Delhi HC stays derecognition of 660 out of 2,962 teacher training institutes by NCTE
The court's order allows these institutions to participate in counselling and admit students for the 2025–26 academic session, the NCTE said in notices—containing the names of the institutes—issued between July 23 and August 1.
NCTE had set a final deadline of December 30, 2024, for Performance Appraisal Report (PAR) submissions after two extensions, requiring institutions to provide faculty details, financial statements, and geo-tagged documents.
In February 2025, it formed a five-member panel headed by Harish Chandra Singh Rathore of the NCTE's northern regional committee to recommend action against defaulters. After issuing show-cause notices, the NCTE derecognised 2,962 non-compliant institutions in April and May.
Rathore declined to comment on the development.
India's TEIs are grouped into four regions. The highest number of derecognitions were in the northern region (1,225), followed by the southern (960), western (748), and eastern (29) regions.
Among the 660 TEIs that have secured an interim stay on derecognition, the maximum—467—are from the Northern region, followed by 115 in the Western region, 71 in the Southern region, and 7 in the eastern region.
'...the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, while staying the operation of the impugned withdrawal orders till the next date of hearing, has also permitted the Petitioner institutions to participate in counselling and admit students for the academic session 2025–2026,' the NCTE said in its notices.
The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for the third week of August 2025.
The court, in its order on July 14, had asked the NCTE to issue public notices and upload the list of institutions on its website whose derecognition order has been stayed and which are permitted to admit students in the academic session 2025–26.
NCTE officials refused to comment on the development, stating that the 'matter is sub judice.'
As per the latest data available on the NCTE website, India has a total of 20,454 recognised TEIs, with the highest concentration in the northern region (8,120 TEIs), followed by the western region (4,928), southern region (4,757), and eastern region (2,649).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Streamline biometric verification for NEET, Delhi High Court tells NTA
The Delhi High Court has ordered the National Testing Agency (NTA) to streamline the biometric verification processes for the conduct of National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) in future. A bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Sachin Dutta noted that it would be 'apposite for the NTA to constitute a Grievance Redressal Framework to examine the complaints or grievances of candidates in a time-bound manner.' Also Read | Constitute grievance panel for NEET candidates facing technical issues: Delhi High Court tells NTA The court's direction came while setting aside an order of a single judge Bench that awarded 'grace marks' to two candidates of NEET (UG) 2025 by applying 'normalization formula' and other consequential directions. NTA had filed an appeal against the July 28 order. The candidates had alleged that time was lost during the course of conduct of NEET (UG) 2025, which was attributable to acts of omission and commission by the personnel deployed at the examination venue. The candidates said that on the day of the exam on May 4, 2025, although they had reached the examination centre within the stipulated time, 'disturbances and loss of time took place at the centre due to the failure of biometric verification, as a result of which there was a delay in authentication'. They said the entire process resulted in the candidates entering and being seated in the examination hall just in the nick of time. During the course of the examination, the candidates were interrupted to undergo Aadhaar verification once again and resubmit the undertaking, as a result of which crucial time was lost. NTA, in its appeal against the single judge Bench order, argued that the candidates did not strictly adhere to the reporting time referred to in the admit cards issued to them and arrived at the examination venue shortly before the prescribed outer deadline for last entry. Also Read | Delhi HC seeks NTA's response on plea alleging defective biometric system at NEET-UG 2025 exam centre The court, in the August 6 order, highlighted, 'the chaotic consequences of extending 'marks improvisation' for individual delays in biometric authentication for reasons not attributable to the testing agency'. 'Such an approach would open the floodgates to claims by candidates who experienced even minor technical delays in biometric authentication... Granting marks for delays in the process of biometric verification, that too for no fault of the appellant, would not be a justifiable course to follow,' it added.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Delhi HC sets aside order awarding grace marks to NEET candidates: ‘Would open floodgates'
