M.S. RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE AND TEACHING HOSPITAL AND M.R. JAYARAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have called into question, the second respondent's order, dated 1.1.03.2013 (Annexure -A), turning down the petitioners' request for the increase of seats in M.S. (Orthopaedics) Course from three to six. Ms. Farah Fathima appearing for Sri. K. Shashikiran Shetty for the petitioners submits that the second respondent's inspectors have recorded their satisfaction that the infrastructure available at the petitioner College is adequate. She brings to my notice that in the earlier part of the impugned order, it is stated that the respondent No. 2 has decided to approve the further intake; in the later part of the impugned order it is stated that the petitioners' representation for further increase cannot be acceded to. She submits that the Orthopaedics Department of the first petitioner College has been publishing about 14 to 15 articles in the reputed journals including the international journals. In this regard, she brings to my notice the petitioners' letter, dated 26.03.2013 (Annexure -K).

(2.) SRI . Zulfikar Kumar Shaffi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 submits that not typing the word 'not' is just an inadvertent omission. The said typographical omission cannot be stretched to mean that the respondent No. 2 has decided to approve of the further increase in the petitioners' intake capacity. He submits that as per the circular, dated 30.11.2009 (Annexure -R -2/5), the applicant institution has to perform 3 major surgeries and 6 minor surgeries in every unit of the department. As it is not in dispute that the petitioners' units are 3, 9 major surgeries and 18 minor surgeries are to be performed daily. On the other hand, as per the petitioners' admission found in their letter, dated 01.02.2011 (Annexure -G), the department averages 5 major and 9 minor surgeries per day. He submits that the Regulation 13.9 Postgraduate Regulation requires each of the postgraduate student to publish a research paper during the period of postgraduate studies to be eligible to appear for the examination. The said Regulation reads as follows: 13.9. A postgraduate student of a postgraduate degree course in broad specialties/super specialties would be required to present one poster presentation, to read one paper at a national/state conference and to present one research paper which should be published/accepted for publication/sent for publication during the period of his postgraduate studies so as to make him eligible to appear at the postgraduate degree examination.

(3.) MY perusal of the impugned order reveals that the respondent No. 2 has barely referred to the assessment report and the documents. It does not state as to what is the prescribed eligibility criteria for sanctioning the increase and what is the shortfall in the infrastructural facilities of the first petitioner College. The assessment report (Annexure -E) shows that its inspectors/assessors were satisfied of the infrastructure available at the first petitioner College. While it cannot be said that the inspectors' report is binding on the respondent No. 2, the respondent No. 2 may reject it or may not act on that but by recording the reasons. In the normal course, the assessment report of the inspectors constitutes the raw -material for considering the application or scheme for the increase in the intake capacity.