S.V.S. EDUCATIONAL AND SOCIAL SERVICE TRUST Vs. THE UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AYURVEDA, YOGA & NATUROPATHY UNANI, SIDDHA & HOMEOPATHY (AYUSH), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND WELFARE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) HEARD Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Haja Mohideen Gisti, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 & 2, Mr. Sanjay Ramasamy, learned counsel appearing for third respondent and Mr. R. Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for fourth respondent. The petitioner which is a Trust, which has established a Homoeopathy College offering Bachelor degree in Homoeopathy Medicine and Surgery Course, has approached this Court for the third time battling for their recognition by the respondents 1 & 2.

(3.) THE learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order is a clear case of having committed contempt of the direction issued by this Court in the earlier Writ Petition No. 32047 of 2013 dated 9.10.2014. Further it is submitted that the impugned order is an outcome of total non -application of mind, without considering the scope and direction issued by this Court in the earlier writ petition and the direction was very clear to the effect that the first respondent has to consider and issue fresh orders on or before 20.10.2014, so that the petitioner will not lose the benefit for the academic year 2014 -15. Further it is submitted that all the deficiencies pointed out in the order dated 19.11.2013, were considered by this Court in the earlier writ petition and each one of the defects were held to be unsustainable and inspite of that, the impugned order has been passed. Further, it is submitted that even in the impugned order in paragraph No. 5, it has been admitted that inspecting committee which was nominated to inspect the petitioner's institution has conducted the inspection on 6.8.2013 and furnished the copy of the inspection report recommending the Central Government for grant of permission for intake of 50 students in BHMS Degree course and there is no valid reason for rejecting the findings of the inspecting team which has been dealt with in the earlier order passed by this Court. Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned order is arbitrary, unreasonable and the respondents 1 & 2 are bent upon to reject the petitioner's application on untenable grounds.