A writ of certiorari does not lie against privately owned and privately managed non-statutory educational institutions, and private institutions imparting higher medical education are not instrumentalities or agencies of the State merely by virtue of the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act or the respective Universities to which they may stand affiliated.

S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

1. The larger question that looms in this set of three Civil Writ Petitions is - whether a writ of certiorari lies against a privately owned and privately managed Medical College and Hospital? Inevitably, at issue is the validity of the somewhat wide ranging observations in this context by the Division Bench in Karan Singh V/s. Kurukshetra University, ILR (1976) 2 Punj and Har 859. Equally significant is the question - whether private institutions imparting higher medical education are instrumentalities or agencies of the State which had also come to the fore in the hearing of this reference to the Full Bench.

2. The terra firma of the factual matrix giving rise to the aforesaid issues (which are otherwise pristinely legal) may be taken from the averments in C.W.P. No. 3480 of 1981 (Gurpreet Singh V/s. Punjab University etc.) The Managing Society of the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital - respondent No. 2, is admittedly a private institution registered under the Societies Registration Act. It is not in dispute that it is a charitable religious society privately managing the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, which is claimed to be a minority institution protected by the Constitution. Another similar organisation is that of the Christian Medical College and Hospital also located at Ludhiana. The 20 writ petitioners who are students seeking admission to the Daya Nand Medical College (hereinafter called the Medical College , aver that in the prospectus issued for this purpose, the admission to the M.B.B.S. Course was limited to categories (a) to (f) of para 7 thereof. However, category (f) was later scrapped and after interviewing the eligible candidates, the Selection Committee, on July 30, 1981 issued a provisional list of 50 selected candidates vide annexure-P/3. The petitioners claim that respondents Nos. 5 to 9 in the said list do not belong to category 7(a) and apart from them other candidates who have been selected were not entitled to be considered in this category. It is the case of the writ petitioners that in the event of the aforesaid persons being excluded from consideration because of para 7(a), the writ petitioners are likely to be selected in their place. It is further averred that the Medical College receives substantial grants-in-aid from the Punjab Government and is strictly governed by the Regulations of the Punjab University and, therefore, under Art.29 of the Constitution of India, the writ petitioners have a fundamental right to claim admission which can be enforced under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. The primary relief claimed is that the admission of respondents Nos. 5 to 9 and all other similar candidates provisionally admitted vide annexure-P/3 be quashed. Equally, a mandamus is sought directing the respondent-Medical College to make admissions under category 7(a) of the prospectus only from amongst the students who have passed from Punjab, Punjabi and Guru Nanak Dev Universities.

3. On behalf of respondent-Medical College, the preliminary objections which have been expressly raised and strenuously pressed are, that the Medical College is a privately owned and a privately managed institution having its own Selection Committee which lays down the rules for the admission within the parametres of binding instructions in so far as they relate to constitutional reservations. Being a minority institution it is protected by Arts.29 and 30 of the Constitution and has a guaranteed right of freedom of internal management and otherwise being a non-statutory body it is not covered by Article 12 thereof. Therefore, no writ particularly that of certiorari lies against the bona fide selection made by the Selection Committee.

4. On merits, it is pointed out that the prospectus itself made it prominently clear that the Selection Committee can amend the criteria for admission as considered necessary from time to time by the authorities. It is claimed that having scrapped cate