The Delhi High Court has held that the decision taken by NCTE (National Council for Teacher Education), by complying with the Court’s order, cannot be examined in contempt proceedings.

The High Court was considering a Petition filed under Sections 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, for the wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order passed by the Court in an earlier order.

The Single Bench of Justice Tejas Karia held, “Be that as it may, since the Respondents have now taken a decision on the Application on 02.06.2026, the validity of the said decision cannot be examined in the present contempt proceedings.”

Advocate Akhilesh K. Srivastava represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Anuj Kapoor represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The Petitioner College was granted recognition by the Western Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to run the B.Ed. course with an annual intake of 100 seats. The Petitioner, thereafter, sought shifting of the premises from which the said course was being conducted and submitted an application to the Regional Director, NCTE, seeking permission for shifting of premises (Application). As per the Petitioner, despite the said Application and subsequent representations, no decision was taken on the Application, which constrained the Petitioner to approach the High. The NCTE was directed to consider the Application expeditiously and within six weeks from the date of the said order.

Arguments

It was the case of the Petitioner that, despite the expiry of the six-week time granted by the Court, the Application filed by the Petitioner was not decided.

It was the case of the Respondents that the Petitioner had shifted its premises in 2006 and that, by way of the Application, it was seeking retrospective approval. It was also submitted that, pursuant to an order dated March 20, 2026, passed by the High Court, show cause notices were issued to the Petitioner and, thereafter, upon consideration of the response and documents furnished by the Petitioner, a decision on the Application was taken on June 2, 2026. It was thus contended that there had been no wilful disobedience of the orders passed by the Court.

Reasoning

Considering that the Respondents had taken a decision on the Application, the Bench held that the validity of the said decision could not be examined in the contempt proceedings.

The Bench took note of the petitioner’s submission that the Petitioner would avail of the remedy of assailing the said decision in appropriate proceedings and prayed that the present Petition be disposed of.

The Bench thus disposed of the Petition as having been rendered infructuous.

Cause Title: R.S.C. College v. MS. Sukhgeet Kaur (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:5125)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Akhilesh K. Srivastava, Rishabh Kumar, Ritu Kumari, Advocates

Respondent: Advocates Anuj Kapoor, Nandeesh Nanda

Click here to read/download Order


Delhi High CourtJustice Tejas Karia

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.