Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010281922025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7389/2025 BAJALI TEACHERS TRAINING COLLEGE,PATACHARKUCHI REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL, P.O. AND P.S.- PATACHARKUCHI, DIST.- BAJALI, ASSAM, PIN -781326 2: SHRI KISHORE KUMAR ROY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O LANKESWAR ROY PRINCIPAL OF BAJALI TEACHERS TRAINING COLLEGE PATACHARKUCHI VILL- NIZ SARIHA P.O.BAMUNKUCHI PATACHARKUCHI DIST- BAJALI ASSAM PIN-78132 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, SHASHTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001. 2:THE CHAIRMAN NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION (NCTE) HAVING ITS OFFICE AT G-7 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI- 110075. 3:THE MEMBER SECRETARY NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION (NCTE) HAVING ITS OFFICE AT G-7 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI- 110075. Page No.# 2/4 4:THE CHAIRPERSON EASTERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION HAVING ITS OFFICE AT G-7 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI PIN-110075 5:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR EASTERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION HAVING ITS OFFICE AT G-7 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI PIN- 110075 6:THE PRINCIPAL GOSSAIGAON B.ED. COLLEGE GOSSAIGAON NEPALPARA HABRUBIL GOSSAIGAON KOKRAJHAR ASSAM- 783360 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R BORO, MR A BORUAH,MR. C BORUAH Advocate for the Respondent : SC, N C T E, DY.S.G.I. BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 19.12 .2025 Heard Mr. C. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. I. Alam, learned standing counsel, NCTE, appearing for the respondent Nos.2—5. 2. The petitioner No.1 herein is Bajali Teachers' Training College, situated at Patacharkuchi. They are aggrieved for rejection of their application for granting Page No.# 3/4 permission to introduce 4 years Integrated Teachers Education Programme (ITEP) by the Eastern Regional Committee (ERC), NCTE, in its 354th Meeting, held on 10.12.2024, on the ground that the institution does qualify the shortlisting criteria of minimum 10 points for processing of the application on the basis of extant norms and standards prescribed by NCTE. 3. Mr. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without giving any prior opportunity to clarify the drawback, if any, the petition was rejected by the NCTE, but they have issued letter of intent to Gossaigaon B.Ed. College, who had secured 7 points only. But, the petitioner herein has secured 8 points and despite securing 8 points, they have not considered the application filed by the petitioner No.1. He also submits that the petitioners had also filed applications on 14.07.2025 and 15.09.2025 to the respondent Nos.4 and 5 and the same are not yet disposed of. And as such, Mr. Boruah submits that at this stage, notice may be issued to the respondents and also it may be observed that pendency of this petition should not be a bar in disposing of the application filed by the petitioner to the respondent Nos.4 and 5 on 14.07.2025 and 15.09.2025. 4. However, Mr. Alam, learned standing counsel for the respondent NCTE has vehemently opposed the petition. Mr. Alam submits that in view of Section 18 of the NCTE Act, 1993 provides for appeal against any order made under Section 14 and 15 or Section 17 of the Act and without exhausting the aforementioned remedy, the petitioner is not entitled to move the present writ petition directly before this Court. 5. At this stage, Mr. Boruah submits that this writ petition may be disposed of by directing the petitioner approach the respondent authorities by filing an appeal as provided under Section 18 of the said Act. 6. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority under Section 18 of the NCTE Act and in the event of filing such an appeal, the respondent authorities shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Page No.# 4/4 7. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE