NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR.versusVAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT.

                        [2012] 2 S.C.R. 856


A        NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR.
                                 v.
               VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT.
                 (Civil Appeal No. 3505 of 2012)

                          APRIL 12, 2012
B
            [R.M. LODHA AND H.L. GOKHALE, JJ.]

       National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 - ss.
  13 and 17 - Action uls. 17 - Whether can be taken directly
C or by following the route of inspection u/s. 13 - Held: If
  satisfaction uls. 17 can be arrived at without inspection, route
  of inspection u/s. 13 is not required to be followed - But where
  the competent authority forms the opinion that inspection is
  necessary, then the inspection and follow-up action uls. 13 is
D required ...,.. National Council for Teacher Education Rules,
  1997 - r. 8.

        National Council for Teacher Education, taking action
    uls. 17 of National Council for Teacher Education Act,
E 1993, derecognized various institutions. Applications
  were filed before Madhya Pradesh High Court as well as
  Delhi High Court challenging the derecognition. The
  question for consideration before the High Courts was
  where an action is contemplated against recognised
  institution uls. 17(1) by the Regional Committee and
F inspection of such recognised institution is found
  necessary, whether such inspection must proceed u/s.
  13 of the Act or the Regional Committee is empowered
  to carry out inspection independent of Section 13.
  Madhya Pradesh High Court took the view that it is
G imperative on the part of the Council to issue notice uls.
  13 to the recognised institution and, if on inspection u/s.
  13, contraventions are found, then a notice needs to be
  given by the Council to the concerned recognised
  institution pointing out to it the deficiencies noticed
H                                856
  NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v.            857
        VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT.
during inspection and, if the institution fails to remove     A
the deficiencies so pointed out, the action u/s. 17 may be
taken. The Delhi High Court opined that the power of
inspection by the Regional Committee is inherent in
exercise of the power u/s. 17 and it is not imperative on
the part of the Council to issue notice u/s. 13 before        B
taking action u/s. 17.

    Disposing of the appeals, the Court

     HELD: 1. Sections 17 and 13 of National Council for
Teacher Education Act, 1993 must be harmoniously              C
construed. In exercise of its powers under Section 17, the
Regional Committee may feel that inspection of a
recognised institution is necessary before it can arrive at
the satisfaction as to whether such recognised institution
has contravened any of the provisions of the Act or the       D
rules or the regulations or the orders made thereunder
or breached the terms of the recognition. In that event,
the route of inspection as provided u/s. 13 has to be
followed. If the Regional Committee has been authorised
by the Council to perform its function of inspection, the     E
Regional Committee may cause the inspection of
recognised institution to be made as provided in Section
13 and prescribed in Rule 8 of National Council for
Teacher Education Rules, 1997. Where, however, the
Regional Committee feels that the inspection of a             F
recognised institution is not necessary for the proposed
action u/s. 17, obviously it can proceed in accordance
with the law without following the route of inspection as
provided u/s. 13. [Para 28) [872-E-G]
    2. It cannot be accepted that unnecessary delay           G
would occasion if inspection of a recognised institution
is carried out in terms of Section 13 and as prescribed
by Rule 8. Rather the inspection in that manner would
bring objectivity and fairness. The guidelines for
expeditious completion of such inspection can always be       H
    858    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2012) 2 S.C.R.


A · framed by the Council. The efficacy of right of appeal u/
    s. 18 is not at all affected if the inspection.of a recognied
    institution is done in the manner indicated above. [Para
    29) [873-B-C]      .

