Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Pacific Medical University vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 June, 2023
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6131/2023
1. Jaswant Sharma S/o Gopal Sharma, Aged About 24
Years, House Number 62 Arniya Panth Chittaurgarh
Rajasthan
2. Deva Ram S/o Pola Ram Raj, Aged About 24 Years,
Pushpak Nagar Colony Jalor Rajasthan
3. Vikash Saran S/o Kishna Ram, Aged About 22 Years,
House No 701 Gorkha Ki Dhani Jalor Rajasthan
4. Hasmukh Singh Rajpurohit S/o Sukhpal Singh, Aged
About 23 Years, Purohit Ka Bas Dhola Shasan Pali Gundoj
Rajasthan
5. Mannu Bairagi S/o Puran Das Bairagi, Aged About 24
Years, Jawada Chittorgarh Rajasthan
6. Vaishnavi Dhakad D/o Nandkishor Dhakad, Aged About
22 Years, Kesharpura Jawad Ward 9 Kesharpura Kalan
Neemuch Mp
7. Abhijeet Vyas S/o Kailash Chandra, Aged About 23 Years,
Vyas Bapu Nagar Rayla Bhilwara Railagaon Rajasthan
8. Kishor Janwa S/o Radhe Shyam Janwa, Aged About 24
Years, Bhanooja Chittorgarh Rajasthan
9. Piyush Gurjar S/o Babu Lal, Aged About 23 Years, 290
Pathan Gode Wala Ke Pass Gariyawas Udaipur Rajasthan
10. Deepak Sen S/o Puranmal Sen, Aged About 22 Years,
Jhor Rajasamand Rajasthan
11. Pooja Kunwar D/o Mahendra Singh Gahlot, Aged About 23
Years, Bus Stand Kalandari Sirohi Rajasthan
12. Yogeshwari Prajapat D/o Rajesh Prajapat, Aged About 22
Years, Ward No 9, Jayaswal Mohalla Jawad Nayagaon Cf
Neemuch Mp
13. Ravina Prajapat D/o Devilal Prajapat, Aged About 22
Years, Arniya Mali Gadola Chittorgarh Rajasthan
14. Kirti Kumari D/o Uma Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Sobrawas Bagoda Jalor Rajasthan
15. Govind Ram S/o Punma Ram, Aged About 23 Years, Dabal
Jalor Rajasthan
16. Suraj Rathore S/o Devaram, Aged About 23 Years,
Dhanda Pali Rajasthan
17. Bhupendra Baranda S/o Anil Baranda, Aged About 22
Years, Nareli Dungurpur Rajasthan
18. Magan Singh Gatav S/o Ram Niwas, Aged About 24 Years,
Gatav Kherli Goojar, Karoli
19. Bhawani Singh Dodiya S/o Bhupendra Singh, Aged About
22 Years, Dodoiya House Near Panchayat Bhawan Bedla
Udaipur Rajasthan
20. Kamlesh Prajapat S/o Ratan Lal Kumar, Aged About 23
Years, Barliyas, Bhilwara Rajasthan
21. Deepak Joshi S/o Vishvanath Joshi, Aged About 22 Years,
Brahmpuri Gaon Gurha Goanguda Rajsamand Rajasthan
22. Mehreen Azad D/o Ajaz Ul Hak, Aged About 21 Years,
Ujhan Rajouri Jammu And Kashmir
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(2 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
23. Raveena Meena D/o Mansingh Meena, Aged About 22
Years, Jaliya Chittorgarh Rajasthan
24. Pooja Nagora D/o Dalichand Nagora, Aged About 23
Years, D21 Tagore Nagar Pali Rajasthan
25. Gaurav Kumawat Bhagwati Lal Kumawat, Aged About 23
Years, Neemuch Darwaja Ke Andar Ward No 11 Chhoti
Sadri Pratapgarh Rajasthan
26. Deepak Regar S/o Mohan Lal Regar, Aged About 22 Years,
Mohalla Khandel Rajasammand Rajasamand Rajasthan
27. Jateen Patidar S/o Narayan Lal Patidar, Aged About 23
Years, Nava Padar Baswada Kharan Ka Parda Rajasthan
28. Govind Kumar S/o Damra Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Nagar Barmer Rajasthan
29. Arvind Singh Chouhan S/o Khim Singh, Aged About 22
Years, Dharmesh Puri Bhim Rajsamand Rajasthan
30. Pawan Kumar Mali S/o Amba Lal Mali, Aged About 24
Years, Arnaya Mali Chittorgarh Rajasthan
31. Karishma Gorana D/o Mangi Lal, Aged About 22 Years,
Gorana 168 Glass Factory Khem Pura Road Girva Udaipur
Rajasthan
32. Bharti Gameti D/o Bherulal, Aged About 23 Years, Nimach
Kheda Durga Colony Dewali Udaipur H.o Udaipur
Rajasthan
33. Varsha Malawat D/o Yashpal Singh, Aged About 23 Years,
1462 Near Seeta Mata Temple Dewali Udaipur Rajasthan
34. Bhoomi Nimawat D/o Girish Kumar Nimawat, Aged About
22 Years, Hanuman Mandir Ke Pass Sapetiya Udaipur
Rajasthan
35. Mayanka Purbiya D/o Kanhiya Lal Purbiya, Aged About 25
Years, Madar Uadipur Rajasthan
36. Udit Pandya S/o Shelendra Pandya, Aged About 23 Years,
Graam Kharadu Badi Jhabua Mp
37. Kuldeep Regar S/o Mdan Lal Regar, Aged About 24 Years,
F52 Govind Nagra Housing Board Rajasamand Rajasthan
38. Rajshree D/o Kalpat Singh, Aged About 23 Years, Ajari
Sirohi Rajasthan
39. Arshad Abbasi S/o Abdhul Rahman, Aged About 25 Years,
Kotra Udaipur Rajasthan
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary
Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Government
Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Nursing Council, B-39, Sardar Patel Marg,
C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Registrar.
3. Pacific Medical University, Bhilon Ka Bedla, Pratap Pura
District Udaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its Registrar.
4. Tirupati College Of Nursing, Pacific Medical University,
Bhilon Ka Bedla, Pratap Pura, District Udaipur Rajasthan,
Through Its Principal.
----Respondents
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(3 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6092/2023
1. Sai Tirupati University, Village Umarda, Ambua Road,
Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its
Registrar Devendra Kumar Jain, S/o Jamna Lal, Aged
About 55 Years, Resident Of 95, Chirag Complex, Panerio
Ki Madari, Saweena, Udaipur.
2. Venkteshwar College Of Nursing, Pacific Institute Of
Medical Science, Village Umarda, Ambua Road, Tehsil
Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Principal
Vijay Singh Rawat, S/o Nahar Singh Rawat, Age - 39
Years, Resident Of 271, Mada Ki Bassi, Post Office, Nardas
Ka Gudha Bhatio Ki Bhagal, Rajsamand.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Government
Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Nursing Council, Jaipur, Through Its
Registrar, B-39, Sardar Patel Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6158/2023
1. Prahlad Ram S/o Shri Hansa Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Looniyasar Jalore Raj.
2. Ajit Singh Damor S/o Shri Abhay Singh Damor, Aged
About 22 Years, Village Thkari Po Bandela Tehsil Simal
Wara Dungarpur Raj.
3. Amin Janvi Manilal S/o Shri Vankar Manilal, Aged About
23 Years, Kathlal Keada Gujarat
4. Ashish Kumar Hodat S/o Shri Harish, Aged About 23
Years, Shisod Dungarpur Raj.
5. Bahadur Mal Bhagora S/o Shri Suryakaran, Aged About
26 Years, Jamboi Post Amarthun Banswara Raj.
6. Bhava Ram S/o Shri Jheena Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Meghwalo Ka Vas Sayala Jalore Raj.
7. Bhik Nath S/o Shri Manak Nath, Aged About 22 Years,
Village Karwada, Tehsil Marwar Junction, Pali Raj.
8. Bishal Kumar S/o Shri Jitendra Yadav, Aged About 23
Years, Village Siyari Karn, Post Lakri Dargah, Barhri,
Siwan, Bihar
9. Chaudhary Amit Kumar Dinesh Bhai S/o Chaudhary
Dinesh Bhai, Aged About 23 Years, Vadoth, Tehsil Vadali,
Sabarkantha, Gujarat
10. Chhagan Lal S/o Shri Mangilal, Aged About 27 Years,
Ramdavgi Ki Gali, Meghwalo Ka Vas, Jadri, Pali Raj.
11. Deshraj Jatav S/o Shri Badri Lal Jatav, Aged About 24
Years, Bhilwadiya, Sheopur, Madhya Pradesh
12. Dileep Seervi S/o Shri Deva Ram, Aged About 22 Years,
Bera Bhambhiya Wala, Khariya Meedhapur, Jodhpur Raj.
13. Fula Ram S/o Shri Asha Ram, Aged About 25 Years,
Meghwalo Ka Vas, Harjee, Jalore Raj.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(4 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
14. Ganpat Singh S/o Shri Tej Singh, Aged About 22 Years,
Dadusan, Post Bawarala, Tehsil Sanchore, Jalore Raj.
15. Gopal S/o Shri Hansa Ram, Aged About 22 Years,
Meghwalo Ka Vas, Bithiya, Pali Raj.
16. Hansa Kumari Suthar D/o Shri Tulsi Ram Suthar, Aged
About 35 Years, Ughmani, Kodariya, Udaipur Raj.
17. Harsan Kumar S/o Shri Parsa Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Meghwalo Ka Vas, Ummedabad, Jalore Raj.
18. Jagdish Kumar Meena S/o Shri Keva Ram Meena, Aged
About 28 Years, Gavwapal Salumbar, Udaipur Raj.
19. Jala Ram Meghwal S/o Shri Jetha Ram, Aged About 25
Years, Meghwalo Ka Vas, Virana, Jalore Raj.
20. Jaydeep Damor S/o Shri Ramesh Chandra Damor, Aged
About 23 Years, Sadriya, Ward No. 3, Dungarpur Raj.
