Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

17. A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of Council taking the stand that the Council, a statutory body has been constituted by the Government of India under the Act of 1984, for the purpose of regulation of veterinary practice, education and maintenance of register of veterinary practitioners possessing recognized veterinary qualification. It is submitted that the Act of 1984 also extends to the State of Rajasthan and therefore, no State Act/Rules/Regulations concerning veterinary education or practice shall prevail over the provisions of the Act of 1984. It is submitted that even the affiliation granted by the University to the petitioners' Colleges was subject to the condition that the Colleges shall ensure fulfillment of requirement as per Council norms and that no admission shall be made without permission of the Government of India/Council and the respondent-University. It is submitted that the B.S. COLLEGE OF VETERNIARY MEDICINE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6690/12 & ten other connected matters) petitioners' Colleges were accorded permission to admit the students subject to the condition that the Colleges shall fulfill minimum requirements particularly, in terms of academic calendar, ILFC and TVCC as per the Council Regulations within a period of six months and the University shall submits its compliance report to the Council for further necessary action. It is further submitted that none of the petitioners' Colleges have adhered to the condition of the provisional permission accorded inasmuch as, the infrastructure facilities as per the Regulations have not been created till this date. Relying upon the various provisions of the Act of 1984, the Regulations framed thereunder and the Standards laid down by the Council for the veterinary education, it is submitted that the decision taken by the Council after due consideration of the Inspection Reports, to stop admission in the petitioners' Colleges, cannot be faulted with. It is submitted that the Colleges, which are not fulfilling minimum standard of veterinary education as laid down under the Regulations, 2008 and have not been duly recognized by the Council, cannot be granted any indulgence by this court so as to permit them to admit the students and impart veterinary education.

B.S. COLLEGE OF VETERNIARY MEDICINE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6690/12 & ten other connected matters) Learned counsel submitted that admittedly, in absence of the recognition of the degrees to be awarded to the students pursuing their studies in the petitioners' Colleges affiliated to the respondent University will be of no use inasmuch as, the degrees awarded shall not be valid to practice as veterinary practitioner in any State and therefore, if the students are permitted to be admitted in the petitioners' Colleges, which do not possess the recognition by the Council, the future of such students will be in total dark, which is bound to create a chaotic situation. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact, the controversy involved in the present writ petitions, stands covered by a Bench decision of this court in the matter of 'Alok Kumar Meena vs. State & Ors.' (D.B.C.Writ Petition No. 2635/11 and other connected petitions), decided by Jaipur Bench of this court vide judgment dated 17.11.2011, wherein it has been categorically held that the colleges which have not been recognized by the Government of India on the recommendations made by the Council cannot impart education for the purpose of veterinary practice, which is governed by the Act of 1984. Learned counsel submitted that even if a college is affiliated with the University, it is absolutely necessary to obtain the requisite recognition by the Council in conformity with the provisions of the Act of 1984 and Regulations framed thereunder. Relying upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of "Dental Council of B.S. COLLEGE OF VETERNIARY MEDICINE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6690/12 & ten other connected matters) India v. Subharti K.K.B. Charitable Trust & Anr.", (2001) 1 SCC, 486 "Basavaiah (Dr.) vs. Dr. H.L. Ramesh & Ors.", (2010) 8 SCC, 372, "National Council for Teacher Education & Anr. v. Venus Public Education Society & Ors.", (2013) 1 SCC, 223, "Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.31982/12) decided on 6.3.2013, learned counsel submitted that the present case does not suggest any special feature so as to warrant interference by this court with the discretion exercised by the Council, an expert statutory body constituted with the sole object to regulate the veterinary education and practice. Accordingly, it is submitted that the writ petitions are devoid of any merit and deserve to be dismissed.

21. I have considered the rival submissions, perused the B.S. COLLEGE OF VETERNIARY MEDICINE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6690/12 & ten other connected matters) material on record and the decisions cited at the bar.

22. Indisputably, 'veterinary training and practice' is a State subject (Entry No.15 of the List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution) and therefore, Parliament has no power to make laws for the States in respect thereof. However, invoking clause (1) of Article 252 of the Constitution of India, the legislatures of the States of Haryana, Bihar, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan adopted resolutions authorizing the Parliament to pass the requisite legislation to regulate veterinary practice and to provide for that purpose, for the establishment of Council and State Veterinary Councils and the maintenance of register of veterinary practitioners and for matters connected therewith and accordingly, the Act of 1984 was enacted by the Parliament. Obviously, any of the matters covered by the Act of 1984 in the aforesaid States and the States which have adopted the said Act by resolution passed in that behalf in pursuance of clause (1) of Article 252 of the Constitution shall be regulated by the provisions contained therein and further, in case of conflict between the law made by the Parliament as aforesaid under Article 252 and the law made by the legislature of the State to which the said Act applies, the former shall prevail.

32. It is true that the inspection of any veterinary institution or a college affiliated thereto in terms of the provisions of Section 19 & 21 of the Act relates to recognition of the veterinary qualification but then, the fact remains that the veterinary education being imparted to the students by any veterinary institution or the college affiliated to a recognized veterinary institution has no meaning unless the veterinary qualification to be granted to the students admitted in the veterinary institutions or the affiliated colleges is recognized by the Central B.S. COLLEGE OF VETERNIARY MEDICINE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6690/12 & ten other connected matters) Government in accordance with the procedure laid down. The contention of the learned counsel that the petitioners are entitled to admit the students for imparting veterinary education and the question of recognition of the qualification shall arise only when the course completes, to say the least, is devoid of any substance. If the colleges affiliated to a recognized veterinary institution not fulfilling the minimum standards of educations as prescribed, are permitted to admit the students and ultimately, the recognition is not granted by the Central Government, the future of such students shall be in lurch inasmuch as, even if a degree is awarded by the University concerned to which the veterinary institutions or the colleges are affiliated, such students holding the degree shall not be entitled to practise in veterinary medicine, which cannot be countenanced by this court. As noticed above, the Act of 1984 has been enacted to regulate the veterinary practice and for the matters connected therewith. Obviously, the imparting of the veterinary education is directly connected with the veterinary practice to be undertaken by the students acquiring the veterinary qualification. Moreover, Section 22 of the Act of 1984 specifically empowers the Council to specify the minimum standards of veterinary education required for granting recognized veterinary qualification by veterinary institutions and therefore, the directions issued by the Council to the University B.S. COLLEGE OF VETERNIARY MEDICINE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6690/12 & ten other connected matters) empowered to grant recognized veterinary qualification in the State of Rajasthan not to permit the admission of the students in the colleges, which do not fulfill the minimum standards of veterinary education as laid down by the Regulations, cannot be said to be without authority of law.