8      3. Thus the view of the Delhi High Court that· the
  power of inspection by the Regional Committee is
  inherent in exercise of the power u/s. 17 and it is not
  imperative on the part of the Council to issue notice u/s.
  13 before taking action u/s. 17 is set aside. The view of
C Madhya Pradesh High Court that before proceeding u/s.
  17, the course of inspection provided in Section 13 has
  to be necessarily followed in all situations is also set
  aside. [Para 30) [873-D-F]            '

       4. Interest of justice shall be sub-served if the
D Council causes inspection of all the institutions
  concerned in the present appeals which approached
  Madhya Pradesh High Court and Delhi High Court - being
  made as provided in Section 13, within six weeks from
  the date of the judgment. The Council shall communicate
E to the concerned institutions the result of such inspection
  and call upon the institutions to make up the deficiencies,
  if found during such inspection, as early as may be
  possible. With regard to the institutions where no
  deficiencies are found in the course of inspection or the
F institutions which make up deficiencies brought to their
  notice as a result of inspection, the Regional Committee
  shall issue appropriate order withdrawing order of
  derecognition. In respect of the institutions. which do not
  make up the deficiencies within .time granted by the
G Council, the order of withdrawal of recognition by the
  Regional Committee shall stand. [Para 32) [874-D-F]
        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
    3505 of 2012.

H
  NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v.                859
        VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT.
     From the Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2010 of the High       A·
Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwalior in W.P. No. 4501
of 2010.
                               WITH
C.A. Nos. 3518, 3519, 3520, 3521, 3522, 3523, 3524, 3525,
                                                                  B
3526,3506,3507, 3508, 3509,3510, 3511, 3512, 3513,3514,
3515, 3516 and 3517 of 2012.

     Pallav Shishodia, Sunil Singh Parihar, S.K. Sabharwal,
Amitesh Kumar, Ravi Kant, Priti Kumari, Navin Prakash, Vivek
Malik, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Sanjay Sharawat, Jasbir Singh           C
Malik, Dr. Kailash Chand, Varun Thakur, V.N. Raghupathy, C.D.
Singh, Sanjay Sharawat, Milind Kumar, Sanjay Ghosh, Nitin
Bhardwaj, Ajit Kumar Gupta, Ajai Kumar Bhatia, Jatinder
Kumar Bhatia for the appearing parties.
                                                                  D
     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

     R.M. LODHA, J. 1. Delay condoned in filing special leave
petitions.

     2. Interlocutory application for permission to delete        E
respondent Nos. 3 and 4 from the array of parties in Special
Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12815 of 2011 is allowed at the risk
of the petitioner.

     3. Leave granted.
                                                                  F
     4. Of these 22 Appeals, 9 arise from the judgment of the
Delhi High Court and 13 from the different judgments of the
Madhya Pradesh High Court. 13 Appeals arising from the
judgments of the Madhya Pradesh High Court have been
preferred by the National Council for Teacher Education (for      G
short, 'NCTE' or 'Council') and the concerned Regional
Committee. The 9 Appeals arising from the judgment of the
Delhi High Court have been filed by various institutions.

     5. In these Appeals, the common question for                 H
    860      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A consideration is, where an action is contemplated against
  recognised institution under Section 17(1) of the National
  Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993, (for short, 'the 1993
  Act') by the Regional Committee and inspection of such
  recognised institution is found necessary, whether such
B inspection must proceed under Section 13 of the 1993 Act or
  independent of Section 13, the Regional Committee is
  empowered to carry out inspection ?

          6. The Madhya Pradesh High Court has taken the view that
   it is imperative on the part of the Council to issue notice under
C Section 13 of the 1993 Act to the recognised institution and, if
   on inspection under Section 13, contraventions are found, then
   a notice needs to be given by the Council to the concerned
   recognised institution pointing out to it the deficiencies noticed
   during inspection and, if the institution fails to remove the
D ·deficiencies so pointed out, the action under Section 17 may
   be taken.

       7. The Delhi High Court has not accepted the above view
  of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. In the view of the Delhi High
E Court, the power of inspection by the Regional Committee is
  inherent in exercise of the power under Section 17 of the 1993
  Act and it is not imperative on the part of the Council to issue
  notice under Section 13 of the 1993 Act before taking action
  under Section 17 of the 1993 Act.
F      8. Mr. Amitesh Kumar, learned counsel for the NCTE,
  stoutly defended the judgment of the Delhi High Court. He
  referred to Sections 13, 14, 15 and 17 of the 1993 Act and
  submitted that the provision of inspection under Section 13 is
  entirely different and the power of Regional Committee
G conferred under Section 17 with regard to withdrawal of
  recognition and the consequences for contravention of the
  provisions of the 1993 Act, Rules, Regulations, etc. is self-
  contained and not circumscribed by the provision of inspec::tion
  by the Council provided in Section 13. He submitted that
H Regional Committee might not be able to discharge its functions
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v. 861
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
under Section 17 appropriately if for exercise of such power the A
provision of Section 13 is read into Section 17.

