Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.L. Dattu and S.J. Mukhopadhaya, JJ.
Royal Medical Trust (Regd.) – Appellant
Vs.
Union of India (UOI) and Anr. – Respondents
C.A. No. 8054 of 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 21788 of 2013)
Decided On : 10.09.2013
Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 - Section 10A – State Government for grant of the essentiality certificate – various statutory Regulations – Evidence on record - However Council rejected application for academic ground inter alia that application filed by Appellant though submitted in time is incomplete application in terms of various statutory Regulations due to non submission of affiliation certificate Aggrieved by same Appellant had approached this Court in SLP which was rejected with the grant of liberty to Appellant to approach appropriate appellate forum to exhaust available alternate remedies before approaching this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by order – Held, In instant case Appellant mindful of aforesaid directions of this Court had applied in due time adhering to statutory timelines - Its application in terms of necessary documents was in fact complete but for Affiliation Certificate from KUHS which was awaited by Appellant even after several reminders for its issuance to KUHS pressing upon urgency of matter. Since the Appellant was not at fault but constrained due to delay on part of KUCH Council was expected to have appropriately considered facts and circumstances of case pleaded by Appellant and thereafter reached a conclusion one way or other on its merits instead of functioning in such mechanical manner by rejecting application filed by Appellant and thereafter forwarding it to Central Government with its adverse recommendations - In our considered opinion, this aspect of matter ought to have been noticed by Writ Court in Writ Petition as well as Writ Appeal - Since that has not been done in our considered view court cannot sustain impugned judgment and order passed by High Court - These schedules have been prescribed upon serious consideration by all concerned - They are to be applied strict sense and cannot be molded to suit convenience of some economic or other interest of any institution especially in a manner that is bound to result in compromise of above stated principles – Accordingly while allowing the appeal Court direct the Council to register the application for the academic year 2013-2014 and thereafter, proceed with the matter on its merits in accordance with Act and Rules thereto within 15 days time from today. The higher authority after receipt of recommendations made by Council, will act upon such recommendations and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a months time from today - With these observations and directions appeal is disposed of - Appeal disposed of
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in W.A. No. 671 of 2013 dated 27.05.2013. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has rejected the Writ Appeal filed by the Appellant.
2. The Appellant-trust is the owner of a hospital Sanctioning at Cherpulassery in Palakkad District, Kerala with occupancy of 500 beds and related facilities. The Appellant, desirous of establishing a new medical college, approached the State Government for grant of the essentiality certificate. The State Government had issued the essentiality certificate valid for making an application to the Central Government for academic years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013, vide Renewed Essentiality Certificate No. 38646/S3/2006/H&FWD, dated 13.09.2010. Thereafter, in order to comply with the requirements of Section 10A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (for short "the Act"), the Appellant had filed an application before the Kerala University of Health Sciences (for short, "KUHS") to obtain Affiliation Certificate before making an application before the Central Government, dated 06.05.2012. Besides other communication between KUHS and the Appellant, on 14.06.2012 KUHS required the Appellant to submit the No Objection Certificate (Essentiality Certificate) from the State Government for the year 2013-2014 and a certificate from the revenue officials stating that the proposed land area is a single plot. The Appellant furnished the essentiality certificate for the academic years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 issued by the State Government, dated 16.08.2012 on the even date. However, for the reasons best known to KUHS, it did not issue the affiliation certificate well in time, i.e., before 31.08.2012. Therefore, the Appellant was constrained to submit the application under Section 10A(2)(a) of the Act to the Central Government without the affiliation certificate on 20.08.2012, which was referred to the Medical Council of India (for short "the Council")-Board of Governors for the purpose of its remarks and recommendations on 28.08.2012.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that after the deadline for application for the academic year 2013-2014, KUHS had issued the affiliation certificate which was sought for by the Appellant on 01.11.2012, whereafter the Appellant supplied the same to the Council for its consideration. However, the Council rejected the application for academic year 2013-2014 on the ground inter alia that the application filed by the Appellant though submitted in time is incomplete application in terms of the various statutory Regulations due to non submission of affiliation certificate on 08.10.2012.
4. Aggrieved by the action of the Council, the Appellant had approached the Writ Court in W.P. (C) No. 1549 of 2013 on 14.01.2013. The said Writ Petition came to be rejected by the Writ Court on 26.06.2013.
5. Aggrieved by the same, the Appellant had approached this Court in SLP (C) No. 13662 of 2013 which was rejected with the grant of liberty to the Appellant to approach appropriate appellate forum to exhaust available alternate remedies before approaching this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by order dated 18.04.2013.
6. Thereafter, the Appellant had filed the Writ Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench dismissed the same being of the view that the application filed by the Appellant was an incomplete application in terms of statutory Regulations and therefore, the Council was justified in not registering the application filed by the Appellant. It is the correctness or otherwise of the said order which is called in question by the Appellant before this Court.
7. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties to the lis.
8. It is neither in dispute nor can it be disputed by the Council that the Appellant herein had filed an application before KUHS for grant of affiliation certificate well in time. It is app
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
