Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.42 seconds)Section 3 in The Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
Raghunath Ayurved Mahavidyalaya & ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 30 April, 2019
"There is however, no quarrel with the proposition of law
as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the
decision reported at [AIR 1987 (SC) 537 (Comptroller and
Auditor General of India Gian Prakash, New Delhi and
Another appellants -vs.- K.S. Jagannathan and Another
respondents)] cited by the learned Advocates of the
appellants. However, in the facts of the instant case it
appears that the appellants herein have failed and
neglected to comply with the requirements within the
stipulated time limit. The respondent authorities had
directed the appellant to comply with the requirements by
December 31, 2017 for grant of permission for the
academic session 2018-2019. Thus, the respondent
authorities were well within their authority to deny
permission to the appellants herein to admit students to
UG Course for the academic sessions 2018-2019.
The decision reported at [(2013) 16 SCC 96 (Ayurved
Shastra Seva Mandal and Another -vs- Union of India and
Others)] cited by the learned advocate for the respondent
No.1 is squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case.
In the case in hand, the respondent authorities after
conducting inspection were of the opinion that the college
has not fulfilled the requirements for grant of permission
to admit students in UG Course for the academic session
2018-2019. The appellants in the reply to the show cause
notice have rather admitted that they have complied with
WP (C) No.7934/2019 Page 35 of 44
the requirements after receipt of the show cause notice.
Since the respondent authorities being the experts to judge
as to whether the college has fulfilled the criteria for grant
of permission is of the opinion that permission for the
academic session 2018-2019 cannot be granted, it is not
for this court to set aside the said order