F.No /2010 Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011

Transcription

1 F.No /2010 Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Holy Child B.Ed. College, Malda, West Bengal dated 13/11/2010 is against the Order No. ERC/ /2010/5381 dated 26/10/2010 of the Eastern Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed. course on the grounds: 1) As per land possession certificate, the land is possessed by Dr. Debasish Sarkar who is Secretary of the institution. 2) List of teaching staff not submitted. 3) Facilities for Language Learning Lab are not mentioned in the VT report. 4) The institution has not submitted the Affidavit on Rs. 10/- stamp paper regarding individual teaching staff along with Principal. 5) Experience certificate of the Principal namely Shri Sadhan Kumar Thakur not submitted. 6) As per VTR the Society registered on 13/07/2009 and application received in ) The VTR has provided only the detail of one FDR for each of endowment fund and reserve fund whereas the institution is recognised for D.Ed. & B.Ed. Courses. 8) Teacher for Primary Education not appointed by the institution. Faculty list approved by the affiliating University not submitted. 9) 3 classrooms have been provided by the institution. 10) The plot no. mentioned in the affidavit is not same as in the land document. Further, khasra Nos. mentioned in the affidavit are not therein the schedule of the land of the VTR and of the affidavit. 11) The land is in the name of individual. 12) The institution is not functioning as per NCTE norms and the salary and service conditions of teaching and non-teaching staff are also not as per NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Holy Child B.Ed. College (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 22/11/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Dr. Debashis Sarkar, Secretary and Shri. Shailendra Narayan Prysty, Member, of the society Holy Child B.Ed. College, Malda, West Bengal presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the land was under the possession of Holy Child B.Ed. College. To support this fact the institution submitted the sale deed of the land, possession certificate in favour of Holy Child B.Ed. College issued by B.L.L.R.O., Malda, Govt of West Bengal and the mutation certificate issued by B.L.L.R.O. - Malda, Govt. of West Bengal alongwith the appeal. The sale deed of the land was submitted to the ERC on 05/01/2010 by speed post, again through VT members on 31/05/2010; the institution submitted the affidavit in the prescribed format containing the list of teaching staff separately for B.Ed. and D.Ed. courses to the VT members on the day of inspection dated 31/05/2010. Based on the list, the VT members asked all the teaching staff to fill-up the format for information about the teaching staff. The VT members

2 collected the filled-in format directly from the teaching staff of B.Ed. and D.Ed. Courses separately and submitted to the ERC; the institution purchased the materials for the language learning prior to obtaining the recognition from the ERC. Photocopy of the vouchers which showed the purchase of the materials for the language learning materials were submitted to the ERC through the VT members on 16/05/2008 prior to the recognition of B.Ed. course and also prior to the recognition of the D.Ed. course on 21/05/2009. The language learning materials for the students were observed by the VT members during last three inspections; the institution had submitted the affidavit on Rs. 10/- stamp paper of all the teaching staff of B.Ed. and D.Ed. courses separately along with that of the principal to the VT members on the day of inspection on 31/05/2010. Also the institution had submitted the photocopy on Rs. 10/- stamp papers to the ERC along with the written representation by speed post on 03/08/2010; institution had submitted the photo copy of testimonials and experience certificates of all the teaching staff along with that of Principal separately for B.Ed. and D.Ed. courses to the VT members on the day of inspection on 31/05/2010, as well as along with written representation by speed post on 03/08/2010; the fact remains that the society: Singatola Society for Education, Relief & Vocational Excellence was registered under Society Registration Act XXVI of 1961 Govt. of West Bengal on 09/02/1996 Vide the registration certificate No. - S/82693 which speaks for itself. This certificate had been submitted to the ERC, NCTE several times, as and when required, including to the VT members on the day of inspections on 16/05/2008, 21/05/2009 & 31/05/2010 as well as along with written representation on 03/08/2010; fixed deposits for endowment fund and reserve fund separately for B.Ed. & D.Ed. course were submitted separately to ERC, N.C.T.E. at the time of obtaining recognition. Also the institution converted the fixed deposits to the joint operation system. The institution was having separate sets of infrastructure for B.Ed. and D.Ed. courses as per the norms of NCTE to run B.Ed. and D.Ed. courses. It was having three classrooms for the D.Ed. course & three classrooms for the B.Ed. course separately. This could be verified from the building plan as well as from the CD of the videography collected during the visit of VT members. Also,a copy of the building plan was submitted to ERC, NCTE along with written representation on 03/08/2010; plot numbers of the land used for the Holy Child B.Ed. College were 533, 534 and 535 which included an area of sq.mt. These plots were already registered directly in the name of Holy Child B.Ed. College by means of a registered sale deed No dated 13/07/2009 executed before the ADSR, Malda, Govt. of West Bengal. This could also be verified from the possession certificate and mutation certificate in favour of Holy Child B.Ed. College issued by B.L.L.R.O., Malda, Govt. of West Bengal; The fact was that the land was under the possession of Holy Child B.Ed. College. The institution was functioning as per the NCTE Norms and the salary and service conditions of teaching and non-teaching staff were also as per the NCTE Norms. As per NCTE norms and the guidelines of affiliated University, the institution was delivering the pay to the teaching and nonteaching staff as per the basic pay of State Govt. by means of account payee cheque. AND WHEREAS the Council deferred its decision on the appeal on for want of certain information from the ERC. It again considered the case on The Council noted that the institution submitted an application to the ERC for grant of recognition of B.Ed. course on ERC after causing an

