women, plot no. 2/87, Pidaneri

Village, Thailapuram P.O. Santhankulam tauka, Nazareth, Thoothududi District,

Pin-628617, Tamilnadu.

Lords and Angels Minority Educational and Cultural society, plot No. 2/87, Udangudi

Road, thailapuram village and Post, Sathankulam Tauk, Nazareth City,

Thooothududi district, pin-628617, Tamilnadu had applied for grant of recognition to

Lords' and Angels' College of Education for Women, Minority Educational and

Cultural Society, Plot No.2/87, Pidaneri Village, Thailapuram P.O., Sathankulam

Taluka, Nazareth, Thoothukudi District, Pin - 628617, Tamilnadu for B.Ed Course for

one year duration under Section 14(1) of the NCTE Act, 1993 to the Southern

Regional Committee, NCTE online on 08.12.2012. The institution has submitted

hard copy of the application on 13.12.2012 along with processing along with

processing fees of Rs.50,000/- vide Demand Draft bearing No.777660 dt.10.12.2012

drawn on Central Bank.

Para 7[1-A(i)] and 7[1-A(ii)] of extant NCTE Regulations published in the Gazettee of India on 31st August 2009, as amended from time to time, the application shall be summarily rejected under one or more of the following circumstances:

Para 7[1-A(i)]

(a) The processing fee, as provided under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished on or before the date of submission of online application;

(b) Hard copy in triplicate of the online application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application;

(c) Copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority indicating that the society/institution applying for the course possessed land on the date of application is not dispatched within 7 days of the submission of the online application.

Para 7[1-A(ii)] The Regional Committee shall, after recording reasons for rejection under the


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

225

circumstances referred to in clause (i) above, return the application to the applicant

and refund the processing fees within 30 days of the online submission of the

application.

In this application the following has been observed: On-line application was submitted on 08.12.2012 and DD drawn from bank on

10.12.2012. Hence, the society has not remitted the processing fee as provided

under rule 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 is not furnished

on or before the date of submission of online application, as required under sub-

regulation 7(1-A)(i)(a) of NCTE Regulations 2009.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 240th meeting held on 09th – 11th March, 2013 reviewed the duly scrutinized above new application received by Southern Regional Office, NCTE for the Session 2013-14. Accordingly, the above application, which suffer from basic infirmities, is summarily rejected as per [ 7 1–A (i)] of NCTE Regulations 2009.

Accordingly, rejection letter was issued to the institution on 27.04.2013.

SRC, NCTE is in receipt of Court Order from the Hon’ble High Court, Madras in W.P. No. 7940 of 2013 and M.P.No. 1 of 2013 the judgment dated 15.04.2013 and 22.04.2013 as reads as under:

“…. These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and these respective affidavits filled in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/s.R.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions and of SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER takes notice on behalf of the respondents R1 and R2 in both the petitions and of Mr. Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate for R3 in both the petitions the Court made the following order:-

Interim order already granted by this Court is extended by one week and the matter will remain in the list”.

The institution preferred appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order no. F.No. 89-577/2013 Appeal/15th Meeting- 2013 dated 12.11.2013 has stated as follows:

“after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to SRC with a direction to process the application as per the Regulations.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

226

necessary action as indicated above”.

The Committee in its 256th meeting held on 04-06th December, 2013 considered the

Appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013, directing SRC to process the application

as per the regulation and decided to process and advised Southern Regional Office

to put up the case in 258th meeting.

The Application was scrutinized and a copy of application was sent to State

Government for recommendation on 22/01/2014. A deficiency letter was issued to

the institution on 23.01.2014.

Now the institution has replied to the deficiency letter on 04/02/2014.

The Committee in its 262nd meeting held on 17-19 February, 2014 considered the Appellate authority order dated 12/11/2013 reply of the institution to the deficiency letter and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show cause Notice under Section 14 of NCTE Act for the following:

• Building Plan duly approved by the competent authority is not submitted.

