2013 Supreme(Del) 232
High Court of Delhi
G.S. SISTANI, J.
National Institute of Medical Sciences and Research & Another
Versus
Board of Governors in Super Session of Medical Council of India & Another
W.P.(C) Nos. 6258, 6259, 6260, 6265, 6266 of 2012 & 335 of 2013
Decided on : 25-02-2013
For the Petitioners:Maninder Singh, Sr. Advocate with Srikant Mishra, Ms. Charu Ambwani, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Amit Kumar, Ashish Kumar for MCI, R2, Amrit Pal Singh, Rupinder Pal Singh, Advocates.
Headnote:
Medical Council of India Regulations - Regulation 8(3)(1)(d) - Case of the Petitioner was that respondent had rejected the application made by the petitioner for increase in number of seats and starting new course for the post graduation - Case of the petitioner was that the MCI without affording any opportunity of hearing passed an order & petitioner was debarred from admitting students against the enhanced capacity in the MBBS course for two sessions - Order was passed on the request for renewal of permission for admission of second batch of the MBBS students against the increase intake from 100 to 150 for the academic year 2012-13 - Order had been passed with respect to MBBS seats and the college stood debarred from admitting students against the increase intake of MBBS seats - No mention in the order with regard to the P.G. course - Court arrived at finding that Clause 8(3)(1)(d) of the Regulations, even if applied to the MBBS course could not apply to the post graduate course, as the order failed to indicate that the application of the petitioner for P.G. course also stood rejected - Held: Though an option was given to the petitioner to withdraw the order pass a speaking order for the PG course but this offer was not accepted, as the respondent was of the view that Clause 8(3)(1)(d) of the Regulations would be applicable to the PG courses as well - Petitions dismissed.
G.S. Sistani, J.
1. Although notice to show cause has only been issued in W.P.(C) 335/2013 and counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents in W.P.(C) 335/2013, short affidavits have been filed in all the matters. For the sake of convenience the facts of W.P.(C) 335/2013 are being noticed.
2. The necessary facts, to be noticed for disposal of these six writ petitions, are that the petitioner college was established in the year 2004 with a capacity of 100 seats. In the year 2010, on completion of the first batch of MBBS, Central Government recognised the college for conduct of MBBS Course with 100 seats. In the year 2010 the college applied to the MCI for enhancement of MBBS seats to 150. Permission was also sought to commence various PG courses. Between the months of January, 2011, to March, 2011, inspection of PG Medical Courses was conducted and letters of permission for the academic session 2011-2012 were granted. In the month of March, 2011, inspection for enhancement of MBBS seats from 100 to 150 was also granted to the petitioner. The petitioner college again applied for renewal of permissions for the year 2012-2013 for increased admission capacity from 100 to 150. On 20.3.2012 a show cause notice was issued by the MCI to the petitioner pointing out various discrepancies in the running of the college. A reply was filed by the petitioner on 21.3.2012. Soon thereafter on 31.3.2012 letter of permission for increase of seats in the Post Graduate courses was granted. This permission was subject to the show cause notice, which was issued by the MCI on 20.3.2012.
3. On 25.5.2012, an application was made by the petitioner college for starting/increase of seats in the Post Graduate courses w.e.f. academic year 2013-2014. The MCI issued a second show cause notice to the petitioner on 30.5.2012 to which a detailed reply was filed by the petitioner on 5.6.2012. The petitioner was also granted a personal hearing on 18.6.2012. Meanwhile the petitioner received a communication dated 25.6.2012 seeking additional information for renewal of permission of MBBS course for 150 seats. The petitioner is stated to have supplied the necessary information and documents to the respondents.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the MCI without affording any opportunity of hearing passed an order on 30.6.2012. The medical college of the petitioner was debarred from admitting students against the enhanced capacity in the MBBS course for two sessions being 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. On an application filed by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act a reply was received from the Medical Council of India that any college, which is already recognised for 100 seats and which has applied for increase of seats to 150, has only to fulfil the requirement as per the minimum standard requirements for 100/150 admissions. The order of 30.6.2012 was challenged by the petitioner by filing a writ petition in the Supreme Court of India, which was disposed of as withdrawn on 10.7.2011. While it is the case of the petitioner that this writ petition was filed directly before the Supreme Court of India as the last date for deciding the application as per the regulations was 15.6.2011 and only the Apex Court could have extended the time and since the date had already elapsed, the counsel appearing for the petitioner on instructions had withdrawn the said writ petition as the current academic year was already lost. The petitioner thereafter made a representation on 12.7.2012 and 17.12.2012, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 4509/2012. Both the representations of the petitioners were directed to be decided, which were subsequently rejected, which has led to the filing of another W.P.(C) 6418/2012 seeking a mandamus to quash the order of 30.6.2012 and 12.9.2012.
5. The case of the respondent is that the order dated 30.6.2012 has attained finality as the matter was argued in detail by the petitioner and when the Court was not