3 inspection U/s 14 of the NCTE Act on , granted recognition to the institution for conducting B.Ed. course vide order dated In pursuance of a complaint dated received from Dr. Kalyani Sahoo, Principal of the College, the ERC got an inspection of the institution conducted u/s 17 of the NCTE Act on The VT report was positive and it inter-alia, indicated that the infrastructural and instructional facilities for both B.Ed. and D.Ed. courses were adequate and that the complaint dated as unreasonable. The ERC after considering the VTR, issued a show cause notice to the institution on on several points. The institution submitted a point-wise reply, alongwith supporting documents, to the ERC on The ERC, vide its order dated withdrew the recognition of the institution stating all the grounds of the show cause notice. It appears that ERC has not carefully taken into account the point-wise reply submitted by the institution alongwith the supporting documents in response to the show cause notice. The Council further noted that the ERC had received another complaint on , that was subsequent to the inspection of the institution U/s 17 of the NCTE Act, from the same complainant i.e. Dr. Kalyani Sahoo alleging that infrastructural and instructional facilities shown to the VT were fake. Alongwith this complaint, an audio CD and certain documents were also sent. In view of the above, the Council came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal with direction to the ERC for examination of the reply submitted by the institution in response to the show cause notice, taking into account the VT report and the documents submitted therewith, the complaint dated and the documents received alongwith it and take appropriate decision thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, 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 ERC s order dated with a direction to ERC for re-examination of the reply submitted by the institution in response to the show cause notice taking into account the VT report and the documents submitted therewith, the complaint dated and the documents received alongwith it and take appropriate decision thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Holy Child B.Ed. College, Vill - Noonbahi Road, Holy Child Campus, PO - MaldaHead Post Office,, Malda , West Bengal 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Eastern Regional Committee, 15, Neelkanth Nagar, Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of West Bengal, Kolkata.

4 F.No Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Bindeshwari Kannya Mahavidyalaya, Ambedkar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh dated 21/10/2010 is against the Order No. F.NRC/NCTE/F- 3/NRCAPP162/165 Meeting/2010/27275 dated 08/09/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed course on the grounds: on the basis of VTR dt , a show cause notice was decided in 162nd meeting of NRC and eleven reasons were given conveying unsuitability of the institution to conduct D.EI.Ed. course. Whereas the institution has established that it has earmarked area and sufficient building, it failed to establish that the building is complete in all respects, proper finishing and furnishing has been done. Even the latest photographs suggested that building lacks finishing, door/windows are not even polished, furniture is rough/unpolished and not up to the mark. Labs are totally inadequate. The total feel of the building as revealed in photos submitted is not good. The institution is not suitable to be recognized as a teacher training institution." AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Bindeshwari Kannya Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 21/10/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. Sudhir Pandey, Clerk and Sh. Suresh Verma, Manager, Bindeshwari Kannya Mahavidyalaya, Ambedkar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that he had submitted a representation dated in response to the show cause notice; while the latest photographs show that the building was complete in all respects, the NRC relied on some old photographs and did not consider the latest photographs and it was not clear how the labs were inadequate when all the equipment/items were there in all the five labs. The appellant also enclosed a copy of his representation dated sent to NRC with the appeal without adding the relevant enclosures except some photographs. AND WHEREAS the Council deferred its decision on pending receipt of certain information from NRC. It again considered the case on the Council perused the documents/photographs submitted with the reply dated of the institution in response to the NRC s show cause notice and noted that recognition was refused by the NRC for valid reasons as even the latest photographs depicted that furniture, doors and tables, surface work, etc. were unfinished; the equipment/materials in the labs were inadequate and improperly placed; the VT report dated stated that the rooms need to be furnished