    9. Learned counsel for the NCTE also raised the grievance
about the nature of direction given by the Madhya Pradesh High
Court in the impugned judgments.
                                                                   B
     10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the institutions
supported the view of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. They
submitted that the view of the Delhi High Court was not in
conformity with the statutory scheme under the 1993 Act and
the rules framed thereunder.                                       c
     11. The 1993 Act was enacted by the Parliament to provide
for the establishment of a National Council for Teacher
Education with a view to achieving planned and co-ordinated
development for the teacher education system throughout the 0
country, the regulation and proper maintenance of norms and
standards in the teacher education system and for matters
connected therewith. It came into force with effect from July 1,
1995.
    12. Section 2 deals with definitions of the expressions used E
elsewhere in the 1993 Act. Section 2(c) defines "Council" as
under:

    "Section 2(c) "Council" means the National Council for
    Teacher Education established under sub-section (1) of F
    section 3."

     Section 2(i) defines "recognised institution" as under :

    "Section 2(i) "recognised institution" means an institution
    recognised by the Council under section 14."                G
     Section 20) defines "Regional Committee" as under :
     "Section 2(j) "Regional Committee" means a committee
     established under Section 20."
                                                                   H
    862       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A According to Section 2(k), "Regulations" means regulations
  made under Section 32.

       13. The establishment of the Council is provided in Section
  3. According to sub-section (2) thereof, the Council is a body
  corporate having perpetual succession. Under sub-section (3)
8
  of Section 3, with the previous approval of the Central
  Government, the Council may establish regional offices at other
  places in India while the head office of the Council is in Delhi.

       14. Section 12 sets out the functions of the Council.
C Section 13, which is relevant for our purposes, reads as follows


          "13. Inspection.-

          ( 1) For the purposes of ascertaining whether the
D
          recognised institutions are functioning in accordance with
          the provision of this Act, the Council may cause inspection
          of any such institution, to be made by such persons as it ·
          may direct, and in such manner as may be prescribed.

E         (2) The Council shall communicate to the institution the
          date on which inspection under sub-section (1) is to be
          made and the institution shall be entitled to be associated
          with the inspection in such manner as may be prescribed.

          (3) The Council shall communicate to the said institution,
F
          its views in regard to the results of any such inspection and
          may, after ascertaining the opinion of that institution,
          recommend to that institution the action to be taken as a
          result of such inspection.

G         (4) All communications to the institution under this section
          shall be made to the executive authority thereof, and the
          executive authority of the institution shall report to the
          Council the action, if any, which is proposed to be taken
          for the purposes of implementing any such
H         recommendation as is referred to in sub-section (3).
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v. 863
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.)
     15. Recognition of teacher education institutions is               A
provided in Chapter IV of the 1993 Act. Sections 14, 15, 17
and 18, which are relevant for the consideration of the present
matter, read as follows :

    "14. Recognition of institutions offering course or training
                                                                        8
    in teacher education.-(1) Every institution offering or
    intending to offer a course or training in teacher education
    on or after the appointed day, may, for grant of recognition
    under this Act, make an application to the Regional
    Committee concerned in such form and in such manner as
    may be determined by regulations:                                   c
     Provided that an institution offering a course or training
    in teacher education immediately before the appointed
    day, shall be entitled to continue such course or training
    for a period of six months, if it has made an application           D
    for recognition within the said period and until the disposal
    of the application by the Regional Committee.

