Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8239 - 8240 OF 2009

Zakir Hussain Primary Teachers Education College & Anr.   …Appellants

Versus

State of Bihar and Ors. …Respondents

J U D G M E N T

K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

Heard the  counsel.  These appeals  arise  out  of  the  judgment of  the  

Patna High Court in LPA No.99 of 2007 (arising out of CWJC No.11428 of  

2006) dated 23.6.2008 and the order dated 25.7.2008 in MJC No.1590 of  

2008  rejecting  the  application  for  modification  of  the  judgment  dated  

23.6.2008.  These  appeals  were  originally  posted  along  with  SLP(C)  

Nos.6511/2009, 9378/2009, 14746-14747/2009 and 14744-14745/2009. By  

order dated 10.12.2009, these two appeals were de-linked from other cases.  

1

2. The Director (Research and Training), Department of Primary Higher  

Secondary and Public Education, Government of Bihar passed an order on  

26.4.1995 granting recognition to the institution for the period 1979-81 to  

1994-96.  A copy  of  the  communication  was  forwarded to  the  Secretary,  

Bihar Schools Examination Board with a request to declare the results for  

the examination conducted for the academic sessions 1979-81 to 1983-85.  

Later, another communication dated 6.2.1997 was forwarded by the Director  

(Research and Training) to the Secretary, Bihar Schools Examination Board,  

Patna,  intimating that  14  such  training  institutes  were  recognized  by  the  

Government  including  Dr.  Zakir  Hussain  Primary  Teachers  Training  

College, Sultanganj (first appellant herein).  Dy. Secretary, Department of  

Primary, Higher Secondary & Adult Education, allegedly sent a letter dated  

4.9.1997 to the first appellant stating that permission has been granted for  

granting recognition to first appellant college for the sessions 1979-81 to  

1994-96 and consequently the prior order dated 26.4.1995 stood revoked.  

Board, however, addressed a letter dated 17.10.1997 to the Dy. Director for  

ascertaining the veracity of the department letter dated 4.9.1997 which was  

replied by the Deputy Secretary to the Government in the affirmative vide  

letter dated 3.2.1998.  

2

3. The Board, however, passed a resolution dated 27.2.2004 deciding to  

cancel  the  results  of  the  students  of  Primary Teachers  Training Colleges  

which had been withheld and not declared for several years. The legality of  

that  Resolution  was  the  subject  matter  of  a  writ  petition  –  CWJC  

No.3794/2004  filed  by  the  students  of  first  appellant  college.  The  writ  

petitioners sought a direction to the respondents to produce the Resolution  

No.3 dated 27.2.2004 of the Bihar School Examination Board and to quash  

the same. The writ petitioners also sought a direction to publish the result of  

the examination and other consequential reliefs. The writ petitioners stated  

that they were admitted to the primary teachers training course for various  

sessions between 1979-81 and 1981-83 conducted by the first appellant –  

Dr. Zakir Hussain Primary Teachers Training College, Sultanganj;  that at  

that time the College was not recognized, though application for recognition  

was pending; and that since no order was passed by the State Government  

on  the  application  for  recognition,  a  writ  petition  bearing  no.CWJC  

2428/1985 was filed which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of  

the  Patna  High  Court  on  28.1.1993  directing  the  State  Government  to  

dispose of the application for recognition.  

3

4. Counsel for the Board had opposed the said writ petition filed by the  

students on the ground of delay and laches. Further, it was also pointed out  

that the order passed by the Director granting recognition was contrary to the  

provisions of National Council for Teacher Education Act which came into  

effect on 17.8.1995. Learned Single Judge noticed that the examination took  

place in the year 1984 and the writ petition was filed only on 25.3.2004 and  

hence there was considerable delay in approaching the court. He therefore,  

dismissed the writ petition on 23.3.2005 mainly on the ground of delay and  

laches.  The  appeal  against  the  said  order  (LPA  No.396  of  2005)  was  

dismissed on 8.7.2005.  

5. Therefore, the appellant college filed a writ petition (CWJC No.11428  

of 2006) seeking a direction to the respondents to conduct an examination  

for its students of the academic sessions 1984-86, 1985-87, 1986-88, 1987-

89, 1988-90, 1989-91, 1990-92, 1991-93, 1992-94, 1993-95, and 1994-96 by  

issuing examination forms, and admissions cards and publish their results.  

The  said  writ  petition  was  also  dismissed  by  a  learned  Single  Judge  on  

6.12.2006, on the ground of delay.  

4

6. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the appellants  

filed an appeal before the Division Bench and the appeal was dismissed in  

limine on  23.6.2008.  Appellants  then  preferred  MJC  No.1590/2008  for  

recalling the order dated 23.6.2008 passed by the Division Bench which was  

dismissed on 25.7.2008. Aggrieved by those orders, these appeals have been  

preferred by the appellants.  

7. We  heard  Shri  PP  Rao,  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the  

appellants, learned counsel appearing for the Board and the learned counsel  

appearing for the State of Bihar.  

8. Dr. Zakir Hussain Primary Teachers Training College was established  

in the year 1975 and the relief sought for was with regard to the recognition  

of the college from the years 1979-81 to 1994-96. Several documents were  

produced before this Court in support of the various contentions raised by  

the parties. We find that the dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of  

delay may not be justified in view of the orders dated 20.4.1995, 6.2.1997,  

4.9.1997, 3.2.1998 passed by the government from time to time. It is also  

stated that the Board has not held the examination for the last two decades  

and for the delay on the part of the Board, the college and its students cannot  

5

be  punished.  Only  when  the  examinations  were  announced,  the  college  

could  approach the  court.  Further,  by  interim order  dated  13.6.2007,  the  

High Court had directed that the students of the college be permitted to pay  

their fees and submit examination forms. In the circumstances we are of the  

view that the writ petition ought not to have been dismissed on the ground of  

delay and laches and the matter ought to have been considered on merits.  

9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the Board submitted  

that the Board did not get an opportunity to file its counter affidavit before  

the High Court since writ petition was dismissed mainly on the ground of  

delay and laches. Counter affidavit for the first time was filed before this  

Court   along  with  a  copy  of  the  order  dated  9.4.2009  issued  by  the  

Department of Human Resource, Government of Bihar canceling the earlier  

order  dated  4.9.1997  stating  that  the  said  order  passed  was  against  the  

provisions of NCTE Act, 1993. To examine the various contentions raised  

by the parties and also the effect of the various orders produced before us, a  

detailed examination of the facts are necessary. Since the writ petition was  

dismissed mainly on the ground of delay and laches and the Letters Patent  

Appeal was dismissed at the admission stage and that the Board did not get  

an opportunity to file its counter affidavit, we feel it would be appropriate to  

6

give an opportunity to the Board to file its counter affidavit before the High  

Court  so  that  the  High  Court  would  be  in  a  better  position  to  examine  

various contentions urged by the parties.  

10. In these circumstances, we are inclined to set aside the judgment of  

the High Court and request the Division Bench of the Patna High Court to  

hear  the  matter  on  merits  after  giving  the  parties  an  opportunity  to  file  

counter affidavits and reply affidavits, if any. In view of the fact that a large  

number  of  students  are  affected  and  as  the  matter  relates  to  courses  

undergone more than two decades ago, we request the High Court to dispose  

of the matter expeditiously. We make it clear that we have not expressed any  

opinion on the merits of the case. The appeals are accordingly disposed of.  

___________________J. [R. V. Raveendran]

____________________J. [K.S. Radhakrishnan]

New Delhi; March  16, 2010.

7