Devendra Pratap Singh, J. - (1.) THE following relevant order was passed on 16.7.2010: The following order was passed on 21.5.2010: The following order was passed on 9.4.2010: The following order was passed on 19.3.2010: 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 incase 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. Incase 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 teacher straining 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 inconsonance with the law of the land and not in anyway 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. Today a supplementary affidavit has been filed alongwith 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. List on 9.4.2010. Today reply to the second supplementary affidavit has been filed stating that the compliance is only camouflage as till date neither students have been provided nor their fee structure has been finalized by the State and the applicants do not know when the academic session of 2010 -2011 would begin. Shri Suresh Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel states that modalities for admission and commencement of the course are being finalized. He has also stated that new incumbents have come on the posts of Principal Secretary, Basic Education and Director, S.C.E.R.T. U.P., Lucknow. Whoever is functioning as Principal Secretary, Basic Education and as Director, S.C.E.R.T. U.P., Lucknow shall ensure compliance of the writ judgment in its letter and spirit as noted hereinabove. Reply to the affidavit filed on behalf of applicant may also be filed by the next date. List on 21.5.2010. The affidavits of Secretary, Basic Education and Director, S.C.E.R.T have been filed alleging that steps have been taken for compliance of the judgments. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant stating that it is all paper compliance but for NTT Course even these steps have not been taken. The history of the case shows that the officials apart from misleading the court have been acting in a most lethargic manner and even though the writ directions were to be complied within two months but about two years have passed since the Single Judge rendered his decision and 10 months from the date when the special appeal was dismissed. Let the Secretary, Basic Education and Director, S.C.E.R.T appear in person on the next date and show cause why action be not taken against them. List on 16.7.2010. The personal presence of Dr. Achala Khanna is dispensed with for the present. However, the directions have yet not been complied and it appears that half -hearted efforts are being made and the patience of the court is being tested as time and again the same prayer is made for extension of time with the promise that it would be completed by the next date. Though the history of the case shows that such promises have been broken on every date but the court restrains itself from passing any stricture at the present with the hope that the entire exercise will be completed by the next date when both the officers shall be present with details with regard to all the similarly situated colleges. List on 30.7.2010.
(2.) IN pursuance thereof, affidavits of Shri Ashok Ganguly, Director, S.C.E.R.T. and Rajiv Sharma, Principal Secretary (Basic Education) have been filed disclosing therein that in all the recognized institutions students for paid and free seats have been recommended for admission in the B.T.C. Course except for the institution Makhandwari Mahavidyalaya in Chandauli and Vidyarthi Sanatak Mahavidyalaya, Khushinagar. With regard to Khushinagar, it is stated that large scale irregularities had occurred in the examinations which had to be cancelled and fresh examinations are under way for selection of students. So far as the institution at Chandauli is concerned, students at source were not available and as such 10 students in the paid category and students in the free seats have been recommended for admission and efforts are on to recommend the remaining students. So far as the Nursery Teacher Training is concerned, the only institute is the applicant herein and efforts are under way to hold the examination and recommend the students for the said course which is to commence from 1.9.1990. Let the entire remaining exercise be completed by the next date and an affidavit be filed showing compliance.
(3.) LIST on 17.9.2010. The presence of both the officials is dispensed with for the time being.;