• Building Completion Certificate in the prescribed format duly approved by the competent authority, i.e, Govt. engineer is not submitted.

• Encumbrance Certificate submitted is not covering all the survey numbers involved.

As per the decision of SRC, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on

12.03.2014.

The Institution submitted its repies on 24.03.2014 and 27.03.2014.





instructions.

Consideration of VT Reports: (Vol – 4)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

84) APS05519

B.Ed

MSES College

of Education,

Karur,

MSES College of Education, 1st Floor, S.F.No. 721, Thanthantrimalai, Karur

District-639005, Tamilnadu

MSES College of Education, 1st Floor, S.F.No. 721, Thanthantrimalai, Karur District-

639005, Tamilnadu has submitted an application for seeking grant of recognition for


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

227

Tamilnadu

TN

B.Ed course on 02.01.2006. The application was processed and recognition to the

institution for B.Ed course was granted for annual intake of 100 students on

13.11.2006.

An RTI query from Shri. V.C. Ravi Chandran has been received through NCTE-Hqrs on 02.09.2010 in which RTI applicant has informed that the college run by the society MSES is running the college without any own building and land and basic infrastructure for more than four years and sought for action. In view of the above, the application file of above institution has been scrutinized and

observed that recognition order has been issued on 13.11.2006 to the address as

mentioned in rent deed.

Recognition has been granted subject to fulfillment of following conditions among others, the institution shall shift to its own premises or building within three years from the date of recognition (if the course is started in rented premises). As per the rent deed submitted by institution they have started institution in rented premises at S.F.No.721, No.13, 1st Floor, Thanthantrimalai, Karur. But so far the institution has not informed about shifting to permanent building and not submitted fee of Rs.40000/- for causing inspection for shifting.

The SRC in its 197th meeting held on 13th-14th October 2010 considered all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show cause Notice Under Section 17 of NCTE Act for the following –

The institution was given recognition on 13.11.2006 in temporary rented premises and as per the NCTE Norms the institution should have shifted to the New building/premises within the stipulated period of 3 years i.e.,on or before 12.11.2009. But till now the institution has not informed to SRC-NCTE about the shifting schedule to new building / premises nor submitted fee of Rs. 40000/- for causing inspection for shifting.

The Management has not shifted to its own building / Premises even after the lapse of more than 4 years period.

Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to the institution on 08.12.2010. The institution did not submit its reply even after completion of stipulated period specified in show cause notice. The matter was considered by SRC in its 200th meeting held on 20th-21st January 2011. The SRC decided to issue final show cause notice.

Meanwhile the institution submitted its reply dated 17.2.2011 requesting to give a copy of the complaint to give an effective reply and submitting that the copy is necessary for giving reply in this regard. SRC in its 201st meeting held on 20th-21st January 2011 considered the request of the institution and decided request to be complied. Accordingly final show cause notice is issued along with the copy of complaint:

The institution has not cared to reply to the show cause notice issued vide letter dt. 08.12.2010 under section 17 of NCTE Act, for the deficiencies pointed in the notice.

The institution was given recognition on 13.11.2006 in temporary rented premises and as per the NCTE Norms the institution should have shifted to the New


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

228

building/premises within the stipulated period of three years i.e., on or before 12.11.2009. But till now the institution has not informed to SRC-NCTE about the shifting schedule to new building / premises nor submitted fee of Rs. 40000/- for causing inspection for shifting.

The Management has not shifted to its own building / Premises even after the lapse of more than four years period.

Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the institution on 08.03.2011 by enclosing a copy of complaint to submit the reply within the period of 30 days.

The reply from the institution has not been received so far. The SRC in its 208th meeting held on 13-14 July 2011 considered the matter and

decided to withdraw the recognition of the institution for B.Ed (APS05519) course

on the following grounds:-

The management has not replied to the show cause notice issued to the institution vide letter DT. 08.03.2011.

The institution has not cared to reply to the show cause notice issued vide letter dt. 08.12.2010 under section 17 of NCTE Act, for the deficiencies pointed in the notice.

The institution was given recognition on 13.11.2006 in temporary rented premises and as per the NCTE norms the institution should have shifted to the new building/premises within the stipulated period of three years i.e. on or before 12.11.2009. but till now the institution has not informed to SRC-NCTE about the shifting schedule to new building/premises nor submitted fee of Rs.40,000/- for causing inspection for shifting.

The management has not shifted to its own building/premises even after the lapse of more than four years period. Accordingly, withdrawal order was issued to the institution on 25.03.2011.

A court notice has received by this office on 13.08.2012 in WP (MD).No.9977 & 9978 of 2012 and again a court order has received by this office on 17.08.2012 in W.P.(MD) Nos. 2 and 2 of 2012 in WP(MD) Nos.9977 and 9978 of 2012 stating as follows:-

“Order: These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petitions and the affidavits filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/s.K.Sridhar, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions, the court made the following order:-

There shall be an order of interim stay for a period of three weeks. It is made clear the petitioner will not admit for the present till the next hearing.

Notice.”


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

229

A court notice has received by this office on 31.12.2012 in WP (MD) No.9977 & 9978 of 2012 “directed respondent No.1(SRC NCTE) to appear before the court personally or by advocate on 31.01.2013.”

Accordingly, a letter addressed to Shri.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate sent on 03.01.2013 along with brief of the both cases (Narendar College of Education, Pullambad, Trichy-621711 and MSES College of Education, Karur District

Now, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, Madurai Bench has sent a court order of W.P.(MD) Nos.9977 and 9978 of 2012 and M.P.(MD). Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 (each two MPs) and M.P.(MD( Nos.2 of 2012 (two Mps) and M.P. (MD) No.3 of 2012 dated 03.01.2014 as follows:-

“……..the petitioner institution should have been given an opportunity by the

authorities concerned. Therefore, both the impugned orders are set aside, as no

opportunity has been given for them to rectify the mistakes pointed by the

respondents, following the judgement made in the Teacher Education vs. Vaishnav

Institue of Technology & Managements, reported in (2012) 5 Secc 139. At the same

time, since the next admission will start only from the year 2014, the respondents will

give a notice of inspection to the petitioners concerned and inspect the institution in

accordance with section 13 or the NCTE Act coupled with Rule 8 of the Act and if

they are satisfied in respect of the rules and regulations, the petitioner institution will

be permitted to start admission. It is made clear that till the inspection is over and

recognition is given, the petitioner institution will not start admission.

With the above discussions and observations, these writ petitions are disposed of.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.”

Note: Same court order of both cases i.e. W.P.(MD) No.9977 of 2012 related to


Tamilnadu (APS07608/B.Ed) and W.P.No.9978 of 2012 related to MSES College of

Education, 1st Floor, S.F.No. 721, Thanthantrimalai, Karur District-639005, Tamilnadu

(APS05519/B.Ed)

The Committee in its 266th meeting held on 2nd May, 2014, considered the Hon’ble

High Court order dated 03.01.2014 and all other relevant documents and decided to

cause inspection for B.Ed (APS05519) course under NCTE Act, to

examine whether the Institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the

existing programme.

Accordingly, inspection of the institution was fixed between 3rd June 2014, the

inspection intimation was sent to institution on 20.05.2014.

The inspection of the institution was conducted on 03.06.2014 and the VT report

received I the office of SRC on 06.06.2014.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

230

The Committee considered the matter, VT report of the institution, and all the

relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Show Cause

Notice Under NCTE Act for the following:

• The institution has not submitted certified copy of the registered land documents issued by the competent authority, i.e, sub-registrar.

• The Affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper in the prescribed format with notary attestation to be submitted.

• Building plan approved by competent authority is not submitted.

