Personal hearings are not mandated under the National Commission of Homeopathy Act; educational institutions must meet adequate facility standards for student competency.

ORDER :

NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J.

Brief facts of the case are the 1st petitioner is a registered society under the provisions of the Public Society Registration Act, 2001 and it established the college of the 2^nd petitioner for running Homeopathy College for Undergraduate courses and has been running the same for the last eight academic years, i.e. from 2017-18. Initially, the 2nd petitioner college was granted 100 seats for UG BHMS Course vide proceedings No.F.No.R.12014/20/2016(EF(H) dated 15-9-2017 by the 1^st respondent. It is stated, petitioners earned good reputation in their field by fulfilling the needs of the rural students and by maintaining the standards as prescribed by the 1^st respondent and claimed that though all the stipulated conditions were fulfilled, respondents have resorted to reduction of seats in their college for the academic year 2025-26.

1.1. Petitioners stated that, as per procedure contemplated under the NATIONAL COMMISSION OF HOMEOPATHY ACT , 2020 (for short, 'the Act), the 3rd respondent conducts periodic inspection of Homeopathy colleges which is specific and mandatory and is conducted before granting of seats or for renewal. Accordingly, the 3^rd respondent conducted inspection of the college on 3^rd and 4^th June, 2025 and issued proceedings dated 12-06-2025 pointing out certain deficiencies and a virtual hearing was given on 13.06.2025 in respect of the same. It is contended, though a representation was submitted with regard to fulfilment of the requirements pointed out in the Inspection Report, they were denied permission to continue the existing number of seats, vide proceedings dated 20-06-2025. Aggrieved, petitioners preferred Appeal before the 2nd respondent under Section 4(1) of the Act on 24-06-2025, which, however, was rejected vide proceedings dated 10-07-2025. According to petitioners, no personal hearing was accorded to them by the first Appellate Authority and an order was issued mechanically on the following grounds:

A) That the genuine functioning of the hospital could not be established by the documents submitted by the College.

B) That during Inspection, 21 teachers were on leave. None of the 21-teaching faculty were found to be registered on AEBAS portal. The genuine presence of teaching staff could not be established.

1.2. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioners filed Appeal before the 1st respondent under Section 9(6) against the objections raised on the functioning of their college by the authorities vide proceedings dated 15-07-2025 by substantiating their claim, along with documentary proof. Despite filing the Appeal in time, it was not considered. Left with no option, Writ Petition No. 30349 of 2025 was filed seeking directions to the 1st respondent for disposal of the Appeal. The said Writ Petition was disposed of directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the Appeal by 31st October, 2025 which was, however, not complied with. When this was brought to the notice of this Court, the order dated 03-11-2025 was passed directing the 1st respondent to accord hearing to petitioners on 12-11-2025 and dispose the same. It is contended that the order was passed on 12.11.2025 is not correct and illegal and that they are entitled for enhancement of seats as they submitted the remarks to the reasons for rejection in proceedings dated 21.11.2025.

1.3. Petitioners further contended that the authorities have recently introduced the National Commission for Homeopathy (Minimum Essential Standards for Homeopathy Colleges and Attached Hospit