IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT APPEAL NO.1135 OF 2019(EDN – REG – P) BETWEEN:
SRI YADATORE B.Ed COLLEGE., ARKANATHA ROAD, 3RD CROSS, K.R.NAGAR, MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 602.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR LOKESH BHARANI C.R, SON OF RAJACHAR.
... APPELLANT (BY SMT. SIRI RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION(NCTE) OFFICE AT HANS BHAVAN, WING II, 1, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MAG, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
2. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION (NCTE) SOUTHERN REGION COMMITTEE JNANA BHARATHI CAMPUS ROAD, OPPOSITE NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL, NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU – 72 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR.
3. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, M.S.BUILDINGS, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
4. UNIVERSITY OFF MYSURU CRAWFORD HALL, MYSURU – 5750 005 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI BASAVARAJ V.SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOs. 1 AND 2;
SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.3 IS COMPLETED – UNREPRESENTED;
SRI T.P.RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNTAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 11.04.2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.51179 OF 2017 AND WRIT PETITION NOs.14494-14518 OF 2019 TO THE EXTENT ITS PROHIBITS THE APPROVAL OF THE STUDENTS ADMITTED FOR ACADEMIC YER 2018 – 19.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 11.4.2019, passed in Writ Petition Nos.51179 of 2017 and 14494-14518 of 2019 by the learned Single Judge, disposing off the writ petitions on various directions, the petitioner has filed this appeal.
2. The learned Single Judge has held that there is no fault to be found in the order impugned therein. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit a representation before the respondent-NCTE seeking relaxation of the shifting condition and if such a representation is filed, the same shall be considered by the respondent in accordance with law.
3. The only ground being urged is that the deficiencies have been complied with and the respondent-NCTE have not considered it in favour of the appellant. However, the said contention cannot be accepted in view of the request of the appellant having been considered and rejected by an order dated 1.7.2019. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the said order requires to be agitated in order to satisfy the legal rights of the appellant.
4. It is presently submitted at the Bar that subsequent to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the respondents have considered the representation and have passed an order dated 1.7.2019. In view of the submission made, we find no reasons to proceed further. The order of the learned Single Judge having spent itself and an endorsement having been issued by the respondents, necessarily the same could be challenged by the petitioner. There are no grounds to entertain these appeals in view of the subsequent events. Hence, the writ appeals are dismissed.
5. All the pending I.As. stand rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Cs/-
CT:MJ