    (2) The fee to be paid along with the application under sub-
    section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed.
                                                                        E
    (3) On receipt of an application by the Regional Committee
    from any institution under sub-section (1 ), and after
    obtaining from the institution concerned such other
    particulars as it may consider necessary, it shall,-
                                                                        F
           (a) if it is satisfied that such institution has.adequate
           financial resources, accommodation, library,
           qualified staff, laboratory and that it fulfils such other
           conditions required for proper functioning of the
           institution for a course or training in teacher              G
           education, as may be determined by regulations,
           pass an order granting recognition to such
           institution, subject to such conditions as may be
           determined by regulations; or

           (b) if it is of the opinion that such institution does       H
    864      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A                not fulfil the requirements laid down in sub-clause
                 (a), pass an order refusing recognition to such
                 institution for reasons to be recorded in writing:

                       Provided that before passing an order under
                 sub-clause (b), the Regional Committee shall
B
                 provide a reasonable opportunity to the concerned
                 institution for making a written representation.

          (4) Every order granting or refusing recognition to an
          institution for a course or training in teacher education
c         under sub-section (3) shall be published in the Official
          Gazette and communicated in writing for appropriate
          action to such institution and to the concerned examining
          body, the local authority or the State Government and the
          Central Government.
D
          (5) Every institution, in respect of which recognition has ·
          been refused shall discontinue the course or training in
          teacher education from the end of the academic session
          next following the date of receipt of the order refusing
          recognition passed under clause (b) of sub-section (3).
E
                 (6) Every examining body shall, on receipt of the
                 order under sub-section (4), -

                 (a) grant affiliation to the institution, where
F                recognition has been granted; or

                 (b) cancel the affiliation of the institution, where
                 recognition has been refused.
          15. Permission for a new course or training by recognised
G         institution.-(1) Where any recognised institution intends to
          start any new course or training in teacher education, it may
          make an application to seek permission to the Regional
          Committee concerned in such form and in such manner
          as may be determined by regulations.
H
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v. 865
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
   (2) The fees to be paid along with the application under A
   sub-section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed.

   (3) On receipt of an application from an institution under
   sub-section (1), and after obtaining from the recognised
   institution such other particulars as may be considered
                                                              8
   necessary, the Regional Committee shall,-

          (a) if it is satisfied that such recognised institution
          has adequate financial resources, accommodation,
          library, qualified staff, laboratory, and that it fulfils
          such other conditions required for proper conduct C
          of the new course or training in teacher education,
          as may be determined by regulations, pass an
          order granting permission, subject to such
          conditions as may be determined by regulation; or
                                                                   D
          (b) if it is of the opinion that such institution does
          not fulfil the requirements laid down in sub-clause
          (a), pass an order refusing permission to such
          institution, for reasons to be recorded in writing:

               Provided that before passing an order refusing      E
          permission under sub-clause (b), the Regional
          Committee shall provide a reasonable opportunity
          to the institution concerned for making a written
          representation.
                                                                   F
   (4) Every order granting or refusing permission to a
   recognised institution for a new course or training in
   teacher education under sub-section (3), shall be
   published in the Official Gazette and communicated in
   writing for appropriate action to such recognised institution G
   and to the concerned examining body, the local authority,
   the State Government and the Central Government.

   17. Contravention of provisions of the Act and
   consequences thereof.-
                                                                   H
    866       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                     [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A       (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
B       to which recognition under sub-section (3) of section 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
c         institution 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
D         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
E
          ·Committee under sub-section (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
F          which such institution was affiliated for cancelling affiliation;
           and

          (b) shall be published in the Official Gazette for general
          information.
G         (3) Once the recognition of a recognised institution is
          withdrawn under sub-section (1 ), such institution shall
          discontinue the course or training in teacher education,
          and the concerned University or the examining body shall
          cancel affiliation of the institution in accordance with the
H         order passed under sub-section (1), with effect from the
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v.      867
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.]

   end of the academic session next following the date of           A
   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-section (1 ), or where an      B
   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         C
   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.
                                                                    D
   18. Appeals.-(1) Any person aggrieved by an order made
   under section 14 or section 15 or section 17 of the Act
   may prefer an appeal to the Council within such period as
   may be prescribed.
                                                                    E
   (2) No appeal shall be admitted if it is preferred after the
   expiry of the period prescribed therefor:

          Provided that an appeal may be admitted after the
   expiry of the period prescribed therefor, if the appellant
   satisfied the Council that he had sufficient cause for not       F
   preferring the appeal within the prescribed period.

