The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to statutory requirements and deferring to the expertise of expert bodies in academic matters.

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the Judgment dated 24.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 222/2023, the Appellant has approached this Court by filing the instant appeal. The Appellant had filed the writ petition being W.P.(C) 222/2023 challenging the Order dated 19.12.2022 passed by the National Commission for India System of Medicine (NCISM) denying the renewal of permission to the Appellant-Institution to admit 60 undergraduate students in Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) course for the academic session 2022-2023.

2. Shorn of details, facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal reads as under:

a) It is stated that the Appellant-Institution started imparting education in the field of India System of Medicine from the year 2016-17 onwards. It is stated that for the academic session 2022-2023 for BAMS course, an inspection was conducted in the Appellant-Institution on 29.09.2022 by the Medical Assessment and Rating Board.

b) Pursuant to inspection, a show cause notice was issued by the Medical Assessment and Rating Board to the Appellant-Institution pointing out certain deficiencies in the college and the Appellant-Institution was called for hearing on 25.11.2022.

c) Pursuant to show cause notice, the Appellant-Institution submitted its reply along with the supporting documents to the Medical Assessment and Rating Board.

d) By Order dated 05.12.2022, the Medical Assessment and Rating Board denied permission to the Appellant-Institution to admit 60 students in Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) course for the academic session 2022-2023. The Appellant-Institution, thereafter, preferred its first appeal against the said Order. During the pendency of the appeal, the Appellant-Institution filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) 17126/2022 against the Order dated 05.12.2022. The matter was listed on 16.12.2022 wherein the Respondent No.2/National Commission for India System of Medicine informed this Court that the decision on the first appeal of the Appellant-Institution would be decided within a couple of days and on the basis of that statement the matter was re-notified on 20.12.2022.

e) On 19.12.2022, Respondent No.2/National Commission for India System of Medicine passed an Order rejecting the first appeal of the Appellant-Institution.

f) Thereafter, the Appellant-Institution preferred a second appeal against the Order dated 19.12.2022 passed by Respondent No.2/National Commission for India System of Medicine. However, the counselling was notified by the State of Punjab and without awaiting the decision of the second appeal, the Appellant-Institution preferred another writ petition being W.P.(C) 222/2023 before this Court.

g) The learned Single Judge vide Judgment dated 24.01.2023 (impugned herein) passed in W.P.(C) 222/2023 dismissed the writ petition by observing as under:

"13. In the present case, if the deficiencies, as have been pointed out by respondent No.2, are to be seen, the same are with respect to the higher faculty in the Departments of Rachna Sharir, Swasthavvritta, Kayachikitsa and Panchakarama. It is seen that against the requirement of 30 teaching faculty, there are 25 teaching faculty excluding the excess. According to respondent No.2, the faculty being shown by the petitioner-institution to fulfill the requirement in a particular department in excess to the requirement are not to be considered to fulfill the requirement of a particular department. The respondents, therefore, state that the excess faculty in the respective department will have to be ignored for the purposes of MSR, 2016. Although, 10 per cent relaxation is considered in favour of the petitioner-institution, in that case also, against the requirement of 30 teaching faculty; the petitioner-institution should have 27 teaching faculty, whereas, the petitioner-institution admittedly has 25 faculty.

14. The total availability of higher faculty with the petitioner-institution is a