LILY THOMAS Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who appears in person, submits that the Minister In-charge, Health and Family Welfare cannot act as the Chairman of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences. According to the petitioner, such nomination of the Minister as the Chairman of an autonomous institution is violative of Article 350 of the Constitution of India. The contention raised is that the Minister cannot act as the Chairman of the governing body of AIIMS, for under Article 350 of the Constitution any grievance that any of the staff or employee of AIIMS may have, has to be considered by him as an appellate body.

(2.) The aforesaid contentions are refuted by the counsel appearing for the respondents on the ground that the provisions of Article 350 of the Constitution of India has no application at all to the facts and circumstances of the case and that the Minister In-charge, Health and Family Welfare acts as a Chairman of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences on the basis of statutory provisions.

(3.) We have considered the rival submissions in the light of the records placed before us. In fact, the contention that Minister In-charge, Health and Family Welfare cannot act as the Chairman of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences stands already negatived by a judgment and order of this Court in Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India and ors. reported in 139 (2007) DLT 289 (DB). While dealing with the aforesaid issue, the Division Bench of this Court referred to the provisions of the AIIMS Act and the Regulations and it was held that the Minister In-charge of Health and Family Welfare could be nominated as the Chairman in terms of the provisions of Section 4(e) of the Act. It was held in explicit terms that the Minister could be nominated on the Institute Body by the government in exercise of its power vested under Section 4(e) of the Act as the Minister is involved in the policy making and functions of the Institute, even otherwise. In this connection, we may also refer to a Supreme Court decision in B."Shankaranand v. Common Cause and others reported in (1996) 8 SCC 674. In the said decision, nomination of B."Shankaranand, who was then holding the portfolio of Health and Family Welfare, as the Chairman of AIIMS was considered and was in issue. In the context the Supreme Court in paragraphs 5 and 6 held as follows: