Medical Council of India vs Jaipur National University Institute for Medical Sciences and Research Centre Jaipur and Another

1 Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6000 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.14967 of 2018)

Medical Council of India ……Appellant

Versus

Jaipur National University Institute for Medical Sciences and Research Centre Jaipur and Another ..…. Respondents

JUDGMENT

Uday Umesh Lalit, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal challenges the correctness of interim order dated

29.05.2018 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur in D. B. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA Date: 2018.07.04 15:08:37 IST Civil Writ Petition No.10103/2018 whereby the High Court directed the Reason:

Central Government to permit the Respondent Institute to admit 150 2 students in the third batch of MBBS course for the academic year 2018-

2019.

3. Pursuant to appropriate recommendation having been given by

Medical Council of India (‘MCI’, for short), Central Government by its

letter dated 06.06.2016 granted letter of permission to the Respondent

Institute to establish a Medical College from the academic year 2016-2017

with annual undertake of 150 students. It appears that after conducting due

inspection and verification, MCI did not recommend renewal of permission

for the next academic session 2017-2018. However, the Central

Government by its letter dated 31.05.2017 granted renewal of permission to

admit 2nd Batch of students for the academic year 2017-2018.

4. In Writ Petition No.432 of 2017 (N.C. Medical College and Hospital

Principal v. Union of India Secretary and Another), a list of 24 Colleges

who despite negative recommendation on part of MCI were accorded

renewal of permission by the Central Government was extracted by this

Court in its order dated 09.10.2017 and all those Institutions including the

Respondent Institute were added as respondents. This Court further directed

MCI to conduct surprise inspection in respect of all the Colleges. It appears

that the Assessors appointed by MCI conducted physical assessment and 3 verification on 31st October, 2017 and 1st November, 2017. The assessment

report was placed before the Executive Committee of MCI in its Meeting

held on 22.11.2017 where the Executive Committee observed various

deficiencies of Infrastructure, Clinical Material and other physical facilities.

The Executive Committee therefore decided to recommend to the Central

Government not to grant renewal of permission for the 3 rd Batch of students

for the academic year 2018-2019. Thereafter, the Central Government

afforded opportunity of hearing to the Respondent Institute and requested

MCI to review the case of Respondent Institute. Aforesaid Writ Petition

No.432 of 2017 was disposed of by this Court on 17.01.2018 directing MCI

to take appropriate decision in respect of 25 Medical Colleges for the

academic year 2018-2019 by 31.03.2018.

5. In order to verify the claims made by the Respondent Institute

regarding compliance and that the deficiencies had been removed, MCI

conducted compliance verification on 05.03.2018 and the report in respect

thereof was placed in the Meeting of the Executive Committee of MCI held

on 24.03.2018. After discussion and deliberation, the Executive Committee

found that the deficiencies in respect of Infrastructure, Clinical Material and

other physical facilities still persisted and therefore recommended to the 4 Central Government not to grant renewal of permission to the Respondent

Institute for academic session 2018-2019. The Central Government after

due consideration of the recommendations made by MCI, vide its letter

dated 01.05.2018 decided not to grant renewal of permission for admission

for the academic year 2018-2019.

6. The aforesaid decision of the Central Government was challenged by

the Respondent Institute by preferring D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10103 of

2018 in the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. It appears that since

the Advocates in Jaipur had gone on strike, the Chairperson of the

Respondent Institute, Under Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family

Welfare, Union of India and Law Officer of MCI who were present, were

heard by the High Court on 29.05.2018. The High Court found that the

inspection conducted by MCI was with predetermined mind not to renew the

permission to the Respondent Institute and was of the prima facie view that

the findings arrived at by MCI were required to be stayed at the interim

stage. The High Court thus while admitting the petition fixed the matter for

final hearing on 09.07.2018 but proceeded to pass following order:-

“6.2 The matter is fixed for final hearing on 09.07.2018. 6.3 In the meantime and till disposal of the petition, the order dated 01.05.2018 as well as dated 28.03.2018 both are stayed and 5 respondent No.1 is directed to allow the petitioner College to admit 150 students in the third batch for the academic year 2018-2019 subject to a rider that if ultimately the petitioner fails in this petition, he will refund all the fees to the students who are admitted pursuant to the order of this court.

6.4 The stay application is accordingly disposed of.

The Central Government will act upon this order”.

7. This appeal questioning the aforesaid interim direction dated

29.05.2018 was listed along with a similar matter where by way of an

interim direction the concerned College was allowed to go ahead with

admissions to 1st MBBS course for the academic session 2018-2019. After

having heard Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of

India in support of the appeal and Mr. Vivek Krishna Tankha, Senior

Advocate for the respondent in the present matter in whose submission there

were no deficiencies at all, this Court on 14.06.2018 had reserved the

matters for judgment and passed following order:-

“Heard learned counsel. In both these matters, the High Courts have permitted the concerned medical colleges to go ahead with admissions. The correctness of those orders passed at an interim stage is under challenge at the instance of the Medical College of India. We have been given to understand by the learned counsel appearing for both the medical colleges that till this date, no admissions have been effected despite the interim orders passed by the High Court in their favour. The statement is taken on record.

We reserve the judgment and till the judgment is pronounced, no admission shall take place in respect of both the 6 institutions to the course of 1 st MBBS for the ensuing academic session 2018-2019.

Permission is granted to place on record requisite documents by 16.06.2018.”

8. In the companion matter namely Civil Appeal arising out of Special

Leave Petition (Civil) No.14972 of 2018, we have adverted to certain

decisions of this Court where the propriety and correctness of similar such

interim directions had been questioned before this Court. Relying upon the

decisions in (i) Medical Council of India v. Rajiv Gandhi University of

Health Sciences and others1, (ii) Medical Council of India v. JSS Medical

College2, (iii) Medical Council of India v. Kalinga Institute of Medical

Sciences (KIMS)3, (iv) Dental Council of India v. Dr. Hedgewar Smruti

Rugna Seva Mandal Hingoli and Others 4, we have held in the companion

matter that there was no justification for passing interim directions and

permitting the concerned College to go ahead with provisional admissions

for the academic session 2018-2019. We have further held that any

stipulation that the admissions pursuant to such interim directions shall be

subject to the result of the petition would not be a sufficient protection or

insulation and such orders result in tremendous prejudice to the students. 1

(2004) 6 SCC 76 2 (2012) 5 SCC 628 3 (2016) 11 SCC 530 4 (2017) 13 SCC 115 7 We have further held that if a case is made out the proper course is to hear

the matter finally rather than passing interim directions as have been passed

in the present matter. Based on same reasoning, we hold that the High Court

was not justified in passing the order under challenge.

9. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the order dated

29.05.2018 passed by the High Court. Since the matter is to come up on

09.07.2018 before the High Court, the entire controversy can be gone into.

We have not dealt with factual controversy in the present matter and the

facts that have been set out in the preceding paragraphs are only by way of

narration of events. We are sure that the pending matter will be considered

purely on merits.

10. With these observations, the present appeal is allowed and the order

under appeal is set aside. No costs.

…………………..……J. (Uday Umesh Lalit)

..………………………J. (Deepak Gupta) New Delhi, July 4, 2018