5 well, and the journals to be subscribed more carefully; ET labs need to be updated, the equipment need to be placed properly. The Council, therefore, came to the conclusion that there was no justification in accepting the appeal, and hence it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS 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 hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and NRC s order dated was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Manager, Bindeshwari Kannya Mahavidyalaya, Plot No. 101, Village- Bardha Bhiura, Post- Songaon, Tehsil Akabarpur,, Ambedkar Nagar -, Uttar Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur , Rajasthan. 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

6 F.No /2010-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan, Distt. Durg, Chhatisgarh dated 01/09/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW00401/723012/137th/2009/69011 dated 06/07/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed course on the grounds: The institution has shifted to the new premises without seeking due permission from the WRC, NCTE as required in the NCTE Regulations. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 03/09/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. B.K. Srivastava, Registrar, Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan, Distt. Durg, Chattisgarh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the Trust, at one point of time, was running an institution named `Rawatpura Sarkar International University at C-1, Sector-1, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Chattisgarh, which was closed alongwith other private universities because of order of the Hon ble Supreme Court. (2) The institution Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan was granted recognition by the WRC vide order dated and the institution has its building and requisite property on land bearing Kh.No.63/2 and 63/3 situated at Kumhari, Durg District,. (3) The Trust `Rawatpur Lok Kalyan Trust was functioning from the address C-1, Sector-1, Devendra Nagar, Raipur which is at a distance of 20 km from Kumhari where the institution is situated. For administrative convenience the corporate office of the trust was shifted to the place within the college premises at Kumhari, Durg. The information regarding change of coporate/administrative office had been given to WRC through letters dated and (4) The WRC issued show cause notice on stating that the institution has been shifted from Raipur to Durg without obtaining prior permission of WRC. For this notice the institution submitted its reply stating that no shifting of the premises has been done. The institution, in furtherance of its act of fairness, also submitted a demand draft for Rs.40,000/- in case the authorities see this change of administrative office as change of premises. WRC, instead of reinspecting the premises at Durg, passed an order withdrawing recognition. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that Shri. Rawatpura Lok Kalyan Trust submitted an application on to the WRC for grant of recognition of Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar International University (SRI University) and mentioned the address of the proposed institution as `C-1, Sector-1, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Chattisgarh. It also furnished the information in the application that its own

7 building construction shall be completed by November 2003 and submitted a land document for 5.00 acre at Kh.No.63/2, 63/3. The VT that conducted inspection u/s 14 of the NCTE Act on stated that the institution proposes to function from its own building and construction of the building was nearly completed, and it was in possession of 6.48 acre of land. (2) WRC issued recognition order dated to the Department of Education, Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar International University, C-1, Sector-1, Devendra Nagar, Raipur (Appl. Code No ). WRC; Consequent upon the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court, as the University status ceased to exist, it accorded recognition vide order dated as an institution in the name of Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan, at the same premises where earlier recognition was granted to the SRI University (C-1, Sector-1, Devendra Nagar, Raipur).Thus, the recognition for B.Ed. course was given to Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan at C-1, Sector-1, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, vide order dated But, the institution applied for grant of recognition of M.Ed. course at Durg, for which only an institution already offering B.Ed. course was eligible. Since no B.Ed. course was sanctioned to the institution at Durg and B.Ed. course was actually sanctioned at Raipur, the WRC, in its 133rd meeting held on 20th and 21st April, 2010 decided to refuse recognition for the M.Ed. course and also decided to issue show cause notice for withdrawal of recognition of B.Ed. course sanctioned at Raipur as the institution shifted to Durg without obtaining prior approval of the WRC. (3) Accordingly, the WRC issued show cause notice to the institution on The institution submitted its reply on The WRC withdrew recognition of the institution. Alongwith the reply dated the institution forwarded a copy of its earlier letter dated informing the WRC that Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan which was functioning at C-1, Devender Nagar, Raipur, was shifted to its own building at Gram Chorha, near Power Grid, Durg. The Council also noted that the argument of the institution that only corporate office was shifted to Durg cannot be accepted. The institution should have shifted after obtaining permission of the WRC as required under the NCTE Regulations. Therefore, the Council was of the view that the recognition of the institution for B.Ed. course was withdrawn by WRC for valid reasons and, thus, there was no ground to accept the appeal. AND WHEREAS 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 hence, it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC s order dated was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Chief Operating Officer, Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Sansthan, Gram Chouraha, Near Power Grid, Kumhari, Distt. Durg , Chhatisgarh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

