JASWINDER KAUR GAMBHIR Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in both petitions are Non-Medico Professors in the Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology respectively in the University College of Medical Sciences (UCMS) of the University of Delhi (University) and have filed the writ petitions impugning the Schedule I of the Medical Council of India's 'Minimum Qualifications for Teachers in Medical Institutions Regulations, 1998' and Note 2 of the Ordinance XXIV of the University adopted by the UCMS, to the extent they come in the way of their appointment as the Head of their respective Departments. Notice of the petitions was issued and vide interim order dated 8th August, 2008 in WP(C) No.5692/2008, the appointment to the post of Head of the Department (HoD) of Biochemistry was made subject to the outcome of the petition. THE pleadings have been completed and the counsels have been heard.

(2.) THE Regulations aforesaid require all medical teachers to possess a basic University or equivalent qualification included in any one of the Schedules to the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (MCI Act) and further requires them to be registered in a State Medical Register or Indian Medical Register. However, an exception is carved out for the Departments of Anatomy, Physiology, Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Microbiology. In the said Departments, non-medico teachers are permitted to be appointed to the extent of 50% and 30% respectively in the Departments of Biochemistry and Microbiology, of the total number of posts in the Department. It is however further provided that the Heads of these Departments must possess recognized basic University, medical degree qualification or equivalent qualification.

(3.) UCMS in its counter affidavit has pleaded that it is a maintained institution of the University, funded by University Grants Commission and is a medical college recognized by the MCI; that the appointments of the HoD are being made in accordance with the Regulations and the Ordinance (supra); that though the petitioner in WP(C) No. 5692/2008 had been earlier officiating as HoD but that was during the absence of the HoD and on the basis of the internal arrangements within the Department and such officiating duty does not vest any right in favour of the petitioner.