• The latest Building Completion Certificate from the competent Government Engineer is not submitted.

• Notarised land usage certificate from the Revenue divisional office stating that the agriculture land converted to non-agriculture for the educational purpose is not submitted.

• Up-to-date Encumbrance certificate issued by the competent authority is not submitted.

• Original Fixed deposits of ₹. 5 & 3 lacs in joint name towards Endowment fund & Reserve fund from a Nationalised Bank is not submitted.

• As per VT report, The present B.Ed course is not being functional.

• As per VT report, the college has no building at present.

• As per VT report, the shifting of premises from the present address to new premises is in progress.

In view of the above, the Committee decided to issue a Show cause Notice to the Institution as to why the recognition be not withdrawn and thereby providing an opportunity to the Institution to make a written representation within 21 days from the date of receipt of the Show Cause Notice along with necessary certificates/documents in order to take a final decision in the matter; failing which action will be taken including the withdrawal of recognition, based on the records available with no further notice.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

231

Consideration of request for withdrawal: (Vol – 4)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

85) APS05891

D.Ed

Shri.

Sadashivappa

Prabhappa

Moogi D.Ed

College,

Belgaum,

Karnataka

KA

Shri Sadashivappa Prabhappa Moogi D.Ed College,Shivabasava Nagar, Belgaum District-590010, Karnataka

SRC, NCTE granted recognition to Shri.Sadashivappa Prabhappa Moogi D.Ed. College, Shivabasava Nagar, Belgaum District-590010, Karnataka for Elementary(D.Ed) course of two years duration with an annual intake of offering 50 students on 12/07/2007.

Now, a letter dated 01/06/2014 is received by this office on 16/06/2014 from the Institution requesting to withdraw recognition of the D.Ed Course and return the FDR’s and stated as follows.

“ Due to non available of students to admit for the D.Ed course in the academic year 2013-14, the management of the above institution decided to close the course of D.Ed from the academic year 2014-15. So we request you to permit the withdrawal of FDRs.”





course.





SRC NCTE, Bangalore. If any, after ensuring settlement of all staff claims.

86) SRCAPP552

M.P.Ed

Annamalai

University,

Cuddalore

District,

Tamilnadu

TN

Annamalai University, Music College Road, Thiruvetkalam, Annamalai Nagar,

Chidambaram, Cuddalore District, Pin – 608002, Tamilnadu.

Annamalai University, Music College Road, Thiruvetkalam, Annamalai Nagar, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District, Pin – 608002, Tamilnadu had submitted application for starting M.P.Ed, B.P.Ed and D.P.Ed courses on 26.09.2011 for the session 2012-13. It is ascertained after scrutiny of your application in accordance with clause 8 (2) and 8(3) of NCTE Regulation 2009, that:-

“In the first instance an institution shall be considered for grant of recognition of only


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

232

one course for the basic unit as prescribed in the norms and standards for the particular teacher education programme”.

“An institution can apply for one basic unit only of an additional course or for an additional unit of the existing recognized course after completion of three academic session of the respective course, for which the institution shall submit application before the cut of date prescribed for submission of applications in the year succeeding the completion of three academic sessions”.

As the University has submitted three applications for M.P.Ed, B.P.Ed and D.P.Ed courses for the session 2012-13 and as per NCTE Regulation 2009 reproduced above, an institution shall be considered for grant of recognition for only one course for the basic unit as prescribed in the norms and standards for the particular teacher education programme.

Accordingly, a letter dt. 04.10.2011 was issued to the University seeking to inform the name of one course that the University wants to apply for further processing and consideration. As per Regulation 2009, 8(2) and 8(3) an institution cannot apply for more than one course at one time.

The University vide letter dt.15.10.2011 has submitted its reply has stated that they have sufficient instructional and infrastructural facilities with highly qualified teaching faculties and has requested to consider for all the three courses namely D.P.Ed, B.P.Ed and M.P.Ed course.

