SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rekha Palli, J.
Rama Medical College Hospital and Research Centre Hapur - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 5353 of 2022 & CM Appl. 16016 of 2022 -Stay.
Decided On : 07-04-2022




The failure of authorities to provide an opportunity to rectify deficiencies before making adverse decisions violates principles of natural justice.

Headnote:(A) National Medical Commission Act, 2019 - Section 28(3) - Medical college petition for increasing MBBS seats - Rejection of increase from 150 to 200 seats due to alleged deficiencies in faculty and minor operating theatres - Decision lacks reasoning for seat reduction and fails to comply with provisions of natural justice. (Paras 1, 5, 11)

(B) Administrative law - Principles of natural justice - It is incumbent upon authorities to grant parties the opportunity to address alleged deficiencies before negative decisions are made. (Para 11)

(C) Judicial review - Delay in administrative decisions can lead to significant prejudice to parties involved, especially in academic counselling contexts. (Paras 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a private medical college, sought permission to increase MBBS seats from 150 to 250. The application was partially granted due to claimed deficiencies in faculty and facilities, which the petitioner disputes.

Findings of Court:
The court recognizes a failure by the respondents to adhere to legal standards mandated for such decisions, highlighting procedural improprieties.

Issues: The key issues are whether the alleged deficiencies were valid grounds for limiting seat increases and if natural justice principles were violated in the decision-making process.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the respondents did not provide a fair opportunity to the petitioner to address alleged deficiencies, highlighting issues with the inspection process and timing of administrative decisions.

Result: The petitioner is permitted to participate in ongoing counselling while the respondents must reassess the alleged deficiencies.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges rejection of seat increase. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's arguments against alleged deficiencies. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. respondent argues based on assessor's findings. (Para 7 , 8)
4. court observes procedural failures of respondents. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
5. court allows interim participation in counselling. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT

Rekha Palli, J. (Oral)--The petitioner has approached this Court assailing the order dated 17.03.2022 passed by the respondent no. 1 rejecting its second appeal against the respondent no.2's order dated 14.02.2022 dismissing the petitioner's first appeal against the order dated 16.11.2021 passed by the Medical Assessment and Ratings Board (MARB), permitting only increase of 50 seats for the MBBS course, as against the petitioner's application seeking increase of 100 seats for the MBBS course.

2. The petitioner is a private, unaided medical college being run under the aegis of Rama Educational Society being represented through its authorized representative, one Mr. Akash Kumar. The respondent no.1 is the Union of India through the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the respondent no.2/NMC, the main contesting respondent, has been constituted under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the `NMC Act'), and was set up in place of the erstwhile Medical Council of India (hereinafter referred to as `MCI') with an aim to inter alia improve access to quality and affordable medical education, ensure availability of adequate and high-quality medical professionals in all parts of the country, and objectively assess the medical institutions periodically in a transparent manner. Respondent no.3 is the authority entrusted to conduct counselling for the UP NEET-UG 2021. The respondent no.3 conducts counselling for 85% quota seats in the state medical colleges.

3. Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that the Letter of Intent dated 16.11.2021, vide which the permission was granted to the petitioner to increase MBBS seats from 150 to 200 only, as against its application for 250 seats, has been passed without assigning any reason as to why the petitioner's request for enhancement of seats to 250 was not being accepted and that too without referring to any deficiency in the Assessors' report. He, submits, that without prejudice to the petitioner's plea that the respondents could not include any new reasons in the appellate orders, other than those mentioned in the order dated 16.11.2021 passed by the MARB, a perusal of the impugned orders, passed in the petitioner's first and second appeal, shows that the impugned decisions to permit only increase of 50 seats is based on three purported deficiencies, which he contends are in fact non-existent.

4. He submits that out of the three deficiencies, two deficiencies pertain to shortfall of 1.84% faculty in teaching staff and 3.83% in the resident doctors. Insofar, as the third deficiency, the same relates to the purported shortfall in the number of minor OTs on the premise that the petitioner has only two minor OTs vis-a'-vis the requirement of minimum five minor OTs. Once the Assessors, at the time of inspection, were of the view that for seeking increase of MBBS seats from 150 to 250, only two minor OTs were required, the petitioner despite having more minor OTs, had shown them only the two minor OTs, as per their directions. He further contends that even the finding in the inspection report that there was a deficiency in the faculty of teaching staff and resident doctors, was taken without examining the leave applications and other documents, which the petitioner had furnished during the inspection proceedings.

5. By placing reliance on the proviso to section 28(3) of the National Medical Council Act, 2019 (the Act), he contends that in case the respondents were of the opinion that there was any deficiency as per the assessors report, they were required to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top