Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Notices are accepted by Mr. Rahul Sharma, learned counsel, on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 (UOI) and by Mr. T. Singhdev, learned counsel, on behalf of Respondent No. 2 (MCI).

10. Renotify on 22nd August, 2019.

CM APPL 21584/2019 (interim relief)

11. By this application, the petitioner prays for issuance of a direction to the MCI to process the petitioner‟s application, for increase of the MBBS seats from 150 to 250 for the academic session 2019-20 and to carry out the inspection on the petitioner‟s institution.

13. The two major objections, of the MCI, for passing of any direction, to it, to inspect the petitioner‟s premises, at this stage, as vocalized by Mr. T. Singhdev, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1, are the following (i) the petitioner had submitted an essentiality certificate dated 7th July, 2017, issued by the State Government of Madhya Pradesh, which clearly indicates that the petitioner was not compliant in respect of the requirements, relating to the OPD strength, the bed occupancy and the Unitary nature of the hospital, and (ii) in any event, when the given time schedules fixed by the Supreme Court in the judgment, i.e. Ashish Ranjan v. Union of India (2016) 11 SCC, 225, inspection of the petitioner‟s premises was required to be conducted by the MCI by 15th December, 2018, and, at this point of time, carrying out the said inspection would violate the said directions.