Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145815 Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27613 of 2025 Petitioner :- Lord Krishna Institute Respondent :- National Council For Teachers Education And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Avneesh Tripathi,Rohit Pandey,Vaibhav Tripathi Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 30.05.2025 passed by the respondent no. 1 (Annexure No.3 to this writ petition). ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 to permit the petitioner to participate in the B.Ed. counseling for academic session 2025-2026 to be conducted by the respondent no.3." 2. Mr. Pankaj Misra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that both the impugned order dated 30.05.2025 passed by the authority concerned without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also not assigning any cogent reasons. It is further submitted that the impugned order dated 30.05.2025 was proposed to recall in the meeting held on 23.06.2025 but no formal order passed on the said minutes of the meeting. It is further submitted that thereafter second meeting (443rd meeting) was held on 15.07.2025, in which, it was proposed that the decision which has been taken in the 442nd meeting, has been withdrawn, and in pursuance of that the order dated 15.07.2025 was passed. It is also apprised the Court that as per the statutory provision i.e. Section 18 of the NCTE Act an appeal has already been preferred before the appellate authority, which is pending. 3. Mr. Misra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently submitted that counselling for the B.Ed Course is already started and prayed that the petitioner institution may be allowed to participate in the on going counselling. 4. Per contra, Mr. Vaibhav Tripathi, learned counsel appeared in advance accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.1- NCTE, Mr. Avneesh Tripathi, learned counsel appeared in advance accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.2 and Mr. Rohit Pandey, learned counsel appeared in advance accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.3 vehemently opposed the instant petition and submitted that the petitioner has already preferred the statutory appeal under Section 18 of NCTE Act. It is also apprised the Court that the petitioner has not submitted the hard copy of the appeal to the appellate authority, which is mandatory requirement as per the NCTE Act, 3rd Amendment Rules, 2011. It is submitted that the petitioner may be directed to submit the hard copy of the appeal to the appellate authority. It is also submitted that before passing the impugned order, the NCTE has given the show cause notice to the petitioner and the same has been duly replied. After consideration of the reply as well as other materials on record the impugned order has been passed. There is no illegality or error in the impugned order as stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 5. At this juncture, Mr. Pankaj Misra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has referred the order dated 16.07.2025 of the High Court of Delhi At New Delhi passed in W.P. (C) 9939/2025 & CM APPL. 41403/2025 (R R Gupta Shikshan Prashikshan Sansthan & Anr. Vs. National Council For Teacher Education & Anr.) alongwith other writ petitions and submitted that the Delhi High Court has stayed the order impugned therein and allowed the respective institutions to participate in the counselling. On the basis of said judgment, it is prayed that the same benefit may be given to the petitioner by this Court. 6. Mr. Misra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has fairly conceded that the impugned order may be stayed by allowing the petitioner to participate in the ongoing counselling till the disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority. 7. Taking into consideration of the entirety of the matter as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and averments made in the petition, I am of the opinion that since the appeal is pending before the appellate authority, the petitioner shall allow to participate in the ongoing counselling, subject to the outcome of the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner. 8. In view of the above direction/ observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 Radhika (Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad