P&H High Court Rejects Colleges' Plea To Extend Admission Deadline To Fill Vacant Seats, Avoid Financial Losses; Cites NCTE Norms

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a plea by an association of private self-financing colleges in Haryana seeking an extension of the admission cut-off for the two-year Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed) course for the 2026-28 session to October 30, 2026. The colleges had sought the extension because a large number of their seats remained vacant.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor held that the prescribed academic schedule and the mandatory requirements of the NCTE Regulations, 2014 must take precedence over the colleges' financial losses. 

Speaking for the bench Justice Kapoor said, “the plea of the petitioners for extension of the last date for any additional counselling session or for the purpose of admitting students on its own for the unfilled seats, cannot be countenanced, as the same would negate the very purpose of imparting quality education to those, who have to further impart elementary education to students in their formative years. Any relaxation in this regard shall be counter productive and would seriously prejudice the cause of education within the State.”

It also rejected the alternative plea for compensation of ₹51,600 per vacant seat.

The petitioners were the Haryana Self Finance Private Colleges Association and its President. They represent NCTE-recognised colleges that run the D.El.Ed course.

In College of Professional Education v. State of U.P. (2013) and Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of U.P. (2013), the Supreme Court laid down an admission schedule for teacher education courses. Under that schedule, admissions must close by June 28 and the academic session must begin on July 1.

SCERT Haryana issued its admission notice on April 30, 2026. Applications were to be filed between May 4 and 11, and three rounds of counselling were to follow. However, the Haryana Board declared the Class 12 results on May 12, and the CBSE and Punjab Board declared theirs on May 13.

SCERT therefore extended the last date for applications to May 20. By a notification dated June 11, it added two more counselling rounds, taking the total to five.

The petitioners alleged that the late results kept many students from applying. According to them, only 9,081 candidates applied against 18,850 seats of the 3,550 seats allotted to their member colleges, only 927 were filled and 2,523 remained vacant. 43 of the association's 88 colleges admitted only between one and nine students each

The association first approached the Supreme Court through a miscellaneous application in the Maa Vaishno Devi case. That application was dismissed as withdrawn on August 4, 2026, with liberty to pursue other remedies.

Senior Advocate Rajiv Atma Ram, appearing for the petitioners, argued that SCERT had itself violated Maa Vaishno Devi by issuing the admission notice after February 1. He submitted that the boards had declared the results late, and that the CBSE results were defective and were revised after June 21. He also argued that without enough students, the colleges could not retain their staff and the course would have to be shut down.

Counsel produced a chart showing that SCERT had allowed admissions three to eight months beyond the Supreme Court's schedule in every session from 2014-16 to 2025-27. He relied on College of Professional Education (2015), in which the Supreme Court allowed a delayed session for 2014-15. He also cited the Supreme Court's order of July 15, 2026 in Parshavanath Charitable Trust v. AICTE, which allowed admissions to AICTE-affiliated colleges until October 30, 2026.

On the 200 working days required under the 2014 Regulations, counsel submitted that 163 working days were available from November 2026 to May 2027. He argued that holding one extra hour of class daily, six days a week, would add the equivalent of 27 days and bring the total to about 190.

He also relied on Islamic Academy of Education, P.A. Inamdar and Index Medical College to argue that private colleges have a right to make admissions and that vacant seats are a national waste.

The Additional Advocate General, Haryana, relied on the High Court's own decision of April 22, 2026 in Association of NCTE Approved Colleges Trust v. State of Haryana. In that case, the Court had directed strict compliance with the Maa Vaishno Devi schedule and warned that any future departure would invite contempt. The State submitted that it had complied, that admissions closed by June 28, and that the session began on July 1, 2026.

The State argued that the February 1 date applies to admissions based on an entrance examination, and that D.El.Ed admissions in Haryana are based on Class 12 marks. It added that the Class 12 results were available online on May 12. According to the State, the single mark sheet the petitioners relied on showed a later “issue” date only because of when that copy had been applied for.

The State further submitted that the proposal for extra classes was unworkable. It pointed to the attendance requirement of 80% for coursework and 90% for school internship, and said that only 154 working days would be left for students admitted around October 2026.

The State accused the association of adopting inconsistent stands to suit its finances. It submitted that when the State relaxed the schedule, the colleges sought compensation for delay, and when the State followed the schedule strictly, they sought extensions because they did not have enough students.

On September 15, the Court asked the State to clarify whether the petitioners' prayer could be considered in light of the NCTE Regulations. The Director, SCERT then filed an affidavit making the following points:

The academic calendar had already been notified, and sports, excursions, internship, community survey and examinations had been scheduled.

Admitted students had already completed almost 40% of the syllabus and would be prejudiced by any extension.

The school internship, which requires 90% attendance and is essential for award of the diploma, takes place in primary schools. It could not be extended into May and June because of summer vacations.

First-year examinations begin in June 2027, leaving no time to complete the remaining teaching days.

The Court framed the “solitary question” as whether the cut-off date should be extended because a substantial number of seats were vacant.

The Court examined the 2014 Regulations. It noted that they require at least 200 working days a year, excluding examination and admission periods, and a 36-hour working week. They also require minimum attendance of 80% for coursework and 90% for school internship.

The Bench held that compliance with these requirements was undisputed, “and rightly so, since any compromise with the same would have a direct bearing upon the quality of would be teachers.”

The Court pointed out that in the earlier Association of NCTE Approved Colleges case, the present petitioner association had sought to intervene and had opposed admissions made after the Supreme Court's cut-off date. It recalled that in that judgment it had clearly said that “henceforth” no admissions could be made outside the prescribed schedule.

The Court found that the authorities had substantively complied with these directions for the current year. It said the few days' extension for applications until May 20 was given only to accommodate students and institutes affected by the delayed Class 12 results, and that the schedule was completed on time.

The Court rejected the reliance on College of Professional Education (2015). It noted that the Supreme Court had expressly said that order could not be cited as a precedent, and described the directions as being in the nature of orders under Article 142. It also pointed out that the association had withdrawn its own applications seeking an extension before the Supreme Court. It held that Parshavanath did not help the petitioners because that case did not involve the requirements of the 2014 Regulations.

The Court concluded that extending the deadline for further counselling, or allowing the colleges to fill vacant seats themselves, “would negate the very purpose of imparting quality education to those, who have to further impart elementary education to students in their formative years.”

It found the compensation claim “bereft of any merit” and said there were no circumstances justifying such relief under Article 226.

The petition was dismissed without costs. Before parting, the Court reiterated that the State Government must publish its admission policy in line with Maa Vaishno Devi well before the start of the next calendar year.

Appearance: Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Deepak Balyan, Additional AG, Haryana.

Mr. Anil Chawla, Senior Panel Counsel, for UOI. Mr. B.S. Seemar, Advocate, for respondent No. 7.