Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJI., J. Chelameswar, R.K. Agrawal, D.Y. Chandrachud, S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.
Amma Chandravati Educational and Charitable Trust and others - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and Another - Respondents
Writ Petition(C) No. 408 of 2017 With M.A. No. 9 of 2017 In Civil Appeal No. 4060 of 2009 (I.A. No. 92 of 2016)
Decided On : 18-07-2017
Oversight Committee - Medical Council of India - The court accepted the proposal to constitute an Oversight Committee to oversee the functioning of the Medical Council of India, granting it authority to approve decisions/recommendations of the MCI, issue remedial directions, and function until the government puts in place an alternative mechanism.
Fact of the Case:
The court accepted the proposal to constitute an Oversight Committee to oversee the functioning of the Medical Council of India, granting it authority to approve decisions/recommendations of the MCI, issue remedial directions, and function until the government puts in place an alternative mechanism.
Finding of the Court:
The court found in favor of constituting an Oversight Committee to oversee the activities of the Medical Council of India and granted it specific functions and authority.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The Oversight Committee was granted authority to oversee the functioning of the Medical Council of India, approve its decisions, issue remedial directions, and function until the government establishes an alternative mechanism.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the case in the terms mentioned, accepting the proposal to constitute the Oversight Committee and outlining its functions and authority.
ORDER
Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General of India, having obtained instructions, has handed over to us the names of five eminent doctors to constitute an Oversight Committee, consequent upon the expiry of the term of the erstwhile Oversight Committee. The names for the Oversight Committee, as suggested, are as under:
1. Dr. V.K. Paul, Professor & Head, Paediatrics, AIIMS, New Delhi
2. Dr. Randeep Guleria, Director, AIIMS, New Delhi
3. Dr. Jagat Ram, Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh
4. Dr. BN Gangadharan, Director, NIMHANS, Bengaluru
5. Dr. Nikhil Tandon, Professor & Head, Endocrinology, AIIMS, New Delhi.
It is submitted, that the Oversight Committee shall commence its functions forthwith, and that liberty be granted to the Union of India to seek substitution of the names in the Oversight Committee, if the occasion so arises.
2. We accept the proposal made to this Court by Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General of India on behalf of the Union of India. We grant liberty to the Union of India to nominate one of the members of the reconstituted Oversight Committee, as its Chairperson. We would like to record the functions, which are assigned to the Oversight Committee, which included the following:
a) the Oversight Committee will have the authority to oversee the functioning of Medical Council of India.
b) all decisions/recommendations of the MCI will require approval of the Oversight Committee before they are communicated to the Central Government.
c) the Oversight Committee will be free to issue appropriate remedial directions for improvement in the functioning of MCI.
d) the Oversight Committee will function till the Central Government puts in place any other appropriate mechanism, or until further orders.
3. The aforesaid functions are clearly limited to oversee the activities of the Medical Council of India. The decision in all matters required to be determined by the Government of India, shall be that of the Government of India, which shall record reasons for taking a view different to the one proposed by the Medical Council of India, in conjunction with the Oversight Committee. It shall also be open to the aggrieved party, if it is so advised, to assail the same, in accordance with law.
4. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
