Advanced Medical and Educational Society and Another vs Union of India and Ors.

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.935 OF 2017 (Dy. No.27756/2017)

Advanced Medical and Educational Society and Another ….Petitioners

Versus

Union of India and Ors. ....Respondents

JUDGMENT

A.M. KHANWILKAR J.

1. The petitioners made an application for establishment of a

new medical college at Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh in the name and

style of “Advanced Institute of Medical Sciences” for the

academic session 2016-17 to the Ministry. That proposal was

duly processed and decision was taken not to issue Letter of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHETAN KUMAR Date: 2017.10.04 Permission (for short, “LOP”) to the petitioner-institute for the 15:23:11 IST Reason:

academic session 2016-17. The Oversight Committee (for short, 2

“OC”), appointed by this Court, however, issued directive and

approved the proposal for establishment of new medical college

with an annual intake of 150 students for the academic session

2016-17 on certain conditions. Accordingly, the Central

Government issued a formal conditional LOP on 12 th September,

2016 for establishment of a medical college for the academic year

2016-17 on conditions imposed by the OC. As per the conditions

in the said LOP, an assessment report with regard to verification

of compliance submitted by the college was duly considered by

the Executive Committee of the MCI in its meeting held on 13 th

January, 2017. Noting as many as 26 deficiencies, the MCI

decided to make a negative recommendation. Accordingly, the

MCI informed the Ministry vide its letter dated 15th January,

2017. The Ministry then gave opportunity of personal hearing to

the petitioner-institute on 8th February, 2017 before Director

General of Health Services (for short, “DGHS”). The Hearing

Committee concurred with the negative recommendation given by

the MCI because of as many as 16 deficiencies noticed by it,

which were not satisfactorily explained by the

petitioner-institute. The Ministry forwarded the report of Hearing

Committee to the OC for guidance. The OC vide its letter dated 3

14th May, 2017, conveyed its views to the Ministry favouring

confirmation of conditional LOP for the academic session

2016-17. However, the Ministry chose to accept the

recommendation of the MCI in view of significant deficiencies and

vide its letter dated 25th July, 2017, informed the

petitioner-institute that it was debarred for two years and

authorized the MCI to encash the Bank Guarantee of Rs. 2 Crore.

2. The petitioners challenged that order before the High Court of

Madhya Pradesh, Principal seat at Jabalpur, being WP No. 12138

of 2017. The High Court following the decision of this Court

directed the Central Government to re-examine the matter and to

record reasons. In compliance with the said direction, the

Ministry granted hearing to the college on 24 th August, 2017. The

Hearing Committee after considering the record and submissions

of the college submitted its report to the Ministry and noted as

under:-

“Acute deficiencies of faculty, residents, clinical material and infrastructure have been pointed out in the MCI assessment. The college could not produce conclusive documentary evidence in support of their assertions. The college claim of 05.01.2017 being a gazetted holiday on account of Guru Govind Singh Jayanti would not hold as the first day of Inspection on which verification of faculty/residents takes place was 04.01.2017.

4 The college could not respond with proof to the objection that though they possess 23 acres of unitary campus, the quarters for teaching faculty are located in the other plot of 2 acres.

The copy of order dated 15.05.2017 passed by the Hon’ble NGT was very clear. However, it does not indicate any relief being granted to the college.

In view of the deficiencies as exists, the Committee agrees with the decision of the Ministry vide letter dated 08.06.2017 to debar the college for two years and also permit MCI to encash bank guarantee.”

3. The Central Government accepted the recommendation of the

Hearing Committee and vide decision dated 30 th August, 2017

reiterated its earlier decision dated 25 th July, 2017 to debar the

petitioner-institute from admitting students for two academic

sessions i.e. 2017-18 and 2018-19 and also authorized MCI to

encash the bank guarantee of Rs. 2 crore. This decision has been

challenged in this writ petition and for further relief to direct the

respondents to allow the petitioner-institute to admit up to 150

students in MBBS course for the academic session 2017-18.

4. We have heard Mr. V. Giri, learned senior counsel appearing for

the petitioners, Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel

appearing for the MCI and Mr. Maninder Singh, learned

Additional Solicitor General for Union of India. 5

5. As regards the relief of issuing direction to the respondents to

allow the petitioner-institute to admit upto 150 students for the

academic session 2017-18, the same will have to be rejected in

view of the recent decision of this Court in the case of Royal

Medical Trust & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Anr.1

6. Reverting to the decision dated 30th August, 2017, passed by the

Central Government, instead of analyzing the factual matrix

culminating with the said decision, we may adopt the course

taken in the case of Annaii Medical College & Hospital and

Anr. Vs. Union of India and Anr. 2. That, in our opinion, will

subserve the ends of justice. Accordingly, we dispose of the

present writ petition in the same terms.

7. Writ petition is disposed of as follows:-

(i) The respondents are directed to allow the students

already admitted in the petitioner-institute on the

basis of conditional LOP for the academic session

2016-17, to continue their studies.

(ii) The MCI shall depute its Inspection Team within a

period of three months to submit an assessment

1 Writ Petition (C) No. 747 of 2017, decided on 12.09.2017. 2 Writ Petition (C) No. 525 of 2017, decided on 14.09.2017.

6 report regarding the overall performance and efficiency

of the petitioner-institute and deficiencies, if any, and

give time to the petitioner-institute to remove those

deficiencies within the time specified in that regard.

(iii) We direct that the stated inspection by the MCI will be

to consider confirmation of LOP of petitioner institute

for the academic session 2016-2017.

(iv) The petitioner-institute shall then report its

compliance and communicate the removal of

deficiencies to MCI, whereafter it will be open to the

MCI to verify the position and then submit its

recommendation to the Ministry. The Ministry shall

then take a final decision within one month of the

receipt of the recommendation from the MCI by taking

assistance of the Hearing Committee as constituted by

the Constitution Bench of this Court in Amma

Chandravati Educational and Charitable Trust &

Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr. 3, or other directions

given in the said decision and in accordance with law.

(v) We direct that until a final decision is taken by the

Ministry and communicated to the petitioners, the 3 Writ Petition (C) No. 408 of 2017, decided on 18.07.2017. 7

Bank Guarantee offered by the petitioners in the sum

of Rs. Two Crore shall not be encashed by the MCI but

the petitioners shall keep the same alive. If it has

already been encashed in the meantime, the amount

shall be refunded to the petitioner-institute, who shall

furnish a fresh Bank Guarantee in the like amount to

the MCI within two weeks from the date of receipt of

the amount.

(vi) In the event the final decision of the Competent

Authority of the Central Government is adverse to the

petitioners, it will be open to them to take recourse to

such remedies as may be permissible in law.

(vii) We further direct the respondents to treat the renewal

application submitted by the petitioner-institute for

the academic session 2017-18 as having been made

for the academic session 2018-19 and process the

same in accordance with law with promptitude.

8. There shall be no order as to costs.

……………………………….CJI.

(Dipak Misra) 8

………………………………….J. (A.M. Khanwilkar)

.………………………………...J. (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud)

New Delhi;

Dated: October 4, 2017.