The SRC in its 213th meeting held on 06-07 November, 2011 considered the reply of the University letter dt. 15.10.2011 and all other relevant details and decided that, the applicant-University has not been able to appreciate the Legal position relating to consideration of applications by the Southern Regional Committee. As per the NCTE regulations 2009, the committee is not allowed to consider applications for more than one course at a time. The applicant-University has neither accepted this position nor indicated its preference of any one out of the three courses applied for. That being so, the application cannot be processed further. Accordingly, all the three applications are rejected and rejection letter was issued to the institution on 24.01.2012.

The institution preferred appeal to NCTE, Hqrs and the Appellate Authority vide order dt. 18.04.2012 has stated as follows:-

“after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit and after consideration oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the Council concluded that there was adequate justification in remaining the case to the SRC for further processing of the application of M.P.Ed. course on merit as per Regulations”.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Annamalai University, Cuddalore, Tamilnadu to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above”.

As per the Regulations an University application for M.P.Ed can be considered only if the University is already running or offering B.P.Ed course. The appellate has not noted this point. The SRC decided to seek clarification about this decision and


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

233

pending clarification from Appellate authority, the committee decided to process the M.P.Ed application.

The SRC in its 222nd Meeting held on 09th-10th May, 2012 considered the Appellate authority order dt. 18.04.2012 and decided to process the application further on submission of original application and related supporting documents as per the regulations. The institution has replied to the deficiency letter dt. 23.07.2012, vide their letter dt. 17.08.2012.

The SRC in its 231st meeting held on 22nd-23rd August 2012, considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 17.08.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and decided to serve Show cause Notice. Accordingly, Show cause notice was issued to the institution on 13.09.2012. The institution submitted its reply on 03.10.2012. The SRC in its 235th meeting held on 21st-22nd November, 2012 considered the reply of the institution vide letter dt. 03.10.2012 and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Final Show cause Notice under section 14 (1) of NCTE Act. Accordingly, by seeing the website the institution had submitted its written representation on 24.12.2012.

The SRC in its 239th meeting held on 26th-27th February, 2013 considered the reply of the institution dt.24-12-2012 and all other relevant documents and decided to cause inspection under section 14 of NCTE Act, to examine whether the institution fulfils all the requirements as per the norms, for the proposed programme, subject to the condition that the deficiencies, if any, were duly rectified by the institution, as per the norms.

The inspection of the institution was fixed between 13th-17th May, 2013. The same was intimated to the institution on 06.05.2013. The inspection of the institution was conducted on 16.05.2013. On careful perusal of the original file of the institution, reply of the institution, all relevant documents and other related documents, Act of NCTE, 1993, Regulations and guidelines of NCTE published from time to time laid on the table, the SRC in its 249th Meeting held on 24th-26th July, 2013 decided to issue Letter of Intent for grant of recognition to M.P.Ed course of two year duration with an annual intake of 40(Forty only)(one unit), subject to the appointment of qualified staff through duly constituted selection committee as per the Norms of NCTE/State Government/Affiliating University and be given effect before the commencement of the academic session. Accordingly, LOI was issued to the institution on 23.08.2013.The University has submitted LOI reply on 07.10.2013.

The SRC in its 254th Meeting held on 25th-27th October, 2013 considered the reply of the University to LOI and all the relevant documentary evidences and it was decided to serve Notice Under section 14 of NCTE Act . By seeing the website the University has submitted the written representation on 30.12.2013.


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

234

The above matter was placed before SRC in its 259th Meeting held on 17th-19th January, 2014 and decided that

1.University can not have M.P.Ed without B.P.Ed

2. LOI earlier given is withdrawn.

3. Reject the application.

A letter received from the University on 30.01.2014 stating as under ;

“ I wish to inform you that Annamalai University is a State University in Tamilnadu established in the year 1929. The Department of Physical Education exists from the inception of this University. This University is offering B.P.Ed., and M.P.Ed., courses from the year 1974 and 1980 onwards respectively even before enactment of the NCTE Act, 1993.

