1. The petitioner, which is the educational agency of an unaided training college, namely, Mannam Foundation Centre for Education Technology, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 order dated 19.10.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent, whereby the recognition granted to the petitioner's institution for conducting B.Ed Course stands withdrawn. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that Ext.P7 order is issued without giving reasonable opportunity of making representation against the proposed order, as provided in first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (for brevity 'NCTE Act'); and a declaration that Ext.P7 order of the Southern Regional committee withdrawing recognition of the petitioner's institution with effect from the academic session 2020-2021 is in violation of the 2 nd proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the NCTE Act.2. On 11.11.2020, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for NCTE sought time to get instructions from respondents 1 and 2.3. On 23.11.2020, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the provisions under the 2nd proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the NCTE Act, an order withdrawing recognition passed by the Regional Committee shall come into force only with effect from the end of the academic session next following the date of communication of such order. The learned Standing Counsel sought time to get instructions.4. On 27.11.2020, during the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for NCTE pointed out that the faculties at serial Nos. 2, 6 and 7 in Ext.P12, with date of joining as 01.12.2016, 12.09.2016 and 10.12.2016, find no place in internal page 9 of Ext.P3 (page No.30 of the writ petition). The learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to get instructions.5. On 01.12.2020, the petitioner has filed an affidavit producing therewith Ext.P13 approved staff list of the year 2017.6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for NCTE representing respondents 1 and 2, the learned Standing Counsel for the University of Kerala, representing the 3rd respondent and also the learned Government Pleader for the 4th respondent.7. The issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P7 order dated 19.10.2020 issued by the 2 nd respondent invoking the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the NCTE Act, whereby the recognition granted to the petitioner institution for running B.Ed course stands withdrawn for the reasons stated therein.8. The document placed on record as Ext.P12 is the list of faculties approved by the 3rd respondent University, which is one dated 30.10.2020. Admittedly, the said approval is one subsequent to Ext.P7 order of withdrawal. Relying on Ext.P12 approved list of faculties, the learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that presently, the institution is having the required faculties in terms of the NCTE Regulations. Considering the fact that the institution is one established in the year 2005, the respondents may be directed to reconsider the matter.9. The learned Standing Counsel for NCTE would point out that against Ext.P7 order of the Regional Committee, the petitioner is having a statutory remedy by way of an appeal under Section 18 of the NCTE Act.10. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner shall invoke the statutory remedy against Ext.P7 order by filing an appeal under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, in the prescribed format, after remitting the requisite fee, producing therewith Ext.P12 list of faculties and other relevant documents.In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by relegating the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal, under Section 18 of the NCTE Act, against Ext.P7 order

dated 19.10.2020 of the 2nd respondent. The petitioner shall file the appeal, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, in the prescribed format, after remitting the requisite fee, before the appellate authority. On receipt of such appeal, the appellate authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of that appeal.