21. Jeeja Kumari Arsoda D/o Shri Amra Arsoda, Aged About
26 Years, Bhanasimal, Karawara, Dungarpur Raj.
22. Jitendra Singh S/o Shri Babu Singh, Aged About 22 Years,
Sangawa, Jalore Raj.
23. Joga Ram S/o Shri Nagji Ram, Aged About 22 Years,
Titop, Jalore Raj.
24. Kamlesh Meena S/o Shri Devi Lal Meena, Aged About 25
Years, Village Samantpura, Bardeeya, Pratapgarh Raj.
25. Kartar Singh S/o Chandrabhan Singh, Aged About 23
Years, Palri, Pali Raj.
26. Komal Kumari Gameti D/o Shri Gotam Gameti, Aged
About 22 Years, Vasuwa, Mahudipal, Dungarpur Raj.
27. Krishna Kumar S/o Shri Ganesha Ram, Aged About 24
Years, Meghwalo Ka Vas, Harjee, Ahore, Jalore Raj.
28. Lalit Kumar S/o Shri Hadmana Ram, Aged About 23
Years, Vijay Nagar, Bishanagarh, Jalore Raj.
29. Manish Patel S/o Shri Amritlal Patel, Aged About 23 Years,
Nichla Kherwara, Udaipur Raj.
30. Manju Kumari D/o Shri Porkha Ram, Aged About 23
Years, Panchla, Jalore Raj.
31. Montu Kumar S/o Shri Vasu Dev, Aged About 24 Years,
Siddheswar Dhamana, Jalore Raj.
32. Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Kalu Lal Meena, Aged
About 24 Years, Ward No. 06, Lohagarh, Pratapgarh Raj.
33. Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Ajay Kumar, Aged About 25 Years,
Ashwaran Baalgram Sansthan, Alawas, Pali Raj.
34. Neha Kumari Gameti D/o Uda Gameti, Aged About 23
Years, Vasuwa, Mahudipal, Dungarpur Raj.
35. Nitin Kharadi S/o Shri Mohan Lal Kharadi, Aged About 24
Years, Valifala, Nichla Mandwagddi, Udaipur Raj.
36. Pankaj Kumar Meena S/o Shri Trilok Chandra, Aged About
34 Years, Gadola, Tehsil Nimbahera, Chittorgarh Raj.
37. Pankaj Meena S/o Kamal Chand Meena, Aged About 25
Years, Sabakher, Kesharpura, Pratapgarh Raj.
38. Pappu Kumar Meena S/o Maliya Meena, Aged About 23
Years, Ward No. 06, Lohagarh, Pratapgarh Raj.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(5 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
39. Pawan S/o Shri Ashok Kumar, Aged About 24 Years,
Chavanda Colony Road, Bilara, Jodhpur Raj.
40. Pinki Jat D/o Shri Shivaram Jat, Aged About 24 Years,
Bhishu Vihar Road, Kelwa, Rajsamand Raj.
41. Pranjal Kharadi D/o Shri Nikul Bhai, Aged About 22 Years,
Raypur, Tehsil Bhiloda, Arawali, Gujarat
42. Praveen Dangi S/o Parta Ji Dangi, Aged About 24 Years,
Village Gudli, Udaipur Raj.
43. Preeti Patel D/o Narayan Lal Patel, Aged About 23 Years,
Thana Pahara, Dungarpur Raj.
44. Priyanka Bhagora D/o Shri Hari Shankar Bhagora, Aged
About 23 Years, Mukam Post Ador Block Gadi, Banswara
Raj.
45. Rahul Garg S/o Shri Vishnu Prasad, Aged About 25 Years,
Mali Mohalla, Opposite Icici Bank Baadsoda, Chittorgarh
Raj.
46. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Joga Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Teetop, Surawa, Jalore Raj.
47. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Mungar Ram, Aged About 24
Years, Naindal, Jalore Raj.
48. Riddhesh Singh Tak S/o Shri Ajay Singh Tak, Aged About
23 Years, Opp. Central Bank Of India, Shiv Colony,
Dungarpur Raj.
49. Rohit Meghwal S/o Shri Tulsi Ram Meghwal, Aged About
23 Years, 146, Govardhan Vilas, Hava Mangri, Girwa,
Udaipur Raj.
50. Shah Khushi D/o Shah Rakesh Kumar, Aged About 23
Years, Asrayn 2, 501 Civil Staff Quarters, Ahmedabad,
Gujarat
51. Sharvan Kumar S/o Shri Sanvla Ram, Aged About 23
Years, Sanked, Jalore Raj.
52. Shilpa Katara D/o Shri Kalu Katara, Aged About 23 Years,
Pal Mathugamda, Dungarpur Raj.
53. Shilpa Kumari Kalasua D/o Shri Mukesh Kumar Kalasua,
Aged About 24 Years, Barna, Udaipur Raj.
54. Shiva Ram S/o Shri Chhoga Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Teetop, Jalore Raj.
55. Shiva Ram S/o Shri Kehra Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Chadarnadi Sankad, Jalore Raj.
56. Tarun Kumar Garg S/o Shri Meetha Lal, Aged About 22
Years, Jojawar, Pali Raj.
