PRINCIPAL (I/C) RVS SIDDHA MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU; COMMISSIONER OF INDIAN MEDICINE AND HOMEOPATHY; SECRETARY, SELECTION COMMITTEE, INDIAN MEDICINE & HOMEOPATHY; M G R MEDICAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, aggrieved by the proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 18.09.2014, in and by which the petitioner college was directed to surrender 18 seats by adjusting 6 seats each year from its Management Quota in favour of the Government in respect of three academic years viz., 2014-2015, 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, had filed this writ petition.

(2.) Facts leading to the filing of this writ petition, briefly narrated, are as follows:

(3.) Mr.P.Godson Swaminath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the typed set of documents and would contend that admittedly, the Central Government had accorded permission to start the institution and the fourth respondent University has also accorded affiliation and also granted extension of time for admission for the academic year 2012-2013 from 31.10.2012 to 15.11.2012 and since the second respondent did not sponsor candidates under Management Quota, it had filled up 18 seats as against the Government Quota of 20 seats and even then 2 seats got lapsed and would further contend that so far as the undertaking given by the petitioner as to the adjustment of seats, it was forced to give on 18.01.2014 on account of the fact that the date of examination was fast approaching and if the petitioner institution did not consent, then the students may not be allowed to sit for the examinations and therefore, left with no other option, it gave its consent under compulsion and hence, it cannot be put against them. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to the communication/letter of the first respondent dated 31.07.2013 and would submit that the action of the management of self-financing colleges for admitting candidates in the Government quota, had been ratified and that in future, the Government Quota lapsed seats should be filled up only with the prior permission of the Government and thereby, the action of the petitioner college in admitting students under Government Quota had been ratified and therefore, the impugned order directing the petitioner College to adjust the seats in future academic year is per se unsustainable. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that insofar as admission of students in medical colleges in the sanctioned capacity, the fourth respondent has no role to play, as it is for the Government to pull up the institution in case of any lapse and also placed reliance upon the decision in Medical Council of India, New Delhi v. The Chairman, Sree Mookambika Institute of Medical Sciences, Kanyakumari District and Others, 2011 1 CTC 41 . It is also contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that a Single Bench of this Court in the decision in T.Arutselvam and Others v. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep by its secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Chennai-9 and Others, 2012 2 CTC 772 has also highlighted the significance of indigenous systems of medicine practiced and would further add that admittedly, the petitioner College possess all infrastructure facilities and amenities and being a self-financing unaided institution, it cannot be compelled to adjust seats in the future academic year and prays for quashment of the same.