Delhi High Court
Charitable Education And Welfare ... vs Union Of India & Another on 12 July, 2013
Author: V.K. Jain
Bench: V.K.Jain
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 12.07.2013
+ W.P.(C) 4371/2013
CHARITABLE EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv with Mr Gaurav
Mitru and Mr Dhruv Kapur, Advs.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, for R-1-UOI
Mr Ankit, Adv for MCI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN
JUDGMENT
V.K.JAIN, J. (ORAL) Issue notice. The petitioner before this Court applied on 27.09.2012 to the respondent-Medical Council of India for grant of approval to set up a medical college. The requisite Essentiality Certificate has also been issued to the petitioner by the concerned State Government. Vide its order dated 02.03.2013, MCI pointed out the following deficiencies in the documents submitted by the petitioner:
1. "Year-wise Targeted Time Bound Programme not disclosed.
2. Authorization letter addressed to the Banker not enclosed.
3. Balance sheet for the year ending 31/03/2012 not enclosed.W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Page 1 of 5
4. Due diligence Certificate from the Advocate in original certifying that the applicant owns and possesses 20 acres of contiguous piece of land. (Proforma enclosed)
5. Land usage Certificate in original as in attached format from competent authority/Revenue authority. (Proforma enclosed)
6. Certificate from revenue authority in original as in attached format stating that applicant owns and possesses 20 acres of contiguous piece of land.
7. Duly certified copies from Gazetted Officer/Public Notary of the sale deed regarding ownership of the land.
8. Financial Details as per Council guidelines available in regulations for the same.
9. Source of fund invested so far and to be invested with documentary proof.
10. In case of loan, a sanction letter of loan issued from Bankers.
11. Revenue details of running hospital from the beginning to 28/02/2013."
The petitioner was advised to read regulations carefully and furnished all documents as required to fulfil the eligibility criteria. The petitioner further informed that its request to establish a new Medical College would be processed further only after receipt of the aforesaid documents. The petitioner was cautioned to treat the matter as most urgent since the matter was time bound under Section W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Page 2 of 5 10A of IMC Act and submit the deficient documents within two weeks from the date of dispatch of the aforesaid letter. The petitioner claims to have submitted various documents vide communication dated 25.03.2013. It also claims to have sent reminders dated 27.05.2013, 17.06.2013, 02.07.2013 and 08.07.2013.
2. In its meeting held on 19.06.2013, the Board of Governors of MCI was not satisfied with the clarification/documents submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, the Board decided to return the application on the ground that the petitioner did not fulfil the qualifying criteria laid down in the establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999. Pursuant to the said decision, a communication dated 01.07.2013 was sent to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that the said communication was received by them only on 08.07.2013. Being aggrieved from rejection of its request, the petitioner is before this Court by way of this writ petition.
3. CM No. 10100/2013 has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following interim directions:
"a. Pass an order in favour of the petitioner, whereby directing the Respondent MCI to inspect the Petitioner's College in view of the time schedule for grant of permission to admit students first batch of MBBS students for current academic year 2013-2014 and/or;
b. Pass an order in favour of the Petitioner, whereby directing the Respondent MCI to grant permission to the Petitioner for admitting students W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Page 3 of 5 its 1st batch of MBBS Course with an annual intake of 100 students for the current academic year 2013-14 and in that behalf;"
4. Admittedly, 15th July is the last date fixed by Supreme Court in the case of Priya Gupta vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 4318 of 2012 for the purpose of issue of LOP for establishment of a medical college. No LOP can be issued unless an inspection of the hospital/medical college of the petitioner is carried out and it is found that all the prescribed norms are met. Considering the deadline fixed by the Supreme Court for issue of LOP, it will not be possible to give a direction to MCI, at this stage, to carry out inspection of the college and hospital of the petitioner. The inspection by the assessors of MCI is the most important action to be taken on the part of MCI and is not a mere formality. The inspection, therefore, has to be thorough and comprehensive. MCI will first have to identify and appoint professors for the purpose of carrying out inspection. It will have to take their consent and ascertain their availability for carrying out inspection. Thereafter, those assessors will have to go the college of the petitioner in Kerala, carry out inspection and submits its report which will then have to be considered by Board of Governors of MCI. This entire exercise, in my view, cannot be effectively and meaningfully carry out within the time available for this purpose considering that 13th is the second Saturday and 14th is the Sunday. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since they got the W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Page 4 of 5 rejection letter only on 08.07.2013, they were not in a position to come to the Court earlier. I, however, find no merit in this contention. The petitioner knew it very well that 15th July, 2013 was the last date fixed by Supreme Court for issue of LOP. Therefore, it was not necessary for the petitioner to wait for rejection letter from MCI and it could have come to the Court will within time instead of waiting till the rejection letter was received by it on 08.07.2013. In these circumstances, it is not possible to grant any interim relief to the petitioner.
The application stands disposed of.
A copy of this order be given dasti under the signature of Court Master. W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Notice. Counter-affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, can be filed within two weeks thereafter.
Renotify 19.11.2013.
V.K. JAIN, J JULY 12, 2013/BG W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Page 5 of 5