57. Vikram Singh Rajput S/o Shri Ganpat Singh Rajput, Aged
About 23 Years, Ward No. 17, Railway Station Gangrar,
Chittorgarh Raj.
58. Vikram Singh Rajput S/o Shri Narayan Singh Rajput, Aged
About 23 Years, Hadecha, Jalore Raj.
59. Vikram Kumar S/o Shri Shravan Kumar, Aged About 24
Years, 210, Police Chowki, Jojawar, Tehsil Marwar
Junction, Pali Raj.
60. Virendra Chormar S/o Shri Kishan Chormar, Aged About
25 Years, Tanda Mangla, Banswara Raj.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(6 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Health And Family Welfare Government Of
Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur
2. The Rajasthan Nursing Council, B 39, Sardar Patel Marg,
C Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Registrar
3. Sai Tirupati University, Village Umarda, Ambua Road,
Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its
Registrar.
4. Venkteshwar College Of Nursing, Pacific Institute Of
Medical Science, Village Umarda, Ambua Road, Tehsil
Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Principal.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6165/2023
1. Patel Krupal Kumar S/o Shri Rajendra Bhai, Aged About
23 Years, Resident Of V/p Ratanpur, Tehsil Idar, District
Sabarkantha, Gujarat.
2. Sourabh Bargot S/o Shri Laxman Lal Bargot, Aged About
23 Years, Resident Of Village Delwada, Lakhiya, Banswara
(Raj.).
3. Vinod Hadat S/o Shri Mohan Lal Hadat, Aged About 25
Years, Resident Of Shisod, Dungarpur (Raj.).
4. Prakash Roat S/o Shri Harish Roat, Aged About 23 Years,
Resident Of Mukam Kherwada, Post Sansarpur, Dungarpur
(Raj.).
5. Vipin Roat S/o Shri Laxman Lal Roat, Aged About 25
Years, Resident Of Vpo Hirata, Dungarpur (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Government
Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Nursing Council, B-39, Sardar Patel Marg,
C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Registrar.
3. Sai Tirupati University, Village Umarda, Ambua Road,
Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan Through Its
Registrar.
4. Venkteshwar College Of Nursing, Pacific Institute Of
Medical Science, Village Umarda, Ambua Road, Tehsil
Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Principal.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6293/2023
1. Abhishek Pargi S/o Lalitmohan Pargi, Aged About 23
Years, R/o Ward No. 6 Mukam Ranakevat Post Vikas
Nagar Dungarpur Rajasthan.
2. Amir Ahmad Shah, Aged About 24 Years, R/o 59Panzala
Gund Bal Baramula Jammu And Kashmir.
3. Archana Devi D/o Des Raj, Aged About 23 Years, R/o S10
Bibrota Dist Ramban Rajgarh Chanderkot Jammu And
Kashmir 182148.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(7 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
4. Arif Hussain S/o Mohd Ashraf Khan, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o Banihal 089 Krawah Banihal Doda Jammu And
Kashmir.
5. Barkha Devi D/o Baldev Singh, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
Gota Chassana Reasi Jamu And Kashmir.
6. Bilal Ahmad Mir S/o Abdhul Ahad Mir, Aged About 22
Years, R/o Geen Pora Magam Kupwara Jammu And
Kashmir.
7. Gagan Verma S/o Sanju Verma, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Da383 Prakash Vihar Palwal Faridabad Haryana.
8. Ghulam Mustafa S/o Bashir Ahmed, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Shelai Chounri Doda Jammu And Kashmir.
9. Mohd Saber S/o Saif Ali, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
Donadi Balgran, Kishtwar J And K.
10. Nagendra Singh Bhati S/o Sajjan Singh Bhati, Aged About
23 Years, R/o Ward No. 10 Sawariya Caolony Mahila Polic
Thane Ke Pass Khumba Nagar Chittorgarh Rajasthan.
11. Narendra Meghwal S/o Mangi Lal Meghwal, Aged About
23 Years, R/o Bagdunda Udaipur Rajasthan.
12. Rebari Dilip Bhai S/o Rebari Shanti Bhai, Aged About 22
Years, R/o Rebari Was Lodhi Patan Gujarat.
13. Rati Raina D/o Jyoti Prakash Raina, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o Ward No. 11 House No. 147 Shiv Nagar, Udhanpur J
And K.
14. Ravi Ranjan S/o Ramanuj, Aged About 26 Years, R/o C 54
Gaji Pur Road Near Arya Samaj Mandir Pali Chokk
Faridabad Hariyana.
15. Samreena Manzoor D/o Manzoor Ahmad Sheikh, Aged
About 23 Years, R/o Mugal Mohalla Nowgam Shangas
Anatnag, J. And K.
16. Samiksha Devi D/o Sanjay Kumar, Aged About 22 Years,
R/o Bolian Doda J And K.
17. Sonu Devi D/o Bodh Raj, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Bodh
Raj Kratta Dissst Ramban Jhat Gali Rambn Chnderkot J
And K 182148.
18. Shallu Devi D/o Swami Raj, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
Kratta Dissst Ramban Jhat Gali Chanderkot J. And K.
19. Sunaina Malviya D/o Ramkishan Ji Malviya, Aged About
22 Years, R/o Bardiya Meemuch Mp.
20. Shahid Shafi S/o Mohammad Shafi Raina, Aged About 23
Years, R/o J. And K.
21. Syed Junaid Naseer Shah Bukhari S/o Syed Naseer
Ahmad, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Zand Batpora Kupwar
J. And K.
22. Uttam Garg S/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
Goyli Sirohi Gohili Rajasthan.
23. Shahrup S/o Sarjeet Khan, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Somsi Bharatpur Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(8 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Government
Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Nursing Council, B-39, Sardar Patel Marg,
C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Registrar.
3. Pacific Medical University, Bhilon Ka Bedla, Pratappura,
District Udaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Registrar.
4. Tirupati College Of Nursing, Pacific Medical University,
Bhilon Ka Bedla, Pratappura, District Udaipur, Rajasthan
Through Its Principal.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7647/2023
1. Pacific Medical University, Bhilon Ka Bedl, N.h. 76,
Udaipur, Through Its Authorized Representative Punet
Makhija S/o Shri Mohan Makhija Aged 37 Years R/o
Pacific Hills, Pratap Nagar, Airport Road Udaipur (Raj.).
2. Tirupati College Of Nursing, Bhilon Ka Bedla Pratappura,
N.h. 76, Udaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Joint Secretary,
Department Of Medical, Health And Family Welfare,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Rajasthan Nursing Council, Through Its Registrar, B-39,
Sardar Patel Marg, C-Scheme .
3. Indian Nursing Council, Combined Council Building,
Kotla Road, Temple Lane, New Delhi Through Its
Secretary.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7893/2023
1. Sai Tirupati University, Village Umarda, Ambua Road,
Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its
Registrar Devendra Kumar Jain S/o Jamna Lal, Aged
About 55 Years, Resident Of 95, Chirag Complex,
Panerio Ki Madari, Saweena, Udaipur.
2. Venketshwar College Of Nursing, Pacific Institute Of
Medical Science, Village Umarda, Ambua Road, Tehsil
Girwa, District Udaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Principal
Vijay Singh Rawat S/o Nahar Singh Rawat, Age 39
Years, Resident Of 271, Mada Ki Bassi, Post Office,
Nardas Ka Gudha Bhatio Ki Bhagal, Rajsamand.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Medical
And Health Department Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Nursing Council, Jaipur, Through Its
Registrar, B-39, Sardar Patel Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Respondents
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM)
(9 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Adv. assisted by
Mr. Rajat Dave.
Mr. Shreyansh Mardia.
Mr. Hemant Ballani.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vandana Bhansali, AGC (on VC)
assisted by Ms.Vrinda Samdani.
Mr. Y.P. Khileree assisted by Mr. Nitin
Gehlot for INC.
Mr. Sangram Singh for RNC.
Mr. Mahendra Vishnoi.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment Reserved on 01/06/2023 Pronounced on 06/06/2023
1. These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been preferred claiming, in sum and substance, the following reliefs:
"It is therefore, humbly prayed, that the present petition for writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ / order or directions:-
(i) The action of the respondent state authorities insisting for seeking NOC for upgradation of the courses of B.Sc.
Nursing, P.B. Bsc. Nursing and M.Sc. (N) may kindly be declared illegal and the same may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(ii) the impugned orders dated 18.04.2023 (Annx-14) issued by the respondent State rejecting the representation may also kindly be quashed and set aside.
(iii) The order dated 13.01.2022 (Annex.-9) cancelling the affiliation / recognition of the petitioner for the academic session 2021-22 may kindly be quashed and set aside with all consequential directions
(iv) The students passed out from the petitioner university whose qualification of B.Sc., PB B.Sc and M.Sc. Nursing Courses recognized by the INC under the act of 1947 may (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (10 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] kindly be declared eligible and appropriate directions may kindly be issued to register the students in the State Register of respondent no.2 and their degree granted stands to be recognized with all consequential directions;
(v) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, it may be declared that in terms of schedule II of the Act of 2014, the petitioner is not required to sought any no objection certificate from the State Government to run the courses mentioned in schedule II of the Act of 2014.
(vi) Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner;
(vii) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner."
2. For the sake of brevity, the factual matrix of the case is being taken from the above-numbered S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7647/2023.
2.1. The petitioner no.1 is a University (Promoted by Tirupati Balaji Educational Trust) established and incorporated under the Pacific Medical University Udaipur Act, 2014; the petitioner no.2 is a Nursing College established in the campus of the petitioner- University. The Nursing Courses is the Undergraduate and Post Graduate Courses, particularly GNM, B.Sc. Nursing and P.B. B.Sc. Nursing.
2.2. The petitioner-University submitted an application for seeking a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the State Government to conduct the GNM Course, as well as for upgradation of the institution to run the B.Sc. (N) & M.Sc. (N) programmes. The State Government vide its communication dated (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (11 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] 17.12.2015 stated that they have no objection, if the Indian Nursing Council (INC) grants such NOC. Thereafter, the petitioner- University submitted the application before the INC, whereupon, the INC got the inspection conducted, and after due verification, granted recognition to the petitioner to run GNM, B.Sc. Nursing as well as M.Sc. Nursing Courses for the academic session 2016- 2017; thereafter, the same continued from time to time, till the academic session 2022-2023.
