MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT JABALBUR BENCH
A.M. Khanwilkar, K.K. Trivedi, JJ.
Gyanjeet Sewa Mission Trust - Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 7915-2015 and I.A. No. 5610-2015
Decided On : 01-07-2015
Medical Council of India - Establishment of New Medical College - Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Regulations framed therein - Summary: The court considered the delay in obtaining the consent of affiliation from the M.P. Medical Science University and the strict time frame for compliance as stipulated in the Regulations. It held that the MCI's negative recommendation based on the delay was untenable in law, especially considering the Central Government's inclination to give the petitioner-Trust one last opportunity to furnish the required documents. The court quashed the MCI's decision and directed it to reconsider the scheme and submit a fresh recommendation to the Central Government.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought permission to establish a new Medical College for the academic year 2015-16. The Medical Council of India (MCI) sent negative recommendations to the Central Government based on the delay in obtaining the consent of affiliation from the M.P. Medical Science University.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the MCI's negative recommendation based on the delay in obtaining the consent of affiliation was untenable in law, especially considering the Central Government's inclination to give the petitioner-Trust one last opportunity to furnish the required documents.
Issues: The core issue was whether the MCI was justified in sending negative recommendation to the Central Government based on the delay in obtaining the consent of affiliation from the M.P. Medical Science University.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the MCI's negative recommendation based on the delay was untenable in law, especially considering the Central Government's inclination to give the petitioner-Trust one last opportunity to furnish the required documents.
Final Decision: The court quashed the MCI's decision and directed it to reconsider the scheme and submit a fresh recommendation to the Central Government.
A.M. Khanwilkar, CJ.
1. This petition filed on 26.05.2015, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the decision of the Executive Committee of Medical Council of India dated 29.04.2015 (Annexure P-22) and communication dated 11.05.2015 (Annexure P-26). Further direction is sought against the respondent No. 2 to consider the application submitted by the petitioner for permission to establish a new Medical College at Jabalpur for the academic year 2015-16 and make recommendations to the respondent No. 1 as per Establishment of Medical Colleges Regulations, 1999. It is further prayed that direction be issued to the respondent No. 1 to pass appropriate orders under Section 10A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 for granting permission to the petitioner -Trust for opening a new Medical College with intake capacity of 150 students for the academic year 2015-16.
2. The petitioner-Trust submitted application under Section 10A for grant of permission, to open a new medical college with intake capacity of 150 students for the academic year 2015-16, on 26.08.2014. According to the petitioner, all the necessary documents were submitted along with the said application. However, respondent No. 2 forwarded a negative recommendation to the respondent No. 1 on 15.01.2015 (Annexure P-12), on the ground that the petitioner had submitted two letters (one letter giving NOC and another giving consent of affiliation) issued by the Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya bearing the same outward No/ACA/2014/3037 and same date i.e. 01.08.2014. The Executive Committee of the Council in its meeting held on 13.01.2015, noted that Registrar, Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya vide letter dated 10.12.2014 has informed that since the M.P. Medical Science University has been constituted in the State, w.e.f. 17.09.2014, any further processing of the proposal must be done by the said University. It was also observed that M.P. Medical Science University has not issued any consent of affiliation in favour of the petitioner, till the decision was taken by the Executive Committee on 13.01.2015. In view of this discrepancy, the Executive Committee decided to seek clarification from Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya University about the circumstances in which the said two letters bearing the same outward number and date were issued by it. This was communicated by the Section Officer of respondent No. 2, to the respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 15.01.2015 (Annexure P-12). This fact was brought to the notice of the petitioner. The petitioner-Trust submitted explanation before the Hearing Committee of respondent No. 1 on 9th February, 2015 (AnnexureP-14). With regard to the question of affiliation of new medical college it was pointed out that Madhya Pradesh Medical Science University was established on 01.08.2011 in terms of notification dated 17.09.2014 in exercise of powers under Section 6 (2) of the Act, notifying 25.09.2014 as the date on which Colleges/Schools or Institutions situated within the limits of the area specified under Section (1), shall be deemed to be associated with and admitted to the privileges of the University.
3. The petitioner also pointed out that pursuant to the notification issued by M.P. Medical Science University dated 17.09.2014, the petitioner approached the Vice Chancellor and Registrar of the University vide letter dated 26.09.2014 requesting to issue consent of affiliation in Form No. 3. However, the said letter was returned on the ground that the petitioner will have to apply for affiliation after announcement is made on M.P. Medical Science University's website. The petitioner thereafter applied in prescribed format to M.P. Medical Science University on 30.10.2014 for grant of affiliation for academic year 2015-16 for 150 MBBS students. Further, the petitioner - Trust deposited Rs. 50,30,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lacs Thirty Thousand) as affiliation fees as prescribed by the M.P. Medical Science University Act, 2011
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.