2023 Supreme(Online)(SC) 28255
SUPREME COURT
X, J
Bonny Natesh (Dr.) P. v. State of Kerala
Civil Appeal|No. 2604/2016
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Unknown
For the Respondents: Unknown
Qualifications prescribed by the state align with statutory regulations; no error by the High Court in dismissal.
Headnote:The appeal challenges the High Court's dismissal of a petition regarding qualifications for teaching roles in medical institutions. It’s asserted that Kerala's qualifications do not align with the Medical Council of India's Regulations 1998. The Court found that Kerala's specifications are consistent with statutory regulations and hence permissible. The appeal was dismissed on these grounds.
Result: The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. missed qualifications raise a dispute. (Para 1 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. kerala's standards meet statutory requirements. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 3. no error found in high court's dismissal. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. the appeal is dismissed. (Para 12 , 14 , 15) |
1. Civil Appeal No. 2604/2016
The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16th September, 2015 passed by the High Court of Kerala dismissing the petition filed at the instance of the appellant holding that the qualifications prescribed by the Government of Kerala for teaching faculties under the Medical Education Services are in conformity with the qualifications laid down by the Medical Council of India under the Minimum Qualifications for Teachers in Medical Institutions Regulations, 1998 (hereinafter being referred to as “Regulations 1998”).
2. It is not disputed that the appellant acquired the qualification of MS (General Surgery) on 21st August, 1989 and was appointed as Lecturer on 12th February, 1990 and later promoted to the post of Assistant Professor on 11th April, 1997 and an Associate Professor on 31st May, 2008 and thereafter acquired the qualification of M.Ch.(Surgical Gastroenterology) on 17th August, 2009 and later promoted as Professor (Surgical Gastroenterology).
3. At the same time, respondent no. 3 with whom he has a lis joined service as Lecturer (Surgical Gastroenterology) on 16th December, 2002 and while in service, he acquired qualification of M.Ch.(Gastroenterology) on 4th November, 2006 and later promoted to the post of Assistant Professor (Surgical Gastroenterology) on 4th November, 2008 and later as Associate Professor & Professor (Surgical Gastroenterology).
4. The final seniority list came to be published of Professors by the Directorate of Medical Education on 05th December, 2022 wherein the appellant's name find place at Serial No.5 and of the respondent no.3 at Serial No.219 and it is the highest post in the teaching faculty and further appointment to the post of Principal, Medical College are made on the basis of rules as being prescribed by the Government from time to time.
5. The grievance of the appellant before the Tribunal was that Regulations, 1998 prescribed the minimum qualifications for appointment and promotion to the post of Associate Professor / Professor in medical service and teachers who are holding qualification of MS (Surgery) with two years special training in the concerned specialty, i.e. Surgical Gastroenterology in the instant case are eligible for appointment / promotion to the teaching post (Associate Professor / Professor) in the Department of Surgical Gastroenterology but the afore - stated qualification has not been acknowledged by the State of Kerala while the qualification being prescribed for appointment / promotion to the teaching posts in the Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and according to him, the qualifications prescribed by the State of Kerala are not in conformity with the Regulations, 1998 and the Medical Council of India being the parent statutory institution, the minimum qualification laid down by Medical Council in its Regulations, 1998 has to prevail. In support of his submissions, learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Preeti Srivastava (Dr.) and Another v. State Of Madhya Pradesh and Others 2009 (7) SCC 120.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents, while supporting the finding returned by the High Court under the order impugned submits that the qualification which has been prescribed by the State of Kerala is in conformity with the Regulations, 1998 and the appellant could be considered for appointment / promotion to the post of Associate Professor / Professor only in terms of the qualifications prescribed by the respondent State under the statutory rules for appointment in teaching faculties under the Medical Education Service and no manifest error was committed by the High Court in dismissing the petition filed at the instance of the appellant.
7. Before
