Statutory Regulators Possess Incidental Power To Enforce Accountability Through Performance Appraisal Reports: Supreme Court

"The statutory framework in which regulators are constituted, their duties and the functions as well as the necessity to ensure that they work effectively and efficiently are important to be borne in mind before exercising judicial review." Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling dated September 3, 2026, held that statutory regulators are empowered to mandate performance appraisal reports from stakeholders as an incidental and ancillary exercise of their regulatory jurisdiction to ensure the planned and coordinated development of the education system.

A bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe observed that judicial review of administrative action must not adopt a "technical or a pedantic view" when assessing the functions of a regulator tasked with a larger constitutional and statutory mandate.

Regulator's Duty To Ensure Compliance

The dispute arose when the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) issued a public notice requiring Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) to submit an annual Performance Appraisal Report (PAR) linked to the renewal of recognition. The Delhi High Court had previously set aside this notice, concluding that there was no material on record to show that the proforma had been evolved or approved by the Council, and further questioning the legality of the fees prescribed for the submission.

Scope Of Judicial Review Over Statutory Bodies

The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the NCTE or its executive arm, the Executive Committee, possessed the authority to issue such a directive without explicit, granular approval for every administrative proforma. The court was also called upon to determine if the requirement for a performance appraisal and the collection of associated process fees exceeded the regulator's powers under the NCTE Act, 1993.

NCTE Act Provides Broad Regulatory Mandate

The Supreme Court rejected the High Court’s narrow interpretation, emphasizing that the NCTE is a statutory body established to maintain norms and standards in the teacher education sector. The bench noted that Section 12(k) of the NCTE Act specifically empowers the Council to "evolve suitable performance appraisal system, norms and mechanism for enforcing accountability on recognised institutions."

"Accountability Is An Essential Principle Of Administrative Law"

The court underscored that accountability is not merely a procedural requirement but a foundational pillar of administrative law. The judgment clarified that accountability encompasses three essential constituent dimensions: responsibility, answerability, and enforceability. Responsibility entails the identification of duties, answerability requires reasoned decision-making, and enforceability mandates corrective action against any dereliction of duty.

"Judicial review of administrative action undertaken by the Council will only be effective and meaningful if accountability of Teacher Education Institutes is ensured by it."

Regulatory Measures As Incidental Powers

Addressing the argument regarding the absence of specific statutory provisions for the PAR proforma, the court ruled that such regulatory measures are inherently incidental and ancillary to the regulator's functions. The bench reasoned that because the NCTE itself is subject to performance audits by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), it is natural and necessary for the Council to require its own stakeholders to provide performance reports.

Regulators Must Avoid Technical Approach

The court further clarified that the prescribed fees are in the nature of "process fees," which fall within the scope of the regulator’s ancillary powers to facilitate administrative efficiency. The bench cautioned that constitutional courts must ensure regulators function effectively, efficiently, and in an accountable manner, and therefore should refrain from adopting a restrictive or pedantic approach toward the administrative actions of statutory bodies.

Finding that the Executive Committee acted within its jurisdiction to carry forward the mandate of the Council, the Supreme Court held the Public Notice dated 22.09.2019 to be legal and valid. Consequently, the court set aside the judgment of the Delhi High Court, reaffirming that statutory regulators possess the necessary authority to institute systems of accountability to achieve the objectives of the RTE Act and the NCTE Act.

Date of Decision: 03 September 2026