1. Dispute regarding the grant of Essentiality Certificate and Consent of Affiliation for establishing a medical college under the Medical Council of India Act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2021 Supreme(SC) 104
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. KHANWILKAR, KRISHNA MURARI, B.R. GAVAI, JJ.
V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 703-704 of 2021, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 14219-14220 of 2020
Decided On : 24-02-2021
Important Points
The Court held that granting an Essentiality Certificate (EC) and Consent of Affiliation (CoA) is not a ministerial act but requires verification of standards. Additionally, an EC can be withdrawn if obtained by fraud or if the substratum on which it was granted disappears.
Subject
MEDICAL - MEDICAL COLLEGE
Act Referred
MEDICAL COUNCIL ACT: S.10(a)
Headnote
Ministerial Act - Establishment of Medical College - Essentiality Certificate - Consent of Affiliation - Granted - Appellant is a trust set up with object of promoting education in Health and Medicine - To start a Medical College, the appellant claims to have set up a 300 bedded hospital - According to case set up by appellant, requisite infrastructure was put in place and it has been trying to establish a Medical College from year onwards but due to arbitrary and discriminatory action of State Government and Kerala University of Health Sciences by denying EC and CoA, it has miserably failed in its attempt - It has been asserted in pleading that in presenti, appellant’s hospital has 76 doctors, 380 nurses and paramedical staff, 4 major operation theatres, 2 minor operation theatres, along with all other facilities and infrastructure required to run a Medical College - EC was granted for first time to appellant - Since same was not in prescribed format, therefore, Medical Council of India refused to accept application of appellant - EC was again issued to appellant for 100 seats - Since same was beyond prescribed time limit, hence it was again rejected by MCI - Appellant was again issued an EC dated - Whether Essentiality Certificate (hereinafter referred to as ‘EC’) and Consent of Affiliation (hereinafter referred to as ‘CoA’) should be granted for year to appellant – Held, Court has emphasized that time schedule either for establishment of new Medical College or to increase intake in existing colleges shall be adhered to strictly by all concerned. There is no manner of doubt that time schedule prescribed in receipt of starting a new Medical College for year is already over long back - Even last date for Academic Year which was extended to in view of prevailing Covid-19 Pandemic is also over by now - State Government of University cannot be directed to issue EC or CoA to appellant for year even notionally as suggested by the learned counsel for appellant - Relief prayed for by appellant for Academic Year, is not liable to be granted - Appeals, accordingly, fail and stand dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Shyam Divan, Udayaditya Banerjee, Sneha Ravi Iyer , Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Priyanka Prakash, Beena Prakash, G. Prakash, Gaurav Sharma, Prateek Bhatia, Dhawal Mohan, Alankrita Sinha, Venkita Subramoniam T.R, Advocates
For the Appellant(s) :Shyam Divan, Udayaditya Banerjee, Sneha Ravi Iyer , Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Priyanka Prakash, Beena Prakash, G. Prakash, Gaurav Sharma, Prateek Bhatia, Dhawal Mohan, Alankrita Sinha, Venkita Subramoniam T.R, Advocates
Table of Contents
2. Whether issuance of Essentiality Certificate is a ministerial act and whether such certificate can be withdrawn by the State Government once granted. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 )
3. Granting certificates requires verifying infrastructure and assuming student responsibility; strict adherence to time schedules and quality standards is mandatory to protect public health. (Para 19 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 32 )
4. Issuance of Essentiality Certificate is not a ministerial act and may be withdrawn if obtained by fraud or if the underlying substratum disappears. (Para 19 , 23 )
5. Appeals dismissed; relief for the specified academic year denied; liberty granted to apply for future years upon removal of deficiencies. (Para 33 )
6. Is the issuance of an Essentiality Certificate (EC) by the State Government a ministerial act?
No. It is not a ministerial act because the State must verify infrastructure and norms, and it provides an unequivocal undertaking to take responsibility for students if the institution fails to maintain standards. (Para 19 )
7. Can an Essentiality Certificate be withdrawn once it has been issued?
Yes. The State Government may withdraw an EC if it was obtained through fraud, if the substratum on which the certificate was granted disappears, or for other reasons of a similar nature. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 )
8. What is the significance of the time schedule in establishing a medical college?
Strict adherence to the prescribed time schedule is mandatory to ensure the highest standards of medical education and to provide the community with qualified medical practitioners. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 )
JUDGMENT :
KRISHNA MURARI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals arises out of the Judgment and Order dated 03.11.2020 passed by the Kerala High Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 1401 and 1413 of 2020, wherein the Division Bench of the said High Court modified the directions of the learned Single Judge to the extent of consideration for establishment of Medical College by the appellant for the Academic Year 2021-2022.
3. The issue arising for consideration before us is whether Essentiality Certificate (hereinafter referred to as ‘EC’) and Consent of Affiliation (hereinafter referred to as ‘CoA’) should be granted for the year 2020-2021 to the appellant. The other issues which need to be addressed are:-
(i) Whether grant of Essentiality Certificate by the State Government is only a Ministerial Act?
(ii) Whether Essentiality Certificate, once issued, can be withdrawn?
4. Facts in brief:
The appellant is a trust set up with the object of promoting education in Health and Medicine. To start a Medical College, the appellant claims to have set up a 300 bedded hospital in Walayar, Palakkad District in 2006. According to the case set up by the appellant, the requisite infrastructure was put in place and it has been trying to establish a Medical College from the year 2006 onwards but due to the arbitrary and discriminatory action of the State Government and the Kerala University of Health Sciences by denying the EC and CoA, it has miserably failed in its attempt. It has been asserted in the pleading that in presenti, the appellant’s hospital has 76 doctors, 380 nurses and paramedical staff, 4 major operation theatres, 2 minor operation theatres, along with all other facilities and infrastructure required to run a Medical College.
The EC was granted for the first time to the appellant on 24.01.2004 for 100 seats. However, since the same was not in the prescribed format, therefore, Medical Council of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘MCI’) refused to accept the application of the appellant. The EC was again issued to the appellant on 18.06.2009 for 100 seats. Since the same was beyond the prescribed time limit, hence it was again rejected by the MCI. The appellant was again issued an EC dated 12.01.2011. However, the Kerala University of Health and Allied Science (hereinafter referred to as ‘KUHS’) granted CoA belatedly much after the time schedule as such the college could not be established. It may be pertinent to point out that the Essentiality Certificate dated 12.01.2011 was valid only for the Academic Year 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. It is an admitted fact that the appellant failed to establish the college during the Academic Year 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 for which the EC was valid. On 10.06.2014, the State Government issued a renewed EC which contained a clerical error which was corrected belatedly on 11.12.2015 much after the date for submission of the application to the Central Government for establishment of Medical College. As a consequence, the MCI returned/ rejected the application for the Academic Year 2014-2015. Application made by the appellant for establishment of the Medical College for the year 2015-2016 was returned by the Government of India vide letter dated 17.10.2014, on the ground that CoA submitted along with the proposal was not valid for the Academic Year 2015-2016 leaving it open to the appellant to submit a fresh application for the Academic Year 2016-2017. It may be pertinent to note at this stage that the appellant had preferred Writ Petition No. 29462 of 2014 before the High Court, wherein an interim order dated 22.11.2014 was passed directing the MCI to consider the application provisionally and further direction was issued to KUHS to conduct inspection for grant of fresh CoA. However, the fresh CoA could not be granted and with the elapse of time the petition was rendered infructuous. The appellant was granted provisional CoA by KUHS for the Academic Year 2016-2017. Insofar as EC is concerned, it was issued by the Stat