2.3. The respondent-Rajasthan Nursing Council (RNC) also issued affiliation order with respect to Courses of B.Sc. Nursing, P.B.B.Sc. However, after five years of running the Courses, the Registrar of the RNC vide order dated 13.01.2022 cancelled the affiliation, for three different Courses, of the petitioner-University for the academic session 2021-2022, for lack of grant of NOC by the State Government, for the same.
2.4. The petitioners preferred a writ petition bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3755/2022 before this Hon'ble Court; wherein vide order 21.03.2022, the operation of the said order dated 13.01.2022 was stayed; thereafter, on 02.02.2023, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the respondent-State within a period of one week; in the event of the representation having been filed by the petitioners within the said period, the same shall be decided preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.
2.4.1. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the petitioner moved a representation before the respondent-State, but the same was (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (12 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] rejected vide the impugned order dated 18.04.2023 (received by the petitioner on 18.05.2023), while referring to Clause 3 of the Guidelines of the Indian Nursing Council.
2.5. Thus, being aggrieved, the petitioners have preferred these writ petitions claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.
3. Mr. Vikas Balia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Rajat Dave, Mr. Shreyansh Mardia and Mr. Hemant Balani, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submitted that the respondent-INC conducted the physical inspection, and after being satisfied about the requisite compliance as per the Sections 13 & 14 of the Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947, has granted recognition for running the Course in question.
3.1. It was further submitted that after five years of running the Courses, without giving the opportunity of hearing nor even calling for any explanation, the respondent-RNC passed the impugned order, cancelling the affiliation of the petitioners for academic session 2021-22, on the ground that the petitioners have not obtained the NOC from the State Government, which is not justified in law.
3.2. It was also submitted that the impugned order of rejection of the representation of the petitioner, specifically refers to Clause 3 of the INC Guidelines, which provides that eligible establishments/ organizations should obtain the essentiality certificate/ NOC from the concerned State Government, where GNM School of Nursing is sought to be established. In furtherance, it was submitted that the said Guidelines are not applicable to the petitioners, as it is pertaining to the Colleges, who wishes to establish itself after (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (13 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] coming into force of the Guidelines; whereas, the petitioners- institutions were established much prior to coming into force of such Guidelines.
3.3. It was further submitted that the respondent-INC is a statutory body and already authorized the petitioners to run the Course in question, even for the academic session, subsequent to the session pertaining whereto the impugned order was passed; therefore, on that count also the petitioners exempted from obtaining the NOC from the State Government.
4. On the Other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, while opposing the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, submitted that the role of the INC is to regulate the nursing profession throughout the country, and set uniform standards of training of nurses, midwives and heath visitors.
4.1. It was further submitted that the INC has powers under the Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947 to recognize nursing qualifications awarded by various authorities, and the statute has clearly prescribed that "Any authority within the States which, being recognized by the State Government, in consultation with the State Council, if any, for the purpose of granting any qualification, grants a qualification in general nursing, midwifery, auxiliary nursing-midwifery, health visiting or public health nursing, not included in the Schedule may apply to the Council to have such qualification recognised, and the Council may declare that such qualification, or such qualification only when granted (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (14 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] after a specified date shall be recognised qualification for the purposes of this Act."
4.2. It was also submitted that the criteria for establishment of a Nursing Institution is to obtain essentiality certificate/No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the concerned State Government, where the concerned Nursing School is sought to be established; the same is a mandatory requirement to be complied with for establishment of a Nursing Institutions. Thus, as per learned counsel, since the present petitioners have not been issued the requisite NOC by the State Government, therefore, the impugned action on the part of the respondents is justified in law. 4.3. It was further submitted that the earlier the same controversy arose in the case of Hitesh Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs. State and Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13990/2016, decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court on 07.02.2018), relevant portion of which, as relied upon, reads as under:
"The issue as to whether the courses offered by a University created by law or under the law requires to be further recognized by any other authority or not is no more res integra in view of the judgment rendered by the learned Single Bench of this Court in the case of Sunil Bishnoi & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.8149/2015) decided on 01.02.2018, wherein the courses offered by Singhania University, Pacheri Bari, Jhunjhunu were held to be automatically recognized as the said University was established under the Statute relying on the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Dr. B.L. Asawa Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. reported in AIR 1982 SC 933 as well as the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Mrs. (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (15 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] Madhu Santosh Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2502/1989) and the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court rendered in the case of Ms. Neelam Devi & Anr. Vs. Haryana Nurses Registration Council & Ors. reported in 2010 158 PLR 323. While allowing the writ petition, the learned Single Bench observed as under :
"As stated earlier, it is not in dispute that the respondent No.3-University is a University established under the statute and, therefore, in view of the law laid down in the above referred cases that a degree, diploma or any qualification awarded by any University, established under the statute, is automatically recognized and needs no recognition by any other authority, there is no hesitation in holding that the respondent No.2-RNC cannot refuse to register the petitioners under the provision of Act of 1964 on the ground that the respondent No.3- University, from which the petitioners have completed GNM and ANM courses, is not recognized by the INC."
