JAGAT DEEP KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. Prayer in the writ petition by students in the medical college

(2.) The college was established during the year 2011-2012 and admitted 150 students for that year. Renewal of permission for the second year was sought for the academic year 2012-2013 and the Board of Governors of MCI, finding that there were several deficiencies, after notice and receiving objection, had decided not to renew the permission to admit 2nd batch of students. The college sent a compliance report after the deficiencies were purported to have been removed but the Board of Directors was still not convinced and a final decision was taken not to grant permission for admitting the fresh batch of students for the year 2012-2013. This was challenged in CWP No.12368 of 2012 before this Court. An order passed by this Court directing fresh inspection was challenged by MCI in LPA No.1228 of 2012. The Bench also gave direction for inspection and MCI preferred a SLP before the Supreme Court. In the meanwhile, as per the directions of the High Court, an inspection had been carried out. At that time, the deficiencies seem to have been made good and there was a recommendation made for granting permission for the year 2013-2014 batch. The MCI, therefore, granted permission for renewal of admission of the 3rd batch of MBBS course for the academic year 2013-2014. The Supreme Court concluded the case in the SLP referred to above that appropriate order for admission would be passed within one month. However, after granting permission to the college for renewal of permission for admission of the third batch of MBBS students for the academic year 2013-14 on 25.10.2012, the MCI conducted a routine inspection on 1/2 April, 2013 and also carried out a surprise inspection carried out on 06.07.2013. The report of the surprise inspection which was taken notice of by the Supreme Court in CWP (Civil) No.590 of 2013 is the basis for the present writ petition and therefore, the deficiencies pointed out are extracted again:-

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would argue that in terms of the notification issued by the Medical Council of India for "establishment of medical college regulations of 1991", the scheme for obtaining permission of the Central Government to establish a medical college has perforce to clear an essentiality certificate, a plea not found in the original pleadings but brought through replication to the pleadings of the college. The essentiality certificate in Form 2 shall secure no objection of the State Government/Union Territory Administration for the establishment of the proposed medical college at the proposed site and availability of adequate clinical material as per the Council regulations. The clinical materials would mean the requisite number of patients and facilities like beds etc. and if the inspection team had found that the college was wanting on such basic ingredients and the college which had been established did not have such facilities, there was a duty for the State to take over. The Senior Counsel would refer to the recitals in the essentiality certificate that cast an obligation on the State to the following effect:-