We has submitted application for granting recognition to M.P.Ed., B.P.Ed and D.P.Ed., courses on 27.01.2011. However NCTE-SRC rejected all the three applications. Therefore left with no other option, we preferred an appeal to NCTE, Head Quarters and the Appellate Authority vide order dated 19.04.2012 has directed to process the application for M.P.Ed course. Accordingly the course application was processed by SRC and letter of Intent was issued based on the inspection held on 16.05.2013.

In the meantime we have also submitted application for B.P.Ed., course on 28.12.2012 seeking grant of recognition and after due inspection on 06.12.2013, the Regional Committee has also issued Letter of Intent for B.P.Ed., course also.

Now we came to know through the website of NCTE-SRC that our application for M.P.Ed course has been rejected citing the reason that University cannot have M.P.Ed without B.P.Ed and the LOI given earlier is withdrawn. In this regard we would like to bring the following to your kind notice:

i) Annamalai University is a State University offering B.P.Ed courses since 1974 and M.P.Ed courses since 1980.

ii) The University is having robust infrastructure and excellent faculty for the requirement of both B.P.Ed and M.P.Ed courses.

iii) Annamalai University is a Unitary University, like other courses B.P.Ed and M.P.Ed courses are also offered by the Department of the University and not by a College affiliated to the University.

iv) Quality of education is ensured in the University through strict scrutiny by University Authorities such as Boards of Studies, Faculty and Academic Council.

v) In earlier years there are evidences that both B.P.Ed., and M.P.Ed., courses are issued in the same year for the same institution and in few Universities recognition for M.P.Ed courses have been given without insisting for B.P.Ed courses.

vi) If approval is denied to the University for conducting M.P.Ed courses, the infrastructure facility will be grossly underutilized.

vii) We also wish to place before you the intension of NCTE (H.Q.) Letter no.F.4915/2013/NCTE/N&S/A73915, dated 12th September 2013) to give fillip to teacher education in general, and, to education to teacher educators. The Ministry of Human


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

235

Resource Development, GOI, has urged the NCTE Regional Committees to grant relaxation of the procedural and infrastructural requirements prescribed by the NCTE regulations.

In addition the NCTE(HQ) has also advised the Regional Directors, to inform the same to Government Universities under the control of State Government/U.T., and extend the relaxation in the regulation as they deem it appropriate to the State Universities.

In view of the above it is requested to kindly reconsider the decision taken in SRC and accord approval for M.P.Ed courses as well as B.P.Ed courses in Annamalai University”.

The Southern Regional Committee in its 261st Meeting held on 9th – 10th February,2014 considered the matter, reply of the University vide their letter dated 28/01/2014, and decided that, Southern Regional Committee can not relax Regulations. The University to be advised to approach NCTE (H.Q) for relaxation of the 3-year gap requirement as requested by the University.

As per the decision of SRC, a letter was sent to the Registrar, Annamalai University on 26.02.2014

Now, on 05.05.2014, this office is in receipt of a letter (1D) No.76 ,sdated 22.04.2014 ,from the Principal Secretary to the Government, Higher Education (H1) Department ,Secretariat Chennai 600 009 regarding approval of M.Ed course.

The letter addressed to the Chairperson NCTE,New Delhi is as under ;

‘Annamalai University is a State University in Tamilnadu established in the year 1929 as per the Annamalai University Act 1928 (Tamilnadu Act 1 of 1929).Presently the University is governed as per the Annamalai University Act, 2013(Tamilnadu Act 20 of 2013) as the 1923 Act has been repealed and replaced with 2013 Act after obtaining presidential assent in September 2013.