8 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Chhatisgarh, Raipur.

9 F.No /2010-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Institute, Durg, Chhatisgarh dated 18/06/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW08164/725032/133rd/2010/67706 dated 05/05/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting M.Ed course on the ground The recognition for running B.Ed. course was granted to the institution at Raipur and the institution has applied for the M.Ed. at Durg. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Institute (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 18/06/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Smt. Amita Saxena, Director, Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar Institute, Durg, Chhatisgarh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that the Head, Corporate office of the Trust was at Raipur and administrative part was being administered from Durg which is at a distance of about 20 km; the administrative block was only shifted to the institution at Kumhari, Distt. Durg, and information regarding this was sent to WRC; the inspecting team also visited the institution at Kumhari, Durg, and the institution has been conducting B.Ed. course for the last five years at Kumhari, Durg; and confusion must have been caused because of the existence of corporate office at Raipur. AND WHEREAS the Council noted that (1) the trust on submitted an application for an M.Ed. additional course with an intake of 25 students in Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Institute, Kumhari Dist. Durg (C.G.); WRC vide order dated refused recognition for non-fulfillment of the deficiencies communicated to the institute. An appeal was preferred against this order and the appellate authority remanded the matter to WRC for considering the case on merit. WRC after causing an inspection on , issued letter of intent prior to grant of recognition on 7th January The institution submitted faculty details on (2) Thereafter the WRC, referring to the visiting team report, issued a show cause notice on on the ground that the institution was not running B.Ed. course at Durg. Hence recognition could not be granted for M.Ed. course at Durg. The appellant submitted its reply on stating that earlier they were running Shri. Rawatpura Sarkar International University at Devendra Nagar, Raipur. After the verdict of Hon ble Supreme Court in the matter of `SRI University, they closed the institute and office at Devendra Nagar, Raipur and shifted all functions to their own building behind Holiday Resort, Kumhari, Distt. Durg. The WRC, after considering the reply, refused recognition. (3) The Council examined the VT report

10 and noted that the society proposed M.Ed. course in an institution namely Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Institute which was granted recognition for B.Ed. course vide recognition order No.WRC/56/723012/61/2004/9037 dated at Devendra Nagar, Raipur. Therefore, the Council was of the view that the WRC was right in refusing the recognition to the institution as it was not running B.Ed. course at Durg where recognition for M.Ed. course was sought. AND WHEREAS 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 hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC s order dated was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Chief Operating Officer, Shri Rawatpura Sarkar Institute, Behind Holidat Resort NH-kUMHARI, Durg , Chhatisgarh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Chhatisgarh, Raipur.

