P ANDREE Vs. TAMIL NADU MEDICAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as Registrar of the Tamil Nadu Medical Council with effect from 1.7.1988. It is stated that since the Medical Council of India did not recognise Sri Ramachandra Medical College, Porur, Tamil Nadu, the petitioner intimated the Dean of Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute on 7.3.1990 that the Medical Council of India did not recognise the said Medical College. THE 2nd respondent then informed the petitioner to ignore the letter dated 16.2.1990 of the Medical Council of India and wanted the petitioner to issue temporary medical registration Certificate to the students who had undergone the course in Sri Ramachandra Medical College. THE petitioner in reply informed the 2nd respondent that it would not be in order to issue temporary medical registration certificate. However, the 2nd respondent insisted upon the petitioner to issue such a certificate to the students, presumably for the reason that the students of the said College resorted to strike because of non-issuance of temporary registration certificate to the students. However the petitioner informed the president of the second respondent about the factum of issuance of temporary registration certificate. At the instance of the second respondent, the petitioner issued the certificate on 13.3.1990. However, the petitioner was called upon to explain in writing as to why he has exhibited the communication from the Medical Council of India to the students of Sri Ramachandra Medical College which created serious reaction from the students of the said college. While so, the President of the second respondent by the impugned communication dated 19.3.1990 placed the petitioner under suspension. THE impugned communication is as follows:From:THE PRESIDENT.To:Mr.P.ANDREE,REGISTRAR,THE TAMIL NADU MEDICAL COUNCIL,MADRAS.Reg: Suspension - Executive Committee Meeting Resolution - Dated 19.3.1990.-------THE Tamil Nadu Medical Council has placed you under suspension temporarily with immediate effect pending enquiries of serious nature. You are directed to hand over the keys and the records to Mr.S.Kandasamy.Sd/-PRESIDENT Tamil Nadu Medical Council, Madras.

(2.) IT is in these circumstances that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the aforesaid communication. Mr.Vijayanarayanan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner represents that in the instant case the executive committee by its resolution dated 19.3.1990 resolved to place the petitioner under suspension with immediate effect and that order was communicated by the President by the impugned communication. Learned counsel would say that the executive committee had no jurisdiction at all, or in other words, it has not been vested with any power to pass such an order of suspension and consequently the impugned order is liable to be quashed. In support of his contention learned counsel refers to Sec. 10(1) of the Madras Medical Registration Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. Sec. 10(1) of the Act provides that the council shall appoint a Registrar who shall act as Secretary of the council and who shall also act as Treasurer, unless the council shall appoint another person as Treasurer. IT is also provided that every person appointed shall be removable at the pleasure of the Council. Sub-sec.(2) of Sec.10 provides that the Council may also employ such other persons as it may deem necessary for the purposes of this Act. According to the learned counsel Sec.10 of the Act confers power on the council for appointment as well as removal of a Registrar at the pleasure of the Council. Learned counsel refers to Sec.9-A of the Act which provides that there shall be an Executive Committee of the Council, consisting of its President and Vice-President ex-officio and three other members of the Council who shall be elected every year in the prescribed manner by the Council at its first meeting held in that year. Clause (a) of sub-sec.(2) of Sec.9- A provides that every member of the Executive Committee so elected shall hold office as such until the next annual election and if any casual vacancy occurs before such election, the Executive Committee shall fill that vacancy by electing a member of the Council. Sub-sec.(3) of Sec.9-A provides that the council may, with the previous sanction of the State Government delegate any of its powers and duties to the Executive Committee. IT is in these circumstances the learned counsel for the petitioner represented that there is no dispute that the council has not delegated any of its powers and duties to the Executive Committee. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the same. If that be so, the Executive Committee has no power to pass any order unless and until power is delegated as provided under sub~sec.(3) of Sec.9-A.

(3.) IN the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed. There will be no order as to costs.