NITESHWAR PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these three writ applications have been heard together on the hypothesis that they involve common question of law and hence they are being disposed of finally by a common judgment. However, the facts of C.W.J.C.No. 5487/98 are vitally different from those in the other two writ applications and hence first this Court would deal with the facts of C.W.J.C. No. 3729/98 and C.W. J.C. No. 9406/98 which relate to same institution i.e. Niteshwar Bhartiya Chikitsha Vigyan Sansthan, Muzaffarpur which impart medical education in indigenous medicine (Ayurved). C.W.J.C. No. 3729/98 has been filed by Niteshwar Prasad Singh the Secretary of the aforesaid institution while the other writ application has been filed by three students of the said institution. The three students claim to represent their batch mates of their respective sessions studying in the said institution. As per averments in the writ petition, petitioner no.1 belongs to the Sessions 1994 -95, petitioner no.2 to the Sessions 1995 -96 and petitioner no.3 to the Sessions 1996 -97 and accordingly they have prayed that they are entitled to take the first B.A.M.S. Examinations 1995, 1996. and 1997 respectively. The students have prayed for a direction to the University to permit the petitioners to take first B.A.M.S. examination 1997 schedule to be held from 2.2.1999 after accepting their examination fees and forms and thereafter to publish their results. In the writ application filed on behalf of the Secretary of the institution, besides a prayer for asking the University to permit the students of the petitioner 'sinstitution to take the first BAMS examination 1995 -96, a further prayer has been made to direct respondent nos. 1 and 2 i.e. the State of Bihar and its concerned officials to grant permanent recognition to the petitioner 's institution on the basis of report dated 14.1.98 submitted by the Inspection Committee headed by respondent no.4, a Deputy Secretary in the Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna as contained in annexure 25 to the writ application. Since the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 9406/98 have relied upon all the facts and submissions advanced on behalf of petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 3729/98 hence further facts mentioned hereinafter with regard to these two writ applications are on the basis of materials in C.W.J.C. No. 3729/98 only.

(2.) IT has been pleaded on behalf of the petitioner that the institution (Niteshwar Bhartiya Chikitsha Vigyan Sansthan, Muzaffarpur) was established in the year 1979 and was registered under the Societies Registration Act. In the year 1980 its students appeared in PreAyurved Examination, 1980. conducted by the respondent University in January 1982 in view of permission to that effect granted by the Vice -Chancellor and communicated to the Principal of the Institute through letter dated 15.10.91 (annexure -1). The students of the institution were allowed to appear in the BAMS examination conducted by the University till 1983 and thereafter the University refused such permission on the ground that the State Government had not granted recognition to the institution. A writ application filed by some students of the institution was disposed of by a Division Bench of this court vide order dated 6.3.1985 directing the State Government to take a firm decision in the matter of recognition within three months. A provisional recognition was granted by the State Government on 10.12.1985 (annexure -3) with a stipulation that within six months a final decision would be taken after obtaining concurrence from Central Council of Indigenous Medicines (C.C.I. M.), Respondent no. 7 and the Union of lndia, respondent no.6. On receipt of recommendation of respondent no. 7, C.C.I.M. the State Government in exercise of power under section 6 of Bihar Indigenous Medical Education Institution (Regulation and Control) Act, 1982 granted provisional permission for admitting 20 students as appears from notification dated 3.10.1987 (annexure -5). Another inspection of the Institution was done by a inspecting team of CCIM on 22.4.1988 and the institution was directed to remove some of the deficiency within one year, some within three years and some within five years. This appears from a letter dated 23.4.1988 (annexure -6). By letter dated 21.3.1988 (annexure -7) the State Government again ' granted provisional permission to the institution for a maximum of 20 students in view of recommendation of CCIM dated 4.3.1987 and 3.10.87. By this letter the institution was directed to be affiliated to Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University. By another notification dated 15.12.1988 (annexure -8), in view of recommendation of CCIM dated 23.4.1988 provisional permission was granted to the institution for maximum 50 students and the institution was affiliated to the then Bihar University, Muzaffarpur (Now BRA Bihar University) respondent no.8. Thereafter by letter dated 22.2.1993 (annexure -9) it appears that the University refused to allow the students of the institution to take the BAMS examination, 1990 for lack of recommendation by the CCIM and corresponding recognition by the State Government.

