Summary
A B.Ed. college in Dehradun applied to the NCTE's Northern Regional Committee to increase its intake. The Uttarakhand Government advised against any further B.Ed. recognition: about 13,000 students were passing out every year against a need for some 2,500 teachers, so most would be unemployed. The High Court quashed that opinion as arbitrary. The Supreme Court reversed, following Vidharbha Sikshan Vyawasthapak Mahasangh. Under the NCTE Regulations the State must give the Regional Committee its comments, with detailed reasons and statistics where it opposes recognition, and those reasons may include need. A need-based decision not to recommend more B.Ed. colleges is a relevant consideration and is not arbitrary.
Issues
- Whether the State Government's opinion, communicated to the NCTE, not to recommend new B.Ed. recognition or increased intake because supply of B.Ed. graduates far exceeded the need for teachers was arbitrary and liable to be quashed under Article 226.
Provisions considered
- Rule 7(5), NCTE Regulations, 2014The State must send its recommendations or comments to the Regional Committee and, if not in favour, give detailed reasons with necessary statistics, which may include the need for teachers and which the Committee must consider. (¶¶ 4, 8)
- Section 14(1), National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993The college had been recognised under this provision; its application to increase intake was before the Northern Regional Committee. (¶ 2)
- Article 226, Constitution of IndiaThe High Court erred in interfering with a need-based policy opinion of the State as arbitrary. (¶¶ 6, 8)
Held
- In Vidharbha Sikshan Vyawasthapak Mahasangh this Court upheld a State's refusal to permit new D.Ed. colleges where intake far exceeded the requirement and would cause large-scale unemployment; applying it, the High Court erred in holding the State's opinion arbitrary. (¶¶ 7, 8)
- Since the State Government must give detailed reasons with statistics when it does not favour recognition, those reasons can include need; its opinion that further B.Ed. colleges should not be recognised as some 13,000 students pass out annually against a need of about 2,500 teachers rests on a relevant consideration and is not arbitrary. (¶ 8)
Result
Civil Appeal No. 8013 of 2022 allowed; the Uttarakhand High Court's judgment dated 10.09.2018 in Special Appeal No. 144 of 2014 and the Single Judge's judgment dated 04.04.2014 in Writ Petition No. 2464 of 2013 set aside; no costs.