Devendra Pratap Singh, J. - (1.) THE following order was passed on 17.12.2009: Heard counsel for the parties. The applicant along with several others similarly situated institutions approached this Court through various writ petitions seeking no objection certificate/affiliation for starting two years Basic Training Course and for quashing the Government Order dated 6.9.2004 and individual order passed in reference thereto. After exchange of pleadings and hearing the parties, the leading petition was decided vide judgment and order dated 8.5.2007 by the following operative portion. In view of the aforesaid, the conclusions arrived at, it is directed that the State Council of Educational Research & Training, Lucknow shall individually re -examine the institutions, which have been ranted recognition by the National Council for Teachers Education for Basic Training Course and in case certain requirements, as per the norms/law of the recognition are still wanted, appropriate orders for removing the deficiencies in a time bound manner be issued. If even thereafter the deficiencies are removed, it may withhold the affiliation and communicate the order in that regard to the National Council for Teachers Education within reasonable time, so that the interest of the institution is not jeopardized unnecessarily. The aforesaid exercise may be completed by the State Council of Educational Research and Training, Lucknow within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Director, State Council of Educational Research and Training, Lucknow. In case essential conditions stand satisfied, the State Council of Educational Research and Training, Lucknow shall grant necessary affiliation to the individual institution concerned and then the State Government shall also ensure that necessary number of students within the permitted intake are allotted to the institution for admission in the course. In case the affiliation is refused, the petitioner institutions, who in turn will be at liberty to approach the National Council for Teachers Education or to challenge the orders of State Council of Educational Research and Training, Lucknow, before appropriate authority, as may be permissible under law. In view of the aforesaid al the writ petitions are allowed subject to the observations made above." Non -compliance, led to the filing of the present contempt petition. Upon issuance of notice, affidavit was filed on behalf of the opposite parties and in the application dated 8.10.2007 filed on behalf of the Secretary of the Department various difficulties were disclosed for implementation and therefore on the basis of averments made in paragraph No. 12 of the affidavit, it was prayed that two months time be granted for implementation of the judgment. This Court rejected the prayer by the following order dated 8.10.2007. Opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 have filed their affidavits stating that the hearing of the contempt application be deferred for a period of two months to enable the State to take a policy decision with regard to the matter in question. In may opinion, the affidavit is patently erroneous and is rejected summarily. The order of the writ court is required to be complied and it is irrelevant for the State to take a policy decision or not. List this matter on 19.11.2007, by which time the order of the writ Court should be complied failing which, the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 will appear in person. However, the writ order was not complied and when the matter was taken up on 19.11.2007, it was brought to the notice of the Court that instead a Special Appeal has been filed and that the incumbent on the post of the Secretary of the Department has been changed and therefore further time was sought, which was granted by the following order dated 19.11.2007. Pursuant to the order dated 8th October, 2007 affidavits have been filed by both the opposite parties. Opposite party No. 2 is present in Court by opposite party No. 1 is not present and an affidavit has been filed along with an application for exempting the personal appearance of opposite party No. 1 for the reasons mentioned in the affidavit. It has been stated in the affidavit that in the connected Writ Petition No. 31924 of 1995 Special Appeal has been filed which is likely to be taken up by the Court on 20th November, 2007. In such circumstances, list this Contempt Petition on 27th November, 2007. As opposite party No. 1 has been transferred, his application for exemption of his personal appearance for today and on future dates is allowed. Opposite party No. 2 shall, however, remain present on the next date. Learned Standing Counsel shall intimate the Court about the name of the officer who has assumed charge of Principal Secretary Basic Education after the transfer of Sri Rohit Nandan. The contempt proceedings were stayed on 20.11.2007 but the Special Appeal was dismissed on 31.7.2009 by the following operative portion. The learned Single Judge has further indicated that if such trained Teachers are available, they would also cater to all cross -sections of the institutions and there is no justification for the stand taken by the State in this regard. The permission to private institutions, in our opinion, would ease the complex education problem of the State and would contribute in whatever little way to bring some portion of misery in primary education to an end. It is well said that a good nursery is one which has a good gardener, who always plants 3 seeds; one for fruits; the other for bad weather and one for himself. It is not understood as to why the State Government and its bureaucracy has taken upon itself the task of creating a monopoly of professional primary teachers training when in all private and professional vocations private entrepreneurship has been encouraged by the Central Government and the State Government at all levels including Medical, Engineering, Law and the like. The policy makers of the State Government, therefore, are under an obligation to formulate a policy that is in consonance with the law of the land and not in any way create an impediment for the sake of a mere obstinate policy decision. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the State and all the appeals stand dismissed. When the matter was taken up on 1.12.2009 the following order was passed. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The applicant along with several other institutions preferred various writ petitions with common facts and involving identical issue raising a claim for grant of No Objection Certificate/Affiliation to their institutions for starting two years Basic Training Course and for quashing various orders of the State Government declining to do so on the ground that the State Government has taken a decision that it will not permit private institutions to run the aforesaid course. A learned Single Judge after clubbing all the writ petitions in the leading case of Writ Petition No. 39124 of 2005 allowed it by a reasoned and an exhaustive order and judgment dated 8.5.2007. Non compliance let to the filing of the present contempt petition where the opposite parties were summoned, however thereafter the proceedings in this contempt petition was stayed in a Special Appeal No. (1693) of 2007 but later a Division Bench of our Court dismissed the appeal vide order and judgment dated 31.7.2009. The opposite parties were granted two months time for complying with the various directions of the writ judgment but till date the said judgment has not been complied despite fresh service through covering letters dated 2.9.2009 on the fresh incumbents in the office of the opposite parties. Whoever is working as Secretary (Basic Education) Government of U.P. and as Director State Council of Educational Research and Training shall appear in person on the next date to show cause why they should not be punished for violation of the writ directions. Let a copy of this order be given to Shri D.N. Mishra, learned Standing counsel within 48 hours. List on 17.12.2009. Today, Dr. Achla Khanna, Director, S.C.E.R.T., U.P. Lucknow and Sri Anup Chandra Pandey, Secretary, Basic Education, U.P., Lucknow are present with their affidavits and again three months time is sought for execution of the writ and the appellate order. It is stated in the affidavit supporting the application that it has been decided by the Government not to file any Special Leave to Appeal but to implement the judgment for which a committee has been appointed on 10.12.2009. It is apparent from the aforesaid narration of facts that though the writ judgment was to be complied within two months, Court was misled that the judgment was in the process of implementation and time sought earlier was refused. The appeal was dismissed on 31.7.2009 and more than four months have elapsed but yet the judgments have yet not been executed. Thus, prima facie, both the opposite parties are guilty of contempt. At this stage, Sri Anup Chandra Pandey, Secretary, Basic Education has given an undertaking that the Government would implement the judgment in letter and spirit by 19.2.2010. List this petition for further orders on 26.2.2010.
(2.) TODAY a supplementary affidavit has been filed along with an application for exemption of personal appearance and discharge on behalf of Shri Anup Chandra Pandey, Principal Secretary, Basic Education, U.P. stating that affiliation was granted to all 46 institutions vide letter dated 17.3.2010. Let the reply be filed by the next date.
(3.) LIST on 9.4.2010.;