IMPORTANT POINTS
It was necessary for the MCI to reconsider its earlier stand and had recommended for such reconsideration, the MCI has declined to do so, despite being directed by the Central Government-Sub clauses (a) or (b) of Regulation 8(3)(1) had been invoked, no reconsideration was necessary- Regulation 8(3)(1) cannot be relied upon to deny to the petitioners the benefit of the principles of natural justice- Central Government has been conferred with the power to modify the time schedule in appropriate cases, lack of time also cannot be accepted as an excuse to deny to the petitioners the right of hearing to which they were entitled

Surendra Mohan, J.

The petitioners in these writ petitions are all conducting Private Self Financing Medical Colleges. They are aggrieved by the action of the Central Government in declining to grant them permission to admit students to the MBBS Course conducted by them, for the academic year 2018-2019. It is contended that the action of the Central Government is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. Since the issues that arise for consideration are common, the writ petitions were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 19386 of 2018 is the Chairman of SR Educational and Charitable Trust which is conducting a Medical College by name S.R. Medical College and Research Centre. The petitioner was granted a Letter of Permission ('LOP' for short) by the Central Government to establish a Medical College as per Ext.P1 dated 20.8.2016. Thus, the petitioner's College started functioning during the academic year 2016-2017 with a sanctioned intake of 100 students. Ext.P1 was issued on the basis of the recommendation of the Medical Council of India ('MCI' for short). As per the procedure stipulated by the Regulations of the MCI, the LOP has to be renewed every year until the first batch of MBBS Graduates pass out of the College. A regular recognition would be granted to the College only thereafter. The LOP is granted every year after the conduct of a surprise inspection by the MCI. The inspection is conducted for the purpose of ascertaining whether the requirements of sufficient facilities, Faculty as well as other infrastructure that are required as per the MCI Regulations were available or not. The number of patients, both inpatient and outpatient, are also taken into account.

3. Accordingly, for the year 2017-2018 an inspection was conducted by the MCI. The MCI found on such surprise inspection that there were deficiencies that included lack of Faculty strength, Residents, patients etc., apart from various other factors. In view of the above, the LOP was not renewed by the Central Government. The petitioner challenged the same before the Apex Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 741 of 2017. The said writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P2 order dated 3.10.2017 directing that the application submitted by the petitioner for the year 2017-2018 shall be treated as the application for the year 2018-2019. The MCI was directed to carry out an inspection as per the Regulations. After the inspection was conducted, if any deficiencies were found, the same was to be intimated to the petitioner so that it could rectify the same. A further direction that if the matter travels to the Central Government eventually, an opportunity of hearing should be given to the petitioner after which alone, the Central Government was to take a decision. The students admitted for the year 2016-2017 were allowed to prosecute their studies.

4. Thereafter, a surprise inspection was conducted by the MCI on 6th and 7th of November, 2017. The report of inspection is evidenced in these proceedings by Ext. P4 and lists a number of deficiencies. There was deficiency in the number of Resident Doctors by 15.21% and a shortage of the required Faculty by 12.64%. As per Ext.P5 notice, the Central Government sought for the explanation of the petitioner after furnishing a copy of Ext.P4 and provided an opportunity for a hearing on 8.1.2018. Accordingly, the Principal attended the meeting, submitted that the deficiencies had been rectified. A summary of the proforma in which the compliance report was submitted by the petitioner at the time of hearing is evidenced by Ext.P7. According to the petitioner, thereafter the Central Government had directed the MCI to review the matter. However, without acceding to the said request, the MCI reiterated its earlier decision that the petitioner could not be considered for renewal of the admission for the academic year 2018-2019. As per Ext.P10 order dated 31.5.2018 the Central Government aft