Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9430 (GAU)

MAMTAZ FOUNDATION v. GAUHATI UNIVERSITY AND 9 ORS

PIL/25/2025 · 2026-07-14

Arun Dev Choudhury

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010119782025 2026:GAU-AS:9662-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : PIL/25/2025 MAMTAZ FOUNDATION INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, FARUK ABDULLAH, R/O- VILL- BALIRAM POTHAR, P.O. BORUPUTIA, DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782428. VERSUS 1.GAUHATI UNIVERSITY AND 9 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR, JALUKBARI, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, PIN- 781014. 2:THE VICE CHANCELLOR GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR JALUKBARI GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN- 781014. 3:THE SECRETARY EXECUTIVE COUNCIL GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR JALUKBARI GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN- 781014. 4:DIRECTOR COLLEGE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR JALUKBARI GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN- 781014. 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 6:NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN G-7 SECTOR-10 NEAR DWARAKA NEAR METRO STATION NEW DELHI-110075. Page No.# 2/4 7:REGIONAL DIRECTOR EASTERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION G-7 SECTOR-10 NEAR DWARAKA NEAR METRO STATION NEW DELHI-110075. 8:DIRECTOR STATE COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION RESEARCH AND TRANING (SCERT) ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19 ASSAM 9:PRODEEP PHUKAN DIRECTOR COLLEGE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR JALUKBARI GUWAHATI-781014 ASSAM 10:TEACHERS TRANING COLLEGE MIRZA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL P.O. MIRZA P.S. PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP RURAL ASSAM PIN- 781125 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Mahanta, Advocate. : Ms. P. Saharia, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P.J. Phukan, Standing Counsel, Gauhati University for respondent Nos.1 to 4. : Ms. K. Das, Standing Counsel, Department of School Education for respondent No.5. : Mr. I. Alam, Standing Counsel, NCT for respondent Nos.6 & 7. : Mr. B.D. Deka, Advocate for respondent No.10. –B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 15.07.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have Mr. P. Mahanta, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. B.D. Deka, learned Advocate for respondent No.10. Mr. P.J. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati University; Mr. I. Alam, Page No.# 3/4 learned Standing Counsel, National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) and Ms. K. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Department of School Education are present. This Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner/Mamtaz Foundation, claiming to be an Educational Foundation incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, which aims at promoting, developing and establishing facilities for improvement of educational, social, cultural, economic and medical relief to the poor and downtrodden and for advancement of any other charitable or developmentary objects of general public utility and community welfare. The primary concern of the petitioner is that despite the de- recognition of the Teachers’ Training College, Mirza (respondent No.10), it was permitted by the Gauhati University (respondent No.9) to admit students in Teachers’ Training course and accepting money from them. During the course of the arguments, it transpired that the recognition of respondent No.10 was cancelled by NCTE but the Appellate Authority remanded the case of respondent No.10 to the authority for a re-consideration and ultimately, the recognition of respondent No.10 was restored. This Court has further been informed that again a decision was taken to de-recognize respondent No.10 but because of the intervention of the Delhi High Court in the matter, the recognition was restored provisionally till a final decision would be taken by the NCTE. As such, the concern of the petitioner, as on date, is non- existent. Page No.# 4/4 We, therefore, close this Public Interest Litigation with the liberty to the petitioner to apprise this Court in case respondent No.10 is derecognized again but continues to admit students in future. This Public Interest Litigation stands disposed off accordingly. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant