Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Sukhsagar Medical College And ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 January, 2020
Author: Atul Sreedharan
Bench: Atul Sreedharan
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
SEAT AT JABALPUR
W.P.No.17946/2019
(M/S Sukhsagar Medical College and Hospital Vs. The State of
Madhya Pradesh and Others)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.Sankalp Kochar,
Advocate
Counsel for the Respondents : Mr.Himanshu Mishra,
No.1 to 4/State. Government Advocate
Counsel for Respondent No.5 : Mr.Satish Verma,
Advocate
Counsel for Respondent No.6 : Mrs.Indira Nair, Senior
Adv. with Mr.Anoop Nair,
Advocate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present: Hon'ble Mr.Sanjay Yadav and
Mr.Atul Sreedharan, J.J.
O R D E R
(06/01/2020) Per Atul Sreedharan, J.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner whereby initially, the petitioner had impugned the legality and validity of a show-cause notice dated 07.08.2019 passed by under Secretary of the Medical Education Department, 2 State of Madhya Pradesh, the respondent no.2 herein, asking the petitioner to show-cause as to why the Essentiality Certificate dated 27.08.2014 issued by the State Government for running Sukhsagar Medical College and Hospital ought not be cancelled. The said show-cause notice was challenged purely on the ground of jurisdiction based on the argument that the respondent nos.1 and 2 have no authority to revoke the Essentiality Certificate much less even issue a show- cause notice for revoking the same in the light of the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Chintpurni Medical College and Hospital and Another Vs. State of Punjab and Others reported in 2018 (15) SCC 1. During the pendency of the said petition, the State passed an order dated 05.09.2019 revoking the Essentiality Certificate given to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for amendment of the petition in view of the subsequent event, which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 16.10.2019, by which, the petitioner extended the challenge to the order dated 05.09.2019 passed by the State revoking the Essentiality Certificate.
2. The brief facts of this case are as follows. The petitioner is a registered Public Trust and has established a Medical College and Hospital. It is 100 percent Charitable Trust. The Said Essentiality Certificate for 3 establishing the Medical College was granted by the State Government on 27.08.2014. The Medical College was permitted by the Central Government to admit 150 students for the academic year 2016-17. On account of certain deficiencies pointed out by the Regulatory Authority, the renewal of permission by the Medical Council of India (In short "MCI") was not granted for the year 2019-20 to the petitioner. The college, however, had the liberty to apply afresh for the next academic session which is 2020-21. The main ground on which the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 05.09.2019, by which the Essentiality Certificate was revoked by the State, is based upon the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Chintpurni Medical College and Hospital and Another (supra).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has led us elaborately through the said judgement where the Supreme Court has held that the intent of issuing the Essentiality Certificate is only restricted to an assessment by the State Government with regard to the requirement of establishing a Medical College and Hospital in a particular area in the State based on its appreciation of public interest and welfare by providing medical aid to its citizens in a particular area. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued in extenso with reference to the relevant paragraph of the judgement that once an Essentialilty Certificate is given and the 4 Medical College is functional, the State has no authority in revoking the Essentiality Certificate and, thereby, inhibit the functioning of the Medical College itself on such transient shortcomings which can be rectifiable and which infact fall within the purview of MCI, which is the authority which carries out an annual inspection of the Medical Colleges in the country and assesses the competence of such colleges to continue functioning provided, the college complies with the norms laid down by the MCI. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the State by the impugned order is trying to arrogate to itself authority that lies solely with the MCI. He has drawn our attention to paragraphs-15, 16 and 17 of the judgement in order to impress upon us that the order dated 05.09.2019 deserves to be set-aside. We have gone through the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chintpurni Medical College and Hospital's and Another . Undoubtedly, the Supreme Court has held categorically and unambiguously that once the Essentiality Certificate is granted by the State and the Medical Colleges commences, thereafter, whether it ought to continue imparting medical education comes within the sole purview of the MCI. The Court has held that permission is granted of the Medical 5 Colleges to function by the MCI, provided that they are compliant of the mandatory norms set by the MCI.
4. Here, we feel it is necessary to refer to paragraph-14, where the Supreme Court has held that the State Government is required to issue an Essentiality Certificate based upon two factors, one is public interest and the other is feasibility or necessity of establishing a Medical College in a particular area. Both these aspects, we shall deal with at a later stage of this order.
5. The MCI carried out an inspection of the facilities of the petitioner and vide order dated 30.05.2019 refused to grant permission to run the medical college for the year 2019-20. It is relevant to mention here that the said permission was refused by the MCI vide order dated 30.05.2019 on account of 18 deficiencies noted by them in their order and the said order was passed atleast 3 months before the show-cause notice was issued by the State Government on 07.08.2019 as to why the Essentiality Certificate ought not to be revoked. Some of the deficiencies, we feel ought to be reproduced in this order. The MCI observe that one lecture theatre for the college was lacking and that the construction of the hospital lecture theatre was not gallery typed as was required under 6 the MCI norms. The medical college was deficient of 798 books, 14 Indian Journals and 6 Foreign Journals. The bed occupancy was only 3.65% which is 15 patients on 410 beds. The 7 t h deficiency pointed out was that there were no minor surgeries, normal deliveries or caesarian section carried out in the hospital. The 17 t h deficiency pointed by the MCI was there was a deficiency of 88.03% in the faculty and the deficiency of 19.9% of Resident Doctors in the Medical College.
6. Thus what it appears from the order of the MCI declining the permission to the petitioner to take fresh admission for the year 2019-20 broadly reflected that the faith of the public in the hospital run by the petitioner was grossly inadequate and that is why the bed occupancy was only 3.65%, no minor surgeries or even deliveries being carried out in the hospital which clearly reflects that public was unable to repose confidence in the functioning of the hospital being run by the petitioner which is adjunct to the medical college. Even after the passage almost 8 months since the order of the MCI was passed declining permission to admit students in the year 2019-2020, the said short comings have not been addressed. We put a specific question to the learned counsel for the petitioner if 18 deficiencies pointed out by the MCI have 7 been rectified. Learned counsel for the petitioner said that they shall be rectified within one month. The answer of the learned counsel for the petitioner itself reflects that as on date of this order the medical college and hospital run by the petitioner is grossly non-compliant of the norms of the MCI.
7. Though, the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chintpurni Medical College and Hospital and Another clarifies the ambit and scope of the States involvement in the running of a medical college have been restricted to the issuance of an Essentiality Certificate, the same does not compel the State from taking a hands of approach completely where after the issuance of the Essentiality Certificate, the medical college becomes non- compliant of the norms of the MCI or falls short of the standard required in the Essentiality Certificate when the same was issued in the first place.
8. Coming back to paragraph-14 of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chintpurni Medical College and Hospital and Another , as regards the Essentiality Certificate, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the same is given on the basis of two factors public interest and feasibility. This must be read in conjunction with 8 paragraph-36 of the judgement, where the Supreme Court held as under:-
"We may not be understood to be laying down that under no circumstances can an Essentiality Certificate be withdrawn. The State Government would be entitled to withdraw such certificate where it is obtained by playing fraud on it or any circumstances where the very substratum on which the Essentiality Certificate was granted disappears or any other reason of like nature."
9. When paragraph-36 is read in conjunction with paragraph-14 of the case, the substratum spoken of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is nothing but public interest and feasibility. And where the MCI vide order dated 30.05.2019 has refused permission to the petitioner to admit students for the year 2019-2020 on account of the 18 deficiencies which remained unaddressed by the petitioner on 07.08.2019 when the show- cause notice was issued and later on 05.09.2019 when the Essentiality Certificate was revoked by the State and continues till date, there is sufficient cause for the State to 9 believe that the substratum of issuing the Essentiality Certificate which is public interest and feasibility, no longer exists. On account of the deficiency pointed out by the MCI at serial nos.6, 7, 9 and 13. Thus as the public interest is no longer visible which also questions the very feasibility of running the medical college, the State Government was completely justified in passing the order dated 05.09.2019 revoking the Essentiality Certificate.
10.Under the circumstances, petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is given a liberty to remove the deficiencies pointed out by the MCI in the order dated 30.05.2019 and apply afresh for the Essentiality Certificate to the State Government and if the same is refused thereafter, it would get the petitioner a fresh cause of action and not otherwise.
(Sanjay Yadav) (Atul Sreedharan)
Judge Judge
rk
Digitally signed by RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Date: 2020.01.09 12:25:32
+05'30'