MAHATMA GANDHI MEDICAL COLLEGE Vs. BOARD OF GOVERNORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved of the refusal by the Board of Governors to increase seats in M.D. (Paediatrics) course, the petitioners have filed this writ petition. The petitioners had sought increase in the seats of MD (Paediatrics) from 2 to 7. But the respondents had decided not to issue letter of intent in view of inadequate infrastructure and equipment and issued impugned communication dated 26.3.2012 (Annexure-6) and also the impugned order dated 31.3.2012 (Annexure-7), after compliance. Therefore, the petitioners have prayed that the aforesaid impugned communication/order be quashed and set aside and the petitioners be held entitled to admit students in PG Course for the session 2012-13 onwards on 5 additional seats in the subject of Paediatrics. Further, it is prayed that the action of the respondent no.1 in refusing to allot the seats be declared illegal, arbitrary and unjustified and they be directed to recognize/enhance 5 additional seats for the session 2012-13 onwards.

(2.) THE petitioner no.1 Mahatma Gandhi Medical College submitted an application, in terms of Medical Council of India, the opening of a New or Higher Course of Study or Training (including Post-graduate course of Study or Training) and Increase of Admission Capacity in any Course of Study or Training (including a Post-graduate Course of Study or Training) Regulations, 2000, as per the prescribed format and deposited an amount of Rs.4 lacs with the request to the respondent Board of Governors to allow the increase of admission for PG Course in Paediatrics. THE existing seats in Paediatrics which were 2 in number were requested to be enhanced to 7, i.e. 5 additional seats were asked for in Paediatrics. THE earlier consent of affiliation given to the college by the University of Rajasthan(later Rajasthan University of Health Sciences), by which the seats were sanctioned for PG Course from 2009 onwards, was also attached with the application for increase of seats.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the petitioners have reason to believe that thereafter the matter was placed before the PG committee again which had recommended for enhancement to four seats and the same was duly approved by the Board of Governors. But as it came to the knowledge of the respondents that the petitioners had filed some writ petition before the court relating to other subjects, they had arbitrarily and illegally refused for enhancing seats to the petitioners and closed the matter on 31.3.2012. Accordingly, a letter was issued on 31.3.2012 (Annexure-9) to the petitioners conveying that after considering the compliance and the Council Assessor's report, the Board of Governors had decided not to issue letter of intent. LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has in this regard pointed out to the court the documents on record, particularly Annexure-10 wherein it has been mentioned that the Board of Governors had decided to increase the seats in MD (Paediatrics) from two to four in view of the compliance report submitted.