Ajay Kumar Tripathi, CJ
1. Heard counsel for the University, counsel for NCTE as well as B.Ed. College in question.
2. The University has preferred the appeal against the order dated 19.06.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in favour of the B.Ed. College
giving a direction upon the concerned Respondents which include the authorities of the NCTE and the present Appellant - the University that they
have an obligation to comply with the mandatory provisions contained in Section 14(6) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 and
grant affiliation to the B.Ed. College.
3. The University is in appeal against such a direction on the ground that the Western Regional Committee (WRC) itself has given a direction to carry
out an inspection by constituting a Visiting Team (VT) which will consider issues raised by the University in its inspection report. Leeway was also
granted to include a person from the University to join the team for inspection. Therefore, the issue according to him is still alive and the recognition
which was initially withdrawn vide order dated 04.12.2017 still subsists.
4. This Court has not only gone through the order of the learned Single Judge which has taken into consideration the legal position which emerges
from the Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in
(2013) 2 SCC 617, but also the decision of the appellate authority of NCTE who set aside the initial order of the Regional Committee withdrawing
recognition, to be a decision taken in haste. This decision of the NCTE / appellate authority is dated 06.03.2018.
5. Once the initial decision of the Regional Committee withdrawing recognition was set aside, then the initial recognition granted to the Institution
revives. The direction for a fresh inspection etc. will provide the inputs for a future decision, but that cannot be used for keeping things in abeyance or
refusing to comply with the direction of the learned Single Judge where grant of recognition is incumbent upon the University and it is not their
discretion.
6. The appeal has no merit, it is dismissed. The University authorities would be well advised not to violate the order and the direction of the learned
Single Judge, which does not suffer from any infirmity.
7. Before parting, the Court is informed that in the garb of pendency of this appeal, the University / the Appellant has not granted affiliation to the
B.Ed. College.
8. Let it be done within a period of 3 days from the date of production of a copy of this order.