The judgment relied on by learned counsel for the respondent No.3 in the case of Lohade Ram Meena's case (supra) relates to a deemed University and cannot be equated with the University established under a Statute.
The respondent - Pacific Medical University was constituted vide Gazette notification published in Rajasthan Gazette on 25.09.2013, wherein the schedule annexed with the notification entitles the University to conduct various specified courses. In the schedule, the University was authorised to conduct courses of the Para Medical Subjects. It is not disputed that the respondent University is established under a statute. Hence, while deciding the writ petition being covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Sunil Bishnoi (supra), the present writ petition is allowed only to the extent that the respondent No.3 shall register the petitioners, in case they are otherwise found eligible. Needful be done within one month of the receipt of this order."
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (16 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] 4.3.1. The said judgment dated 07.02.2018, upon being challenged by way of preferring special appeal, was upheld by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No.629/2018 (Rajasthan Para Medical Council Vs. Hitesh Kumar Sharma & Ors. decided on 25.05.2018. However, in the SLP No.21841/2018 preferred before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench, an interim order staying the operation of the judgment dated 25.05.2018 was passed; the said SLP is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
4.4. It was also submitted that it is mandatory for the institutions concerned to obtain the NOC from the State Government for running the Nursing College; whereas, in the present case the institutions are running the Courses without the requisite NOC from the State Government, which is clearly impermissible under the law. In support of such submission, reliance was placed upon the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in the case of The Registrar, Rajasthan Nursing Council Vs. Asha Devi Institute of Nursing & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 568 of 2012, decided on 24.08.2012).
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record of the case alongwith judgments cited at the Bar.
6. This Court observes that the petitioners ran the nursing courses for various academic years till the academic session 2022- 23 and the affiliation/recognition for running the Courses in question has been granted by the respondent-INC and the petitioners did not get any NOC from the State Government.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (17 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] Thereafter, the respondent-RNC vide the impugned order 13.01.2022 has cancelled the affiliation of the petitioners on ground that the petitioners have not obtained the requisite No Objection Certificate from the State Government.
7. This Court further observes that aggrieved by the aforesaid order, petitioners preferred the writ petition, which was decided with certain directions, as mentioned hereinabove. Thereafter, the petitioners submitted representations before the State Government, but the same were rejected by the impugned order dated 18.04.2023.
8. This Court further observes that the impugned orders passed by the respondents clearly stated that the petitioners have not obtained the requisite NOC from the State Government, in accordance with Clause 3 of the Guidelines and Minimum Requirements to Establish General Nursing & Midwifery School of Nursing issued by the Indian Nursing Council. The said clause 3 is reproduced as hereunder:
"3. The eligible Establishments/Organizations should obtain Essentiality Certificate/No Objection Certificate from the concerned State Government where the GNM School of Nursing is sought to be established. The particulars of the name of the School/Nursing Institution along with the name of the Trust/Society [as mentioned in the Trust Deed or Memorandum of Association] as also full address shall be mentioned in No Object Certificate/Essentiality Certificate."
9. This Court also observes that the aforesaid criteria was also dealt with in the judgment rendered in the case of The Registrar, (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (18 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] Rajasthan Nursing Council (Supra); relevant portion whereof reads as under:
"16. Unfortunately, the regulations were not brought to the notice of the Single Bench. The regulations being statutory have to prevail. It is apparent from Regulation No. 1 that NOC/Essentiality Certificate from State Government is necessary to open a School/College of Nursing Second requirement is to be fulfilled is that permission has to be given by the INC to start the programme of school/college and thereafter, approval from the State Nursing Council is required in case, college has permission and affiliation, NOC for school has also to be obtained as per Regulation 4, student can be admitted only after approval of the State Nursing Council and affiliation by University in case of college, as the case may be.
17. School of Nursing is a different entity than College of Nursing. Even the note appended to the Regulations makes it clear that when School of Nursing wants to be upgraded to College of Nursing, NOC/Essentiality Certificate is not required, with that situation we are not concerned in the matter. It is also not provided in the note that when the B.Sc. level Nursing college wants to start the School of Nursing, NOC from the State Government is not necessary. Regulation 1 clearly requires NOC from State Government for a school. Thus, in our considered opinion, due to non-consideration of the regulations, as they were not placed for consideration, the Single Bench could not appreciate the correct legal position. The regulations framed under Section 16 of Act of 1947 have the statutory force and are binding. Thus, it was not necessary to go into the various provisions contained in the Act of 1947 and Act of 1964 as they do not deal with aforesaid aspect. The education being State subject also, in concurrent list, State Government cannot permit mushroom growth of the institutions. The State Government essentially comes into play in such matters, as such, aforesaid provision has rightly been made in the statutory regulations of 2007 framed by the INC under the Act of 1947, which have to prevail.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (19 of 22) [CW-6131/2023]
18. Certain guidelines with respect to ANM and GNM Course been relied upon by the Counsel appearing on behalf of institutions as well as INC, which are as follows:
ANM GUIDELINES TO START A.N.M. COURSE * Any organization under the Central Government, State Government Local body or a Private or Public Trust, Mission, Voluntary registered under Society Registration Act or a Company registered under company's Act wishes to open an ANM Training School, should obtain the No Objection/Essentiality certificate from the State Government.