2. It is understood that the NCTE-SRC has given formal recognition for B.P.Ed. However in case of M.P.Ed , the NCTE-SRC has advised the University to approach NCTE Head Quarter with State Government’s recommendation for relaxing norms for approval of M.P.Ed

3. In the reference third cited, the Registrar, Annamalai University has requested the Government to recommend to the Chairperson ,NCTE,New Delhi for approval for M.P.Ed course by giving one time relaxation to the norms as being done in case of Central Universities.

4. The Annamalai University is running M.P.Ed course since 1980 and B.P.Ed since 1974 and the University is having adequate infrastructure facilities and human resources to run these courses .In past one year especially, after the enactment of the above said Act, the University administration has taken steps to get recognition for the above courses on par with other State Universities coming under the Government of Tamilnadu.

5. It is stipulated in NCTE regulations under the heading “Power to Relax” that ‘On recommendations of State Government/UT administration concerned


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

236

and only for removal of any hardship caused in adhering to the provisions in these regulations, in circumstances peculiar to the said State/UT, it shall be competent for the Chairperson, National Council for Teacher Education, for reasons to be recorded in writing, to relax any of the provisions of these regulations in respect of any class or category of institutions in the concerned State/U.T to such an extent and subject to such conditions, as may be specified in the order allowing relaxation.

6. Therefore, I am directed to convey the recommendation of the State Government for approval for M.P.Ed course offered by Annamalai University by giving one time relaxation exempting the 3 year gap requirement to conduct M.P.Ed course subject to conditions that the National Council for Teacher Education may satisfy themselves that their regulations and norms are fulfilled for getting recommendation to the above course.


Consideration of Complaints: (Vol – 4)

Sl. No.

Code No Course


State

Remarks

87) APS03040

APS08327

B.Ed

M.Ed

Annai

Mathammal

Sheela College

of Education,

Nammakkal,

Tamilnadu

TN

Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty,Nammakkal District-637013, Tamilnadu

Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty,Nammakkal District-637013, Tamilnadu for B.Ed course from the session 2005-2006 with an intake of 100 students was granted recognition on 21.11.2005

Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty Post, Namakkal District, Tamilnadu for M.Ed course from the session 2009-2010 with an intake of 25 students vide order No.13457 dated 01.06.2009. The institution was granted recognition for increase of intake from 25 to 35 on 20.08.2010.

A complaint has been received by SRC-NCTE from Vysya College, Salem-636103, Tamilnadu against Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty-637013, Namakkal Dt., Tamilnadu on 28.05.2014 regarding Malpractice done by Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education during NAAC visit which was held on 22.01.2014 & 23.01.2014 which is as under:-

“….NAAC Peer Team Members Prof.Rathore.L.S. (Chairperson), Prof.Dilip Kumar Dureha (Member Co-Ordinator), Dr. (Mrs.) Satinder Dhillon (Member) visited Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty-637013, Namakkal Dt., Tamilnadu for NAAC assessment on 22.01.2014 & 23.01.2014.

In this regard we wish to register a complaint regardint he Malpractice done by Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, during NAAC visit. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

237

institution has shown our Institution (Vysya College of Education, Salem, Tamilnadu) Principal, Dr.P.Selvam as Principal of their institution during the NAAC visit.

Dr.P.Selvam appointed as Assistant Professor of Tamil on 19.06.2010 in Vysya College of Education (Annexure-1 copy enclosed) and joined in our institution on 01.07.2010 (Annexure-2 copy enclosed) onwards. While she was working as Assistant Professor in our college she got approved as Principal from Tamilnadu Teachers Education University and we got the approval letter on 19.05.2012 (Annexure-3 copy enclosed) and she took charge as Principal, Vysya College of Education and continuing her service as Principal as on date.

In the meantime we have received an information that Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty-637013, Namakkal Dt., has paid around 2 lakh rupees for our college Principal Dr.P.Selvam for acting as Principal for those two days (22.01.2014 & 23.01.2014) during NAAC visit which is highly an unethical practice.

