MUTHUKUMARAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the orders of disapproval passed by the Government of India on the schemed submitted for the renewal of permission to admit students for the academic year 2014-15, the appellants filed writ petitions before the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge dismissed all the writ petitions upholding the orders passed by the Government of India under Section 10-A(4) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act'') basing reliance upon the recommendations of the Medical Council of India, (in short, "MCI"). Aggrieved over the decision rendered by the learned single Judge, the appellants are before us.

(2.) For the sake of brevity, the submissions made by all the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants are summarised, as the issues of law are one and the same between the parties.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the deficiencies as found in the recommendations made by the MCI are not traceable to any Regulations and therefore they cannot be the basis upon which an order of disapproval can be passed. The findings of fact rendered by the MCI are not borne out by records. The MCI ought to have taken into consideration the records maintained by the Institutes. For the inordinate delay caused by the respondents, the appellants cannot be made to suffer. A surprise inspection alone cannot be the basis for the recommendation and the order passed in exercise of powers granted under Section 10-A of the Act. The Orders impugned disclose total non-application of mind. The procedure followed is an empty formality and no reasons have been assigned by taking note of the explanation given by the appellants. The opportunity of rectifying the defects as mandated under Section 10-A(3)(a) has not been followed. The learned single Judge has taken into consideration of the irrelevant materials without affording sufficient opportunities to the appellants. The appellants have complied with the primary requirements. Inspite of the adverse recommendations made by the MCI, the Government Medical Colleges have been given the approval of their schemes. The Orders passed are contrary to the Wednesbury's principle of reasonableness and the doctrine of proportionality. The orders are also tainted with legal malice. The deficiencies cannot be sustained on a combined reading of Minimum Requirements for 150 M.B.B.S. Admissions annually Regulations, 1999 read with the Act. When the delay is on the part of the respondents, the time limit given by the Supreme Court cannot be put against the appellants. The learned single Judge has not taken into consideration of the relevant materials while holding the approval pertaining to the building. The Government of India has abdicated its duty as enshrined under Section 10-A(4) of the Act and the orders passed have civil consequence. The MCI cannot take a stand that they were unable to re-assess the compliance report. Accordingly, it is submitted that the writ appeals will have to be allowed. In support of the contentions, the learned counsel made reliance upon the following decisions: