Pattanaik, J. -
(1.)This Appeal by the Union of India is directed against the Judgment of Rajasthan High Court allowing the Writ Petition filedbefore it. A private educational institution conducting courses leading to the degree of Bachelor of Education filed a Writ Petition challenging the order passed by the Northern Regional Committee ofNational Council for teachers education rejecting the application of the institution for recognition of the B. Ed. (Vacation Course). The institution was directed not to admit students in the vacation course from 1999-2000 onwards. In the Writ Petition, the constitutional validity of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (Act 73 of 1993, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was also challenged. The High Court by impugned judgment came to hold that the order de-recognising the vacation course is bad in law. The High Court also struck down S. 17(4) of the Act.
(2.)The Parliament enacted the Act and provided for the establishment of a council for teacher education with a view to achieving planned and co-ordinated development of the teacher education system throughout the country and for regulation of proper maintenance of norms and standards in the teacher education system. Section 17 of the Act, with which we are concerned in the present case, is extracted hereinbelow :
Section 17."Contravention of provisions of the Act and consequences thereof.- (1) Where the Regional Committee is, on its own motion or on any representation received from any person, satisfied that a recognised institution has contravened any of the provisions of this Act, or the rules, regulations, orders made or issued thereunder, or any condition subject to which recognition under sub-sec. (3) of S. 14 or permission under sub-section (3) of Section 15 was granted, it may withdraw recognition of such recognised institution for reasons to be recorded in writing :
Provided that no such order against the recognised instituting shall be passed unless a reasonable opportunity of making representation against the proposed order has been given to such recognised institution :
Provided further that the order withdrawing or refusing recognition passed by the Regional Committee shall come into force only with effect from the end of the academic session next following the date of communication of such order.
(2) A copy of every order passed by the Regional Committee under sub-sec. (1),-
(a)shall be communicated to the recognised institution concerned and a copy thereof shall also be forwarded simultaneously to the university or the examining body to which such institution was affiliated for cancelling affiliation; and
(b) shall be published in the Official Gazette for general information.
(3) Once the recognition of a recognised institution is withdrawn under sub-sec. (1), such institution shall discontinue the course or training in teacher education, andthe concerned University or the examining body shall cancel affiliation of the institution in accordance with the orderpassed under sub-sec. (1), with effect from the end of the academic session next following the date of communication of the said order.
(4) If an institution offers any course or training in teacher education after the coming into force of the order withdrawing recognition under sub-sec. (1), or where an institution offering a course or training in teacher education immediately before the appointed day fails or neglects to obtain recognition or permission under this Act, the qualification in teacher education obtained pursuant to such course or training or after undertaking a course or training in such institution, shall not be treated as a valid qualification for purposes of employment under the Central Government, any State Government or University, or in any school, college or other educational body aided by the Central Government or any State Government."
(3.)On and from the date of enforcement of the Act, every institution, offering or intending to offer the course or training inteacher education, was required to make application to the Regional Committee in such form and manner as may be determined by the regulations as provided in S. 14 of the Act. In accordance with the said provision the respondent institution made an application for grant of recognition to the Bachelor of Education (vacation course). This application, having been rejected by the Northern Regional Committee of the council, the respondent had approached the High Court. Having regard to the Entry 66 of the List I of the SeventhSchedule of the Constitution, the High Court did record a conclusion that the Parliament has the legislative competence for enacting the Act with a view for achieving planned and co-ordinated development of theteacher education system. But so far as S. 17(4) of the Act is concerned, the High Court held that the Parliament cannot make law prescribing qualification for entry into the service under the State Government and such law can be made only under the Proviso to Article 309 of the constitution. In the opinion of the High Court, when NCTE cannot force a State or State funded institution to employ only teachers having a particular qualification like B. Ed. or B. P. Ed. or it cannot force the State Government for the employee to have B. Ed. degree then it cannot have power under any law to de-recognize any such degree for the purpose of employment and as such sub-sec.(4) of S. 17 is unconstitutional and ultra-vires of the Constitution. Having struck down S. 17 (4) of the Act, the High Court further directed the NCTE to issue certificate of recognition to the B. Ed. (vacation course) of the institution since the regulation of B. Ed. course imparted by the same institution was recognised by the council.