   (3) Every appeal made under this section shall be made
   in such form and shall be accompanied by a copy of the
   order appealed against and by such fees as may be                G
   prescribed.

   (4) The procedure for disposing of an appeal shall be such
   as may be prescribed:

         Provided that before disallowing an appeal, the            H
    868      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A         appellant shall be given a reasonable opportunity to
          represent its case.

          (5) The Council may confirm or reverse the order appealed
          against."
B      16. Section 20 deals with Regional Committees. Sub-1
  section (1) thereof provides that the Council shall, by notification
  in the Official Gazette, establish the following Regional
  Committees, namely, (i) The Eastern Regional Committee; (ii)
  the Western Regional Committee; (iii) the Northern Regional
C Committee, and (iv) the Southern Regional Committee. Its
  composition, terms of the members, etc. are provided in
  different sub-sections. Sub-section (6) provides that the
  Regional Committee shall, in addition to its functions under
  Se.ctions 14, 15 and 17, perform such other functions, as may
D be assigned to it by the Council or as may be determined by
  regulations.

       17. The Council has been empowered to terminate the
  Regional Committee in the circumstances provided in Section
E 21. Section 27 empowers the Council to delegate its powers
  and functions, etc., except the power to make regulations under
  Section 32.

       18. Section 31 empowers the Central Government to make
  rules, while Section 32 empowers the Council to make
F regulations. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 31,
  the Central Government has framed the rules titled the National
  Council for Teacher Education Rules, 1997 (for short, 'the 1997
  Rules'). Relevant rule for the purposes of our consideration is
  Rule 8, which deals with inspection. Rule 8 provides as under
G
          "8. Inspection :-

          (1) The Council may inspect the recognised institutions in
          the manner specified in sub-rules (2) to (8).
H
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v. 869
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
    (2) The Council shall approve a panel of names of experts        A
    in teacher education or educational administration who
    may be able to inspect the recognised institutions. The
    Chairman shall nominate at least two person out of the
    panel of experts to a inspection team.
                                                                     B
    (3) The Council shall give a notice of its intention to the
    institution alongwith a questionnaire in Form - 'IV' seeking
    information within fifteen days on all relevant matters
    relating to the institution.

    (4) On receipt of the completed questionnaire, the Council       C
    shall communicate the names of the members of
    inspection team and the date of inspection to the institution.

    (5) The institution to be inspected shall nominate its one
    officer or employee, to be associated with the inspection        0
    team.

    (6) The inspection team shall ascertain as to whether the
    institution is functioning in accordance with the provisions
    of the Act and the rules and regulations made thereunder.
                                                                     E
    (7) The members of the inspection team may, if deem
    necessary, interact with the faculty members and other
    employees of the institution.

    (8) The inspection team shall submit its report to the           F
    Council within a period of fifteen days from the last day of
    the inspection."

     19. From the survey of the above provisions, it would be
seen that the Council has been established for ensuring
planned and co-ordinated developrnent for the teacher                G
education; for proper maintenance of norms and standards for
teacher education and for discharge of diverse functions
assigned to it in the 1993 Act. The Regional Committees are
empowered to discharge their functions as statutorily provided
in Sections 14, 15 and 17 and also such other functions which        H
    870     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A   may be assigned to them by the Council or which may be
    provided in the regulations. For grant of recognition to an
    institution, the Regional Committee, on receipt of the
    application as prescribed, has to consider diverse aspects,
    particularly it has to be satisfied that such institution has
B   adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified
    staff, laboratory and that the applicant-institution fulfils other
    conditions necessary for proper functioning for a course or
    training in teacher education. It is only after the Regional
    Committee issues recognition to an institution and that is
c   notified in the Official Gazette, the Examining Body grants
    affiliation to such institution.

         20. Under Section 15, the Regional Committee is
    empowered to grant permission for a new course or training
    to an institution which has already been granted recognition.
D
         21. Section 17 empowers the Regional Committee to take
    action against recognised institution where it receives a
    representation from any person or it is suo motu satisfied that
    a recognised institution has contravened any of the provisions
E   of the 1993 Act or the 1997 Rules, regulations, orders made
    or issued thereunder, etc. or the recognised institution has
    contravened the conditions of recognition.

        22. Once recognition has been granted by the Regional
  Committee to an institution, the Council has to ensure that such
F recognised institution functions in accordance with the 1993
  Act. To achieve that objective, the Council has to get inspection
  of recognised institution done periodically and, if such institution
  is found wanting in its functioning as required, then recommend
  to the institution the remedial action to be taken by it as a result
G of inspection.
       23. In view of the above statutory scheme, it is hard to
  appreciate the litigious approach of the council and the present
  controversy. If the Council feels that its function of inspection
H under Section 13 may be performed by the Regional
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v. 871
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.]

Committees, it can so provide by invoking Section 20(6) or             A
Section 27, as the case may be.
     24. What is clear from the provisions of the 1993 Act is
that post recognition, an institution acquires a different position.
On recognition by the Regional Committee under Section 14
and on affiliation being granted by the Examining Body, once           B
the recognised institution starts functioning, the interest of
teachers, employees and the students intervene. In order to
ensure that the recognised institutions function in accordance
with the 1993 Act, the 1997 Rules, regulations and the
conditions of recognition and, at the same time, functioning of        C   1

such recognised institutions is not disturbed unnecessarily, the
provision for inspection and follow-up action pursuant thereto
has been made in Section 13. By Section 13, as a matter of
law, it is intended that the Council ascertains whether the
recognised institutions are functioning in accordance with the         D
provisions of the 1993 Act or not. For that purpose, it empowers
the Council to cause inspection of any such institution to be
made by such persons as it may direct, and in such manner
as may be prescribed. The Council may authorise the Regional
Committee to carry out its function of inspection. But such            E
inspection has to be made as prescribed in Rule 8 to find out
whether such recognised institution is or is not functioning in
accordance with the provisions of the 1993 Act.
      25. In the 1997 Rules framed by the Central Government,
Rule 8 deals with inspection and sub-rule (6) provides that the        F
inspection team shall ascertain as to whether the recognised
institution is functioning in accordance with the provisions of the
1993 Act and the rules and regulations made thereunder.
     26. On inspection being completed as provided in sub-
sections (1) and (2) of Section 13 of the 1993 Act read with           G
Rule 8 of the 1997 Rules, the Council is required to
communicate to the concerned institution its views with regard
to the outcome of the inspection and, if deficiencies are found,
to recommend to such institution to make up the deficiencies.
The whole idea is that the Council as a parent body keeps an           H
    872      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2012] 2 S.C.R.