The Delhi High Court has set aside a single-judge order that directed the award of grace marks to candidates who faced interruptions and lost time due to the failure of biometric verification during the NEET (UG) examination. It has now directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to 'streamline its biometric processes for the conduct of future examinations'. A division bench of the HC also held that awarding grace marks in this case would open the floodgates to similar claims by candidates of other exams, even for minor delays in biometric authentication. Two candidates had moved court, seeking that they be compensated as they lost time during the exam, owing to 'acts of omission and commission by personnel deployed at the examination venue' due to the failure of biometric verification'. As a result, there was a delay in authentication, they said. The aspirants had also highlighted that they were interrupted while writing the exam to undergo Aadhaar verification once again. In an order dated July 28, Justice Vikas Mahajan had directed that the students be awarded grace marks by applying the formula laid down in a Supreme Court judgment. The court had also ordered that the students be assigned a supernumerary rank to ensure their revised ranking does not affect the positions of other candidates. The single judge's order was challenged by NTA before the HC division bench. On Wednesday, the bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Sachin Datta set aside the single judge's order. The bench took into account that the candidates had not strictly adhered to the reporting time at their exam centre — 11 am. It also said a report from the technical agency (Innovatiview India Limited) indicated that the difficulty in biometric authentication of the two aspirants was on account of 'biometrics locked by the Aadhaar Holder'. Noting that there is merit in the NTA's assertion that 'the difficulty in biometric authentication of the candidates concerned in the present cases was attributable to the conduct of the examinees concerned themselves', the court also observed that granting grace marks will 'open floodgates' to claims by candidates who experience even minor delays in biometric authentication. '.. a larger issue that concerns the Court viz. the chaotic consequences of extending 'marks improvisation' for individual delays in biometric authentication for reasons not attributable to the testing agency. Such an approach would open the floodgates to claims by candidates who experienced even minor technical delays in biometric authentication… Any such delay, besides being not attributable to the appellant, is not scientifically measurable, the bench reasoned. Noting that the single judge had arrived at the loss of time caused to the candidates through CCTV footage as the exam itself was on pen-paper OMR, and not a computer based test, the bench recorded, 'The entire process of scrutinising unverifiable claims based on visual perusal and extrapolation from CCTV coverage, and seeking to translate the same into 'improvisation marks', is an exercise that is inherently subjective.' It further said, 'Undoubtedly, the same would undermine the finality and legitimacy of the results of the examination… Moreover, biometric verifications are part of the mandatory security process, which ensures the integrity of the examination by preventing impersonation. Granting marks for delays in the process of biometric verification, that too for no fault of the appellant, would not be a justifiable course to follow…' The bench said at this stage, 'it would be imprudent to seek to 'calculate' the extent of time lost in individual cases through visual impression gathered by perusing CCTV coverage, and then proceeding to work out 'improvisation/grace marks''. The bench also held that 'the concept of 'supernumerary rank' has no basis in the extant examination regulations' and it 'alters the inter-se merit between candidates', which may further affect cut-off thresholds.
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Passport case against businessman Sushil Ansal: Delhi court allows AVUT to assist prosecution
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court has allowed the Association of the Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT) to assist the prosecution in a fraud case against businessman Sushil Ansal. Ansal was convicted in the 1997 Uphaar cinema fire , which killed 59 people. The AVUTs chairperson, Neelam Krishnamoorthy, had filed an application to assist the prosecution in the case, raising certain objections in the investigation and filing of the chargesheet. Ansal was booked by Delhi Police's crime branch in 2019 under Section 12 of the Passport Act, which deals with obtaining a passport by suppressing information about nationality. The FIR was also registered under IPC Sections 177 (knowingly furnishing false information to a public servant) and 181 (false statement on oath or affirmation to public servant or person authorised to administer oath) 192 (fabricating false evidence), 197 (issuing or signing false certificate) and 420 (cheating). In an order on August 4, chief judicial magistrate Shriya Agarwal said, "The Association at the instance of which the law was set into motion in the present case ought to get a right of assisting the prosecution, to which there is no bar in law." AVUT, the judge said, was at liberty to assist the prosecution in the present case and no prejudice would be caused to the accused. Senior advocate Vikas Pahwa said the present case was registered through a Delhi High Court order in a writ petition filed by AVUT, and so effective right of participation could be given to the association. Earlier, in its 8-page final report, police claimed Ansal misled the government authority on oath that he has not been convicted in any criminal proceedings by any court. The case was lodged on the direction of the Delhi High Court while hearing a petition by Krishnamoorthy, alleging that Ansal concealed or gave false information to the authorities for renewal of his passport. Ansal, however, surrendered his passport on August 14, 2017 "because he knew that adverse orders against him may well be passed", the final report said. Krishnamoorthy, who lost two children in the tragedy, has been fighting a legal battle on behalf of the victims' families for over two decades. Rules stipulate for a new or a re-issue or a replacement of lost or damaged passport issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, the applicant has to disclose whether he is involved in any criminal case or not and to produce an no-objection certificate from the court concerned in case they are involved in any criminal prosecution. A fire at the Uphaar cinema during the screening of Hindi film 'Border' on June 13, 1997 had claimed 59 lives.