(3.) PETITIONER filed a writ petition being C.W.J.C.No. 107/96 against the decision of the State Government dated 23.6.95 (annexure 20) by which the earlier constituted inspection committee and its report with regard to non - Government Colleges was respectively dissolved and cancelled. That writ application was finally disposed of by order of this court dated 1.9.1997 (annexure -24). In that order this Court noticed the statutory provisions contained in annexure 5 and 6 of the Bihar Indigenous Medical Education Institutions (Take over and Control) Act 1982 which provide for inspection of the concerned college and its recognition as per permission of the CCIM and the Central Government and held that considerable delay in taking these steps was causing considerable hardship, harassment and loss to the petitioner. Hence this court directed the State Government to take a final decision on the question of grant of recognition to the institution without any delay and in accordance with law. The State Government and the CCIM were directed to have the institution inspected by a team of experts constituted by the C.C.I.M. and this team was directed to submit its inspection report within two months and thereafter within six weeks, the State Government was to forward the matter to C.C.I.M. and the Central Government with its own recommendation for permission as provided under section 6 of the Act. Within two months from the date of receipt of the State Government 'srecommendation along with the report the Central Government and the C.C.I.M. were directed to intimate to the State Government their decision on the question of granting permission to the petitioner 'sinstitution to run a course in Indian Medicines. It is quite apparent that the spirit of the final order of this court dated 1.9.97 (annexure 24) was same as that of earlier final order dated 10.5.1995 (annexure 19). Pursuant to Annexure - 24. the institution was again inspected by a team of three persons on 30th December, 1997 which submitted its report on 14.1.1998 (annexure -25) but thereafter the State Government did not act in the matter and no final decision in the matter was communicated to the petitioner. On 11.4.98 vide annexure 26 the respondent issued a communique regarding dates of first BAMS examination 1995. -96 in which only the students of Government Ayurved Colleges were permitted to appear. In such a situation the petitioner preferred this writ application on 14.5.98 asking for the two reliefs already noticed earlier. Through supplementary affidavit petitioner has brought on record a report of inspection dated 9.6.98 (Annexure -27) by the visitors appointed by CCIM. A perusal of annexure -27 shows that the visitors from CCIM made no recommendation for granting recognition to the institution but instead, after noticing the pendency of this case recorded that in the interest of students direction may be given to State Government regarding conduct of examination for the students. This observation was given after noticing the fact that in the year 1994 the State Government had stopped admission from sessions 1994 -95. 4A. When the University published a communique dated 19.9.99 for holding fresh BAMS examination then the petitioner made a grievance against not permitting the students of petitioner 'sinstitution to take the said examination. Prima facie satisfied with the allegation that the students of similar institution were being permitted to take the examination while no decision was being given with regard to petitioner 'sinstitution even after holding of necessary inspection, this court by order dated 13.1.1999 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 9406/98 directed that BAMS examination scheduled to be held from 2nd February, 1999 shall not be held till further order. The said interim order still continues save and except a partial modification in favour of students of Government Ayurved College, Patna vide order dated 18.5.99. This writ application was thereafter admitted for hearing on 20.7.1999. Subsequently interlocutory applications were filed on behalf of some students of Ravindra Nath Ayurved Medical College and Hospital, Motihari for a further modification of the interim order dated 13.1.1999 on the ground that the concerned students had taken admission in the said college when it was recognized and these students had earlier appeared in the concerned B.A.M.S. examination and hence their bona fide could be ascertained by the University and they belonged to Sessions earlier to 1994 -95 and hence were not covered by the conditions imposed by the State Government on 31.12.93. Those interlocutory applications were disposed of with a direction to the University to consider their representation and if their all contentions were found correct then the University could take a decision to allow them to take further examination and in that case the interim order of this court dated 13.1.99 would not stand in the way of the University. This small opening, however, appears to have caused some problem for the University on whose behalf it has been submitted that a large number of such representations have been filed. Some further interlocutory applications of similar nature were also filed at the fag end of hearing of these cases but since the students belonged to different institutions hence the petitioners objected to any further delay in hearing on account of such interlocutory applications and hence those applications have not been entertained further. Moreover it is expected that the final judgment and order in these cases shall itself obviate the necessity of any modification in the interim order dated 13 .1.1999.