11 F.No /2010-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Dwarika Prasad Yadav Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Vidisha, Madhya Pradesh dated 09/07/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/NCTE/2010/RL dated 22/03/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.El.Ed (Addl. Intake) course on the grounds The land documents Khasra no. 517/ min 1 and 517 min 2 and 286/ min-2 area not properly readable in favour of soceity. The same land is used for existing D.Ed course namely Shri Dwarika Prasad Yadav Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, recognized by WRC on This is not as per NCTE Regulations AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Dwarika Prasad Yadav Shiksha Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 09/07/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri Rabindra Nath Yadav, Principal, Shri Dwarika Prasad Yadav Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Vidisha, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the appellant had been conducting D.Ed./D.El.Ed. programme w.e.f with the NCTE s recognition and affiliation of the examining body. And in the same premises, now it had proposed for D.El.Ed. programme. It was having requisite land on ownership basis in the name of the society for the existing programme as well as for the proposed programme. In proof of availability of land, the appellant submitted the required land documents i.e. (Khasra, a Khatauni document, from which the land area mentioned against each Kh. No. 517/min- 1, 517/min- 2 and 286/min-2 were readable. WRC has not provided any opportunity to the appellant for submitting its explanation against the grounds of rejection of the file not yet received from WRC. The Council deferred its decision on the appeal on that day for want of certain information from WRC. It again considered the case on AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the institution was not issued any show cause notice before rejecting the application as per the provisions contained under Section 15 of the NCTE Act. The ground on which the recognition was refused to the institution vide WRC s order dated was also not clear. The Council, therefore, came to the conclusion that there was adequate justification in accepting the appeal with a direction to the WRC for issuing show notice on the refusal grounds and taking further decision thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal,

12 affidavit, 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 WRC s order dated with direction to the WRC for issuing show notice on the refusal grounds and taking further decision thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Principal, Shri Dwarika Prasad Yadav Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Khasra No. 517, Village- Sironj, Post Office - Sirnoj, Tehsil- Sirnoj, Vidisha - -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

13 F.No /2010 Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Guru Harikishan College of Education, Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh dated 06/12/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW05682/223616/140TH/2010/71773 dated 08/11/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed. course on the ground: The College does not exist on the land of which the land documents were submitted, along with the application. The explanation given by the institution is not acceptable. The institution contravened the clause 8.11 and 8.7 of Regulations AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Shri Guru Harikishan College of Education (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 13/12/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Sh. Rajendra Khabiya, Secretary and Sh. Vikas Kothari, Director, Shri Guru Harikishan College of Education, Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the inspection of the institution u/s 14 of the NCTE Act was caused at Shastri Nagar, Ratlam; when the recognition itself was granted on consideration of visiting team s report of Shastri Nagar, Ratlam, there could be no reason to hold that the college did not exist on the land for which the land documents were submitted; WRC did not consider that the land documents for Shastri Nagar, Ratlam, which were on record at the time of grant of recognition and the visiting team had confirmed that the college existed on the land at Shastri Nagar, Ratlam. WRC decided the case of withdrawal of recognition on the basis of land documents of Barbad Road, Ratlam, which were submitted initially along with the application. There was no reason to ignore the land documents, visiting team report, etc. which mentioned the address of Shastri Nagar, Ratlam. The decision of WRC is, therefore, perverse. The Council deferred the decision on the appeal on that day for want of certain information. The case was again considered by the Council on AND WHEREAS the Council noted that (1) the appellant society Shri Guru Harikishan Shiksha Samverdhan Samiti - submitted an application on to the WRC for grant of recognition of the B.Ed. course in the name of Sri Guru Harikishan College of Education in the premises situated at Shree Guru Teg Bahadur Academy campus, Barbad Road, Ratlam. The appellant alongwith its application submitted a lease deed for 32,500 sq.ft. of land and 22,500 sq.ft. of building at Barbad Road, Ratlam and the deed was executed on between the appellant society and Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Academy and also an

