Sri Kant vs. National Council For Teachers Education

Signature Not Verified

ITEM NO.68 COURT NO.17 SECTION X

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).65/2025

SUKHEN MONDAL & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No.87/2025 (X) Diary No(s).1422/2025 (X) (IA No.48522/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING/CURING THE DEFECTS) Date : 07-04-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Kausar Raza Faridi, AOR (N.P.) Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Hassan Zubair Waris, Adv. Ms. Shivangi Singh Rawat, Adv. Mr. Suchit Singh Rawat, Adv. Ms. Astha Shrestha, Adv. For Respondent(s) :Ms. Manisha T Karia, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shalini Chandra, AOR Mr. Deepin Deepak Sahni, Adv. Ms. Ananya Arora, Adv. Ms. Shreya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Akshat Srivastava, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C) No.65/2025 & W.P.(C) No.87/2025

The matters have been taken out of turn, on the plea of learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that as per the Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT Date: 2025.04.07 16:45:09 IST Reason:

1

order of the High Court of Calcutta the petitioners, who have continued in service, were required to undergo a bridge course to be developed by the NCTE within one year from 08.04.2024 and the petitioners and other similarly situated persons had to clear the same within six months after its notification.

2. Learned counsel for the NCTE submitted that the NCTE was required to device a module for such bridge course and the petitioners had to complete the same latest by 07.04.2025 i.e., today, as per the direction given by this Court dated 08.04.2024 in "Devesh Sharma vs. Union of India & Ors." (Diary No.4303/2024).

3. She submitted that the High Court of Calcutta may not have correctly appreciated the import of the order dated 08.04.2024 and further that the NCTE has already framed a course, which is now pending approval by the Ministry of Human Resource Development. Further learned counsel also fairly admits that as per the Supreme Court order, the onus would be on the petitioners to complete the course within the stipulated time-frame to be fixed by the NCTE only after the scheme is framed, notified and implemented.

4. Having regard to the aforesaid, by way of a clarification, we direct that till the NCTE bridge course is notified and implemented and the course is offered to the petitioners, and they do not complete the said course within the stipulated time, no coercive action shall be taken against them.

5. Though, the remaining respondents have been served, but as nobody has entered appearance, learned counsel for the petitioners

2

may take fresh steps for service including dasti as well as on the standing counsel.

6. The matters be listed on 05.08.2025.

Diary No.1422/2025

7. List on 05.08.2025.

(ARJUN BISHT) (ANJALI PANWAR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)