SUMANDEEP VIDYAPEETH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is desirous of starting a new Ayurvedic Medical College with 100 seats in the undergraduate (UG) programme Bachelor of Ayurveda Medicine and Surgery ("BAMS") for the Academic Year 2021-2022, has approached this Court assailing the denial order dtd. 31/1/2022 passed by the Medical Assessment and Rating Board of the Indian System of Medicine of the respondent no.2 (hereinafter referred to as the "MARBISM"), vide which its scheme for commencement of the said course was rejected. The petitioner also assails the orders dtd. 24/2/2022 and 31/3/2022 passed by the respondent no. 2 and respondent no. 1, respectively, whereby its first appeal and second appeal against the denial of Letter of Permission ("LOP") dtd. 31/1/2022, have been rejected.

(2.) The petitioner approached the Health and Family Welfare Department, state of Gujarat (H&FWD, Gujarat) seeking a 'No Objection Certificate'(hereinafter referred to as the "NOC") as required under the Indian Medicine Central Council (Requirements of Minimum Standard for undergraduate Ayurveda Colleges and attached Hospitals), Regulations, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as "MSR, 2016"). On 29/8/2020, the state government, after satisfying itself with the infrastructure and clinical material in the petitioner institute issued a NOC for establishment of an ayurveda college with the admission capacity of 60 seats in BAMS course to the petitioner.

(3.) On 23/9/2020, the petitioner, armed with this NOC, submitted an application to respondent no.2 under sec. 13A of the Indian Medical Central Council Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the "IMCC Act") for establishment of Sumandeep Ayurveda Medical College and Hospital. The said application was rejected by the respondent no.1 on 18/11/2020 for want of an updated 'Consent of Affiliation' from the affiliating university as it was the petitioner's case that on account of being a 'Deemed to be University' as per the UGC norms, it did not require a 'Consent for Affiliation'. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached this Court by way of W.P.(C) 10942/2020 against the respondents' refusal to consider its application on the aforesaid ground and it is only after the intervention of this Court that the respondent no.1 agreed to process the petitioner's application without insisting on a 'Consent for Affiliation'.