14 affidavit dated mentioning the complete postal address of the institution as 40 Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Academy, Barbad, Sailana Road, Ratlam. The institution did not submit any approved building plan, building completion certificate neither at the time of submission of the application nor while sending the reply to the deficiency letter. It just submitted a lease document for the premises at Barbad, Ratlam only. The WRC conducted an inspection on The visiting team clearly mentioned the location of the institution as Shastri Nagar, Ratlam and also mentioned in the essential data sheet about a lease deed executed on for the premises at Shastri Nagar, Ratlam Distt. However, copy of the lease deed dated for Shastri Nagar premises was not annexed with the VTR. WRC did not notice that VT mentioned a different address, other than the address mentioned in the application and affidavit. Further the institution did not submit any land and building documents for the premises at Shastri Nagar. It did not raise the issue of change of location of the building even in its show cause notice dated The institution submitted a building plan vide its letter dated titled for S.G.T.B. Shaikshnik Vikas Samiti, Shastri Nagar and the plan mentioned sq.mt. of land and sq.mt. of builtup area. WRC would have issued a notice to the institution for taking the visiting team to a place other than address mentioned in the application and the lease document submitted therewith. Rather erroneously granted recognition to the institution at the premises of Shri. Guru Tegh Bahadur Academy, Barbad, Madhya Pradesh vide order dated The institution also did not bring to the notice of the WRC about the wrong address mentioned in the recognition order. It also did not submit any lease document for Shastri Nagar premises. AND WHEREAS the Council further noted that the WRC vide letter dated informed the institution about inspection of the institution u/s 17 of the NCTE Act. The visiting team that visited the institution on mentioned the location of the institution as Barbad, Ratlam and availability of sq.mt. of built-up area and sq.mt. of land. It however recorded that the postal address of location is different. The VT annexed with its report an affidavit of the institution stating the location of the institution as Shastri Nagar, Ratlam; a lease deed dated for the premises situated at Shastri Nagar and building plan of S.G.T.B Shaikshanik Vikas Samiti, Shastri Nagar. WRC on the basis of the report withdrew recognition of the institution on the ground mentioned in para-1. The Council also noted that the institution submitted/downloaded copies of the website details twice to the WRC. (a) The website details submitted prior to (inspection u/s 14) grant of recognition revealed the address of Shri. Harikishan College of Education, Aurobindo Marg, Sailana Road, Ratlam, and (b) the website details furnished after grant of recognition (at the time of inspection u/s 17) revealed the address of the institution as Shastri Nagar, Ratlam. It is apparent that the society took first visiting team to the Shastri Nagar address despite knowing very well that it had furnished in the application, affidavit and website details; land documents in support of Barbad Road, Ratlam and the institution did not bring the change of location of the institution to the notice of WRC before causing inspection or granting recognition as well as after issuing recognition order. It even furnished misleading information to the second VT that also while it informed the VT the location of the institution is at Barbad, Ratlam but furnished the document in support of Shastri Nagar premises. That s why VT recorded that the postal address of location is different. The institution has now come up with a new version stating

15 that it has purchased land adjacent to the old leased premises at Barbad Road, Ratlam and constructed a building and these premises may be inspected by the WRC. The Council noted that the Society has been changing the premises of the institution on its own as per its wish, and this is not being acceptable as per NCTE Regulations. AND WHEREAS 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 hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and WRC s order dated was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Secretary, Shri Guru Harikishan College of Education, C/O In The Campus of Shree Guru Teg Bahadur Academy, Barbad (Sailana) Road,, Ratlam -, Madhya Pradesh 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.

16 F.No /2010 Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Institute of Progressive Studies and Development, Haridwar, Uttaranchal dated 20/10/2010 is against the Order F.No.NRC/NCTE/F.3/UR-192/166th Meeting/2010 dated 19/11/2010 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting M.Ed course on the grounds 1) The total land available to the institution is 2,816 hectare which is inadequate for the existing B.Ed and B.P.Ed. Course. As such, institution cannot be given any additional course, on the present land. 2) The visiting team report has categorically mentioned that the labs are not adequate. The reply of the institution giving the details of equipments/ apparatus has been given by providing a typed list, and bills, which do not have any serial number and do not seem to be authentic. It cannot be accepted as a proof, particularly when the items were not found in the labs by VT during its visit. Moreover, the institution did not submit even a copy of stock register to establish that they have the equipments/ apparatus, in the absence of which the list or bill cannot be accepted. 3) The library and facilities therein have been found inadequate by VT. The institution has claimed that it has 7000 books. However, to substantiate its claim it has given cash receipt of books; but did not give even copy of the accession register to establish that they have been purchased and placed in the library. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Institute of Progressive Studies and Development (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 20/10/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Mrs. Kuldeep Kaushik, Chairperson and Shri. Paras Kaushik, Lecturer, Institute of Progressive Studies and Development, Haridwar, Uttaranchal presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that the institute was having land measuring sq. mts. ( acre). The institution received hectare land on long term lease for 30 years from Uttarakhand Govt. and the institute bought hectare land it self. The institute was having Sq.mts. built up area which was quite sufficient for running B.Ed., M.Ed, and B.P.Ed. courses according to NCTE norms, because according to NCTE norms only 2000 Sq.mts. built up area was essential for running B.Ed. and M.Ed courses and only 1500 Sq.mts. built up area was needed for running B.P.Ed. course. The institute would produce all the documents relating to land and built up area; the labs of the institute were fully furnished and the institute was having the genuine bills of the tools and materials relating to different labs. All the tools relating to different labs

