SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(SC) 15

RANGANATH MISRA, A. M. AHMADI, R. M. SAHAI
Subodh Nautiyal – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT


ORDER:— We have heard Mr. Pandey at some length.

2. Recently we had occasion to deal with the practice prevailing in the seven Medical Colleges of Uttar Pradesh and we have highlighted the legal position that the Medical Council of India is entitled to make prescription of requisite qualifications and those are binding. In view of that clarification of ours and particularly the fact that we had directed the Principles of the Medical Colleges to take note of the changed position, we do not think it would be appropriate at this stage to interfere in favour of the petitioner and direct that he be admitted. The main ground on which counsel has pressed this petition is that till as late of 4-1-1991 some admissions have been given. We have already indicated in our previous orders that the course throughout India is intended to commence on a particular date and, therefore, admissions must be over prior to the date of such commencement. The intention of this Court has been to appropriately regulate the teaching in Medical Colleges both at the Under-Graduate as also in the Post-Graduate level. The happenings which have been noticed by this Court and which are being placed before th





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top