All the original certificate of Dr.P.Selvam is kept in our institution and we were surprised how, she was shown as Principal & how NAAC members failed to check her original documents, attendance register Acquaintance, TDS detected, etc during visit.

We also doubt that most of the faculty shown by Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty-637013, Namakkal Dt., is also duplicated.

We were shocked to see that the college which has duplicated the Head of the Institution was Accredited with “B” Grade by NAAC (Annexure-4 list enclosed).

Our Principal Dr.P.Selvam, has applied for on Duty from 21.01.2014-25.01.2014 stating that she has received a communication from University for arrear paper valuation. She joined her duty on 26.01.2014 & reported on 27.01.2014. she has also submitted the attendance certificate from 20.01.2014 to 25.01.2014 (Annexure-5, 6, 7 copy enclosed).

But she has submitted the attendance certificate from University from 20.01.2014 to 25.01.2014. in this regard, we requested university to give us few details regarding the paper valuation through Right to Information Act and we have got the information from university. (Annexure-9,10 copy enclosed).

Dr.P.Selvam has acted as Examiner only for one day (21.01.2014) only and hence it is provide that through her influence she got false certificate from paper evaluation centre and she has produced the same to our institution and it is confirmed that she has acted as Principal on 22.01.2014 and 23.01.2014 in Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Erumapatty-


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

238

637013, Namakkal Dt.,

More over we have also received the peer team visit report of Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, from NAAC, office through Right to Information Act for further confirming her presence as Principal. (Annexure-11, 12 copy enclosed).

We confirm you that the signature in the peer team visit report matches with our college principal’s signature and hence we assure you that she has been used for NAAC purpose.

As on date she has signed in our college attendance register, Acquaintance, we have properly detected TDS, etc. (Annexure-13 copy enclosed).

The university examinations for college of education start from 30.05.2014 and ends on 11.06.2014. so the students will be present in the campus and hence you can have a surprise visit to check the presence of the Principal in the college. Moreover the admission for next academic year has been started by most of the institution and the college which has involved in such malpractice may admit students based on the grade received from NAAC and hence we request NCTE to verify the originality of the status of the institution and save the life of the student’s community.

Hence we request you to take necessary strict action on such colleges involved in such malpractices. If you wish to conduct an enquiry on this issue we are ready to support you by producing all documents about Dr.P.Selvam to you in person.

We have registered the complaint by forwarding the letter to NAAC Bangalore dated 17.05.2014. we request you to kindly send us the action taken by you for further legal proceedings”

The SRC in its 268th meeting held on 4-5 June 2014 considered the complaint matter and decided that “request the university to enquire and comment”.

In the meantime, the NAAC has submitted its written representation on 12.06.2014 stating as follows:-

“…..NAAC has completed the Peer Team Visit of the Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu a recognized institution of National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Bangalore, on 22nd and 23rd January 2014 and the results have been declared.

We are sorry to bring to your kind notice about a complaint received in this office against the alleged mala fide act committed by Annai Mathammal Sheela College of Education, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu, during the NAAC Peer Team Visit. The complaint has been made by J. Rajendra Prasad, Secretary Vysya College of Education, Salem, Tamil Nadu also a recognized institution of National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), Bangalore. The


(S.Sathyam)

Chairman

239

complainant has alleged on the issues which are of serious concern for all the organisations of higher education like NAAC, NCTE and the University which are striving hard to sustain quality in the field of higher education.

Therefore, I am directed by the competent authority to request you to cause suitable enquiry on both the colleges and to offer your remarks to that extent so as to facilitate NAAC to initiate appropriate proceedings.

Please find enclosed herewith a copy of the complaint for your ready

reference.

Kindly treat this as very urgent and acknowledge the receipt of the same.”

The Committee considered the matter, written representation fromNAAC

dated 12.06.2014, decided and advised Southern Regional Office to inform

NAAC that the University has been requested to enquire and report. As soon

as the report from the University is received, the copy of the same is to be

sent to NAAC. Also, the copy is to be sent to the University.