A eye over the recognised institutions that they function in
  accordance with the 1993 Act and the rules and the regulations
  and orders made or issued thereunder and, if any recognised
  institution is found wanting in its functioning, it is given an
  opportunity to rectify the deficiencies.
B
        27. Derecognition or withdrawal of recognition of a
  recognised institution is a drastic measure. It results in
  dislocating the students, teachers and the staff. That is why, the
  Council has been empowered under Section 13 to have a
  constant vigil on the functioning of a recognised institution. On
C recommendation of the Council after inspection, if a recognised
  institution does not rectify the deficiencies and continues to
  function in contravention of the provisions of the 1993 Act or
  the rules or the regulations, the Regional Committee under
  Section 17 has full power to proceed for withdrawal of ·
D recognition in accordance with the procedure prescribed
  therein.
        28. Sections 17 and 13 must be harmoniously construed.
  ·in exercise of its powers under Section 17, the Regional ·
E Committee may feel that inspection of a recognised institution
   is necessary'before it can arrive at the satisfaction as to
   whether such recognised institution has contravened any of the
   provisions of the 1993 Act or the rules or the regulations or the
   orders made thereunder or breached the terms of the
F recognition. In that event, the route of inspection as provided
   under Section 13 has to be followed. If the Regional Committee
   has been authorised by the Council to perform its function of
   inspection, the Regional Committee may cause the inspection
   of r~pognition institution to be made as provided in Section 13
   and prescribed in Rule 8. Where, however, the Regional
G Committee feels that the inspection of a recognised institution
   is not necessary for the proposed action under Section 17,
   obviously it can proceed in accordance with the law without
   following the route of inspection as provided under Section 13.
          29. Mr. Amitesh Kumar, learned counsel for the NCTE,
H
 NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TECH. EDU. & ANR. v.      873
VAISHNAV INST. OF TECH. & MGT. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
submitted that for an action under Section 17, inspection of the      A
recognied institutions would be necessary in most of the
situations and, if the route of inspection under Section 13 was
followed, it would result in delay and might affect right of appeal
given to an aggrieved institution under Section 18 against the
order of the Regional Committee passed under Section 17. The          B
submission does not appeal us. It is hard to accept that
unnecessary delay would occasion if inspection of a
recognised institution is carried out in terms of Section 13 and
as prescribed by Rule 8. Rather the inspection in that manner
would bring objectivity and fairness. The guidelines for              c
expeditious completion of such inspection can always be
framed by the Council. The efficacy of right of appeal under
Section 18 is not at all affected if the inspection of a recognied
institution is done in the manner indicated above.
     30. In view of the above, the view of the Delhi High Court       D
does not commend us and we set aside the judgment of the
Delhi High Court. The view of the Madhya Pradesh High Court
to the extent it runs contrary to what we have noted above does
not hold good. In other words, the view of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court that before proceeding under Section 17 of the             E
1993 Act, the course of inspection provided in Section 13 has
to be necessarily followed in all situations is set aside. If
satisfaction under Section 17 can be arrived at without
inspection of a recognition institution, the Regional Committee
is not required to follow the route of Section 13. However, where     F
the Regional Committee forms an opinion that for its proper
satisfaction as to whether a recognised institution has
contravened the provisions of the 1993 Act or the rules or the
regulations or the orders made or issued thereunder or the
conditions of recognition, an inspection is necessary, then           G
necessarily the inspection and follow-up action under Section
13 has to be followed. We answer the question accordingly.
     31. It appears that the concerned institutions are presently
not functional because of withdrawal of recognition. Insofar as
Appeals arising from the Madhya Prad.esh High Court are               H
    87 4    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012] 2 S.C.R. .
                                   .
A   concerned, in the Appeals preferred by the NCTE, the Court
    by an interim order stayed the judgment of the Madhya
    Pradesh. As regards the Appeals filed by the institutions from
    the judgment of the Delhi High Court, we find that this Court
    refused to grant any stay in favour of the institutions. We are
s   informed that with regard to the institutions who have appealed
    against the Delhi High Court judgment, the Regional
    Committee had already ordered withdrawal of their recognition,
    but later on, the order of withdrawal of recognition was put in
    abeyance u.ntil the decision in the Writ Petitions. It would be,
c   thus, seen that on dismissal of the Writ Petitions by the Delhi
    High Court, the order of withdrawal of recognition of the
    institutions has come into operation.
        32. In what we have discussed above, in our considered
  view, interest of justice shall be sub-served if the Council
D causes inspection of all the institutions concerned in these
  Appeals - which approached Madhya Pradesh High Court and
  Delhi High Court - being made as provided in Section 13 of
  the 1993 Act within six weeks from today. The Council shall .
  communicate to the concerned institutions the result of such
E inspection and calf upon the institutions to make up the
  deficiencies, if found during such inspection, as early as may
  be possible. With regard to the institutions where no
  deficiencies are found in the course of inspection or the
  institutions which make up deficiencies brought to their notice
F as a result of inspection, the Regional Committee shall issue
  appropriate order withdrawing order of derecognition. In
  respect of the institutions which do not make up the deficiencies
  within time granted by the Council, the order of withdrawal of
  recognition by the Regional Committee shall stand.
G        33. Civil Appeals are disposed of as above with no order
    as to costs.
        34. In view of the above, Interlocutory Applications, if any,
    do not survive and stand disposed of.

H K.K.T.                                       Appeals disposed.