* If any Nursing Programme is recognised by Indian Nursing Council then the institution will be exempted from NOC/Essentiality Certificate for A.N.M. from the State Government.
* The Indian Nursing Council on receipt of the proposal from the Institution to start ANM training program, will undertake the first inspection to assess suitability with regard to physical infrastructure clinical facility and teaching faculty in order to give permission to start the programme.
* After the receipt of the permission to start ANM training program from Indian Nursing Council, the institution shall obtain the approval from the State Nursing Council and Examination Board.
GNM GUIDELINES TO START G.N.M. COURSE * Any organization under the Central Government, State Government, Local body or a Private or Public Trust, Mission, Voluntary registered under Society Registration Act or a Company registered under company's Act wishes to open a School or Nursing should obtain the NO Objection/Essentiality certificate from the State Government.
* If any Nursing Programme is recognised by Indian Nursing Council, then the institution will be exempted from NOC/Essentiality Certificate for G.N.M. from the State Government.
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (20 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] * The Indian Nursing Council on receipt of the proposal from the Institution to start nursing programme, will undertake the first inspection to assess suitability with regard to physical infrastructure, clinical facility and teaching faculty in order to give permission to start the programme.
* After the receipt of the permission to start the nursing programme from Indian Nursing Council, the institution shall obtain the approval from the State Nursing Council and Examination Board.
20. Firstly, the guideline that Nursing Programme is recognized by the INC then the institution will be exempted from NOC/Essentiality Certificate from the State Government is contrary to regulations which have to prevail. It is a case of opening of the school itself. There is no ANM Training School and School of nursing, running as such, the permission from State Government is imperative even under the guidelines recognition of college is different from recognition of school level programme. Section 10 of the INC Act deals with the recognition of qualifications. Section 11 deals with the effect of recognition.
Recognition of course and permission to start school are different aspects. Once, recognition of qualification is obtained, that shall sufficient to get enrolled in any State register. In the instant case, permission has been granted to run the ANM Training School/School of Nursing which further subject to regulations No. 1 of the Regulation of 2007 which have the statutory force. NOC/Essentiality Certificate from the State Government is imperative. The guidelines cannot supersede the provision made in the regulations which have the statutory force. Regulation No. 1 of the Regulation of 2007 makes it clear that institution is required to produce NOC/Essentially certificate from the State Government, only then the INC can grant permission under the Regulation 2. Guide liens cannot be repugnant to the statutory regulations; Regulations of 2007 have to prevail. Though, the guidelines cannot be interpreted so as to supersede the Regulations, guidelines are subordinate to regulation and for internal functioning of INC and cannot be said to be having statutory force. If guidelines are followed, anomalous result would arise and that is not so contemplated guidelines also. When we deal with the question of permission as envisaged in (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (21 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] Regulation No. 2, which has been granted on 20.7.2012, Regulation Nos. 1 and 2 cannot be ignored. Thus, the NOC/Essentiality certificate is necessary for opening ANM/GNM Training School/School of Nursing. Merely running of Nursing College of B.Sc. level cannot come to rescue so as to absolve the institutes from complying with the imperative statutory requirement of obtaining NOC/Essentiality certificate from the State Government. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that the order passed by Single Bench is liable to be set aside.
22. Thus, we are also of the considered opinion on consideration of the provision of Regulation 1 of the statutory regulations framed in 2007 by the INC under Section 16 of the INC Act, 1947 and that School of Nursing and College of Nursing being different entity, NOC/Essentiality certificate is imperative to be obtained from the State Government before Rajasthan Nursing Council can take up the matter for recognition/affiliation."
10. This Court also observes that issuance of the NOC for the Course in question by the State Government is necessary for running the Nursing Institution, and that, the State Government have powers under the law to grant or cancel the affiliation/recognition, if the institution concerned is violating the requisite norms. In the present case, the petitioners-institutions were being run without any NOC from the State Government, and the respondent-RNC cancelled affiliation/recognition, on that count.
11. This Court further observes that the role of the State Government in determining whether the NOC is to be granted or not, because the State Government, amongst other regulatory bodies, has to ensure fulfilment of each and every norm laid down for the institutions. The education, more particularly pertaining to the Course in question, is quite significant for the country, and (D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) (22 of 22) [CW-6131/2023] that, the institutions imparting such education, must have proper management, infrastructural facilities etc. for the same.
12. In light of the aforesaid observations and in light of the judgment rendered in the case of The Registrar, Rajasthan Nursing Council (Supra) and looking into the factual matrix of the present case, this Court does not find it a fit case so as to grant any relief to the petitioners in the present petitions.
13. Consequently, the present petitions are dismissed. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
skant/-
(D.B. SAW/556/2023 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 01:32:15 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)