SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56341

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MR. MURALEE KRISHNA, JJ
CHITRA COLLEGE OF NURSING CHITRA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND RESEARCH CENTRE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WA NO. 2841 OF 2025 | WP(C)NO.40066 OF2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.SHAJ, SMT.BEENA N.KARTHA, SHRI.BHARAT VIJAY P., SHRI.KEVIN JAMES, SHRI.AKASH JOSHI, SMT.MINU VITTORRIA PAULSON, SMT.GOPIKA GOPAL, SMT.ARCHANA P.P., SHRI.REN SHIBU, SMT.SHEHROON PATEL A.K., SHRI.ISSAC MELVIN B.O., SHRI.ALVIN JOSEPH
For the Respondents: SMT. NISHA BOSE, DR. ABRAHAM P. MEACHINIKARA, SRI. VIVEK MENON, SMT. SHAMEENA SALAHUDHEEN, SRI. S. GANESH.

The appeal for enhancement of nursing seats was denied due to failure in complying with statutory inspection requirements as per governing regulations.

Headnote:(A) Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947 - Indian Nursing Council (Minimum Pre-Requisites for Granting Suitability to Nursing Programs) Regulations, 2020 - Appeal against interim relief denial - The appellant sought enhancement of B.Sc. Nursing seats from 40 to 60 for the academic year 2025-26, which was denied due to non-fulfillment of the Indian Nursing Council's statutory requirements - The learned Single Judge found the prior inspection for suitability sufficient for that academic year, thereby denying the relief. (Paras 2, 3, 6, 17)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The appellant's claim of rectifying noted deficiencies was unsupported by legal backing against the regulations governing the nursing courses, justifying the learned Judge's denial of interim relief. (Paras 10, 17)

Facts of the case:
Chitra College filed a writ petition seeking enhanced intake seats from 40 to 60 but faced opposition and denials of interim relief based on statutory provisions and inspections outlined in the Nursing Regulations, highlighting a breach of protocol regarding inspections.

Findings of Court:
The demand for an interim relief order was denied since the regulations stipulated inspections only once per academic year, confirming that existing deficiencies needed resolution before further applications could be made.

Issues: The main issue was whether the learned Single Judge erred in denying the interim relief sought regarding the enhancement of B.Sc. Nursing seats despite claims of rectification of deficiencies from prior inspections.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court reinforced that compliance with the Indian Nursing Council's regulations regarding seat enhancement and inspections must be met before the institution could admit additional students beyond the sanctioned number.

Result: Writ appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. writ for enhancement of nursing seats. (Para 1 , 2 , 4)
2. contentions on statutory compliance. (Para 3 , 7 , 8)
3. interpretation of regulatory framework. (Para 6 , 11 , 12)
4. final ruling on statutory requirements. (Para 13 , 15 , 18)

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The appellant, namely, Chitra College of Nursing, which is offering B.Sc. Nursing Course with an annual intake of 40 students, filed W.P.(C)No.40066 of 2025 before this Court, invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs;

“(i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the 4th respondent to forthwith conduct inspection of the petitioner college expeditiously;

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the 4th respondent to consider Ext.P6 letter and complete the process of inspection and approval for enhancement of B.Sc. Nursing Programme seats from 40 to 60 for the academic year 2025- 26 within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court, before the last date of admission, i.e., 30.11.2025;

(iii) To declare that the petitioner college, having rectified all defects and obtained approval for enhancement of B.Sc. Nursing Programme seats from 40 to 60 for the academic year 2025-26 from respondent Nos.1 to 3, is entitled to have its request for seat enhancement duly considered and approved by the 4th respondent after conducting its inspection;

(iv) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing the 4th respondent to issue suitability certificate to the petitioner college for enhancement of B.Sc. Nursing Programme seats from 40 to 60 for the academic year 2025-26.”

2. In the writ petition, the 4th respondent Indian Nursing Council filed a counter affidavit dated 10.11.2025, opposing the reliefs sought for, producing therewith Ext.R4(A) Indian Nursing Council (Minimum Pre-Requisites for Granting Suitability to Nursing Programs) Regulations, 2020.

3. On 24.11.2025, when the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Single Judge declined the interim relief sought for in the writ petition, i.e., an order directing the 4th respondent Indian Nursing Council to grant suitability certificate provisionally to the petitioner for admitting 20 more students, i.e., with an annual intake of 60 students for B.Sc. Nursing Course and direct the 1st respondent State to allow the petitioner College to admit 20 more students from the Centralised Allotment Process for B.Sc. Nursing Course, for the academic year 2025-26 itself, in case the 4th respondent Indian Nursing Council fails to issue suitability certificate for the enhanced annual intake. The order dated 24.11.2025 of the learned Single Judge, whereby the interim order was declined, reads thus;

“Although learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Regulation 15 of the Indian Nursing Council (Minimum Pre- Requisites for Granting Suitability to Nursing Programs) does not interdict second inspection for the purpose of enhancement of seats, having carefully perused the Regulation, I find more merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the INC that there can only be one inspection in an Academic Year. The words “only one application/proposal shall be accepted, in one Academic Year” in Regulation 15 are not intended to provide for more than one inspection in an Academic Year.

2. In the case at hand, inspection was conducted and deficiencies noted. The petitioner claims that the noted deficiencies have been cleared and hence, the INC should be directed to issue Suitability Certificate for the enhanced seats.

3. In the face of Regulation 15 read with 13 of the INC Act, it is impossible to grant the said relief. The interim order is hence declined.”

4. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 24.11.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.40066 of 2025, the appellant- petitioner is before this Court in this writ appea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top