17 were already entered in the stock registers which were inspected by the visiting team and they found them very satisfactory. The institute would again produce all the stock registers; the institute was having a very rich library containing 7086 books of 1017 titles. The visiting team inspected all the records and accession register of the library. The institute would again produce the desired document. the Council deferred its decision on that day for want of some information/documents from NRC. It again considered the case on AND WHEREAS the Council noted that the appellant had already been conducting B.Ed. and B.P.Ed. courses and submitted an application for grant of recognition of M.Ed. course on Along with the application, it submitted a lease deed for Hect. (6.958 acre) of land at Village Shikarpur/Hajjarpur. NRC after causing an inspection of the institution vide letter dated interalia informed the institution that the land area is not enough to B.Ed. B.P.Ed. and M.Ed. courses. NRC after considering the reply of the institution refused recognition vide order dated inter-alia on the ground that Hect. of land available with the institution is inadequate for the existing courses (B.Ed. and B.P.Ed.), and hence, no additional course can be granted on this land. The appellant during the course of presentation submitted one more document for Hect. of land on ownership basis and this additional land piece document which was not submitted to the NRC cannot be considered now, and moreover, this piece of land existed at Village Jaurasi, whereas the leased portion of the land existed at Shikharpur village. So both the land pieces were at two different places and they were not adjacent to each other. Further, VT also recorded in its report dated that the space and equipment in labs and library is not adequate for the existing courses and the proposed course, and therefore, the claim of the appellant that the library and facilities therein were found adequate by the VT cannot be accepted. In view of this, the Council came to the conclusion that there was no ground to accept the appeal and hence it should be rejected. AND WHEREAS 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 hence it should be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected and NRC s order dated was confirmed. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The Chairperson, Institute of Progressive Studies and Development, Opp. Landhora Railway Station, Shikarpur,, Haridwar -, Uttaranchal 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, A-46, Shantipath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur , Rajasthan.

18 4. PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttaranchal, Dehradun.

19 F.No /2010-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /04/2011 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, Junagarh, Gujarat dated 17/04/2010 is against the Order No. WRC/APW02158/322239/131st/2010/65809 dated 10/03/2010 of the Western Regional Committee, withdrawing recognition for conducting PTC course on the grounds: 1) Certified copy of land document has not been submitted. 2) Staff affidavit by the management not submitted. 3) Principal does not have adequate teaching experience as per the NCTE norms. AND WHEREAS the Correspondent, Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), preferred an appeal dated 04/05/2010 to the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Council) under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 against the said Order. AND WHEREAS Shri. Karshanbhai M. Solanki, President, Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, Junagarh, Gujarat presented the case of the appellant institution on In the appeal and during personal presentation, it was submitted that land documents were provided in vernacular language and also legally authorized translation in English submitted by the appellant institution and the same were registered in the name of Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, all the land documents submitted by the appellant were certified by the competent authority; staff affidavit was furnished to the WRC; however, another staff affidavit on Rs.100 stamp paper in the prescribed proforma was submitted alongwith the appeal; as per prevailing norms and standards, the Principal of the appellant institution was eligible for appointment as lecturer as he was having five years experience in teacher training institute and the qualification of the Principal was also as per NCTE Norms. During the presentation, the representative of the institution also submitted that a new Principal was subsequently appointed. AND WHEREAS the Council deferred its decision on that day for want of some information/documents from the WRC. It again considered the case on The Committe noted that (1) the appellant submitted an application to the WRC on for grant of recognition of PTT (PTC) course in the name of Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, Kodinor, Distt, Junagarh (the Trust name as well as institution name is same) and it submitted alongwith the application a lease deed dated in favour of the institution i.e. Somnath Charitable and Educational Trust for the premises at Survey No.270, Gohil Ni Khan Kodinar for conducting P.T.C, B.Ed. and B.P.Ed. colleges. The lease deed did not mention the land and built-up area details. (2) WRC granted recognition vide order dated to Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust for

20 conducting P.T.C. course. The President of the institution/trust vide his letter dated requested WRC for change of nomenclature and address of the institution from the existing Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, C/o Shivam Silk Palace, Opp. Government Hospital, At-Kodinar, Junagarh to Matushree Ajuben B. Solanki PTC College, Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, Somnath Academy, Voraval Highway, Near Bypass, at-kodinor, Dist- Junagarh, Gujarat. WRC in its meeting held on November 2008 permitted the change. However, no letter has been issued by the office to this effect. (3) WRC conducted an inspection u/s 17 of the NCTE Act on The visiting team in its report mentioned that the institution Matushree Ajuben B. Solanki PTC College, Kodinor has also been conducting B.Ed. (100 intake) and C.P.Ed. (50 intake) courses in the same building. The VT though mentioned a total land area of sq.mt. and built-up area sq.mt. (B.Ed sq.mt., C.P.Ed sqmt., PTC sqmt.). It did not annex with its report any document in proof of its availability. There were only 15 computers and 4250 books and labs and library facilities were shared with other courses. AND WHEREAS the Council further noted that the appellant society was in possession of land at various survey Nos. at village Gohil Ni Khan and it has executed two sale deeds and four lease deeds for the immovable property at different points of time. They are (a) lease deed dated for both land and building at Sy.No.270 (but area details are not mentioned) for conducting PTC, B.Ed., B.P.Ed. college. (b) Lease deed dated for 4400 sqmt. of land at SyNo.300, (built-up area details not mentioned). (c) Lease deed dated for sq.mt. of land at Sy.No.299 for B.Ed., C.P.Ed., PTC and M.Ed. colleges. (d) Lease deed dated for the property at Sy.No.269 for B.Ed., B.P.Ed. and PTC college (land and built-up area details not mentioned). (e) Sale deed dated for 5649 sqmt. of land at Sy.No.270/1. (f) Sale deed dated for sqmt. of land SyNo.292/2 and 302/1/11. In view of the availability of so many pieces of land, it was not certain as to on which piece of land the institution under reference is situated, and moreover, there is no mention of the Sy.No. of the land by the VT and also did not annex any land document, building plan and building completion certificate alongwith its report obviously because the institution did not made available the same to the VT. Further, land/building on private lease was permissible only during the period from to , when the NCTE Regulations, 2005 were in vogue. From , when the Regulations, 2007 came to force, private lease is not permissible. Therefore, the lease deeds dated and were not acceptable. In fact in the entire file there is no building completion certificate mentioning the Kh.No., land and built-up area details. The file also contains two different building plans. The one, submitted before the grant of recognition, was for school and hostel building, and the plan submitted on was for Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust for a built-up area of sqmt. on a plot area of 5649 sqmt. at Sy.No.270/1. The total plot area dimensions mentioned by the VT do not match with the dimension shown in the building plan. Though the institution maintained in the appeal that all the land documents were certified, the Council noted that the documents furnished were not certified. Further, it was apparent that the Trust has been running a number of courses under different college names. Therefore, it can not be ascertained as to on which piece of land the present institution is located and what is the exact built-up area, as there is no

21 building completion certificate also. The institution did not submit any affidavit by Management. Therefore, the Council came to the conclusion that a composite inspection of all the courses/institutions under the banner of Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust may be conducted by the WRC and further decision be taken only thereafter. AND WHEREAS after perusal of documents, memorandum of appeal, affidavit, 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 WRC s order dated with direction to the WRC for causing a composite inspection of all the courses/institutions under the banner of Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust and taking further decision thereafter. NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby reverses the Order appealed against. (R.P. Sisodia) Member Secretary 1. The President, Somnath Educational and Charitable Trust, C/O Shivam Silk Palace, Opp. Govt. Hospital, At- Kodinagar, Junagarh , Gujarat 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills, Bhopal PS to Chairperson 5. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.