IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ.
Under Graduate Medical Education Board, New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust – Respondent
WA No. 2236 of 2025
Decided On : 22-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to interim order in w.p.(c) (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. interim relief sought for student admissions (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding application of regulations (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. legal impermissibility of granting interim relief as final (Para 18 , 28 , 31) |
| 5. consideration of deficiencies in medical education (Para 20 , 22) |
| 6. final resolution of the writ appeal (Para 32) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.
1. The appellants, who are respondents 1 and 2 in W.P.(C)No.32178 of 2025, have filed this writ appeal, invoking the provisions under Section 5(i) of the KERALA HIGH COURT ACT , 1958, challenging the interim order dated 27.08.2025 of the learned Single Judge in that writ petition.
2. W.P.(C)No.32178 of 2025 is one filed by the petitioners (respondents 1 and 2 herein), namely, V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust and its Managing Trustee, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 order dated 22.08.2025 of the 2nd respondent National Medical Commission (1st appellant herein), in the appeal filed by Palakkad Institute of Medical Sciences, Walayar, under Section 22 (3) of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, read with Section 9 of the Maintenance of Standards of Medical Education Regulations, 2023, and Ext.P13 order dated 14.07.2025 of the 1st respondent Under Graduate Medical Education Board (1st appellant herein), whereby the Board decided to reduce 50 seats in Palakkad Institute of Medical Sciences, and granted conditional renewal of only 100 MBBS seats, for the academic session 2025-26; a declaration that for the institutions granted Letter of Permission under the Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999, read with the Minimum Standard Requirements for 150 MBBS Admissions Annual Regulations, 1999, and the Minimum Requirements for Annual MBBS Admissions Regulations, 2020, yearly renewals till the grant of Letter of Recognition is governed by said norms; a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents (1st and 2nd appellants and the 3rd respondent University) to permit the petitioners to admit second batch of 150 MBBS students during the academic session 2025-26; a writ of mandamus commanding the appellants to grant Letter of Permission to the petitioners for 150 MBBS seats during the academic session 2025-26; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent Kerala University of Health Sciences to grant order of Continuation of Provisional Affiliation for150 MBBS seats during the academic session 2025-26.
3. The interim relief sought for in W.P.(C)No.32178 of2025 reads thus:
“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit and in the writ petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit the petitioners to admit the second batch of 150 MBBS students during the academic session 2025-26 and further direct the respondents to pass appropriate orders for the purpose thereof, pending disposal of the writ petition (civil).” (underline supplied)
4. On 25.08.2025, when W.P.(C)No.32178 of 2025 came up for admission as ‘today motion’, it was adjourned to 27.08.2025. On 27.08.2025, the petitioners filed I.A.No.1 of 2025 for accepting an affidavit sworn to by the 2nd petitioner stating additional facts. The learned Single Judge, by the interim order dated 27.08.2025, directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to admit the second batch of 150 MBBS students, during the academic session 2025-26. The 3rd respondent University is directed to pass appropriate orders for that purpose, as early as possible. The interim order dated 27.08.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.32178 of 2025 reads thus;
“The request of the petitioners for renewal of affiliation with enhancement of MBBS seats from 100 to 150 has been declined by the KUHS stating that there are deficiencies. According to the petitioners, there are no deficiencies if assessed under MSR-2020, and the University is finding fault based on MSR-2023.
2. When the petitioners approached the Hon’ble Apex Court with W.P.(C)No.1166 of 2
State of Kerala v. Pradeepkumar A.V.
Manohar Lal Sharma v. Medical Council of India
Dental Council of India v. Dr Hedgewar Smruti Rugna Seva Mandal
Medical Council of India v. Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences
Dental Council of India v. Dr Hedgewar Smruti Rugna Seva Mandal
Royal Medical Trust v. Union of India
Ashish Ranjan v. Union of India
Dr. Hedgewar Smruti Rugna Seva Mandal
Union of India v. Era Educational Trust
Krishna Priya Ganguly v. University of Lucknow
Medical Council of India v. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences
Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal v. Dunlop India Ltd.
Interim relief in educational admissions must not equate to final relief unless justified; compliance with statutory standards is essential for approval.
Interim orders allowing increases in medical college seats without proper approval are impermissible and jeopardize students' futures.
The court held that expert regulatory bodies' assessments of medical institutions' deficiencies are not to be overridden by the judiciary unless significant jurisdictional errors are proven.
Court reaffirmed the necessity of timely processing applications for educational seat enhancements, emphasizing adherence to statutory timelines under the National Medical Commission Act.
The court upheld the authority of the National Medical Commission to regulate medical education standards, emphasizing adherence to statutory requirements for college establishment.
The distinction between the establishment of new medical colleges and the enhancement of student intake in existing colleges is critical; prior judicial rulings must not impede justified applications....
The court upheld that compliance with Indian Nursing Council regulations for seat enhancement is mandatory, and the institution's failure to meet conditions justified the denial of additional intake.
Educational institutions must comply with statutory regulations for seat enhancement; inspections for such enhancements are limited to one per academic year as per governing laws.
The appeal for enhancement of nursing seats was denied due to failure in complying with statutory inspection requirements as per governing regulations.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of the petitioner's request for increasing the intake of students in the MBBS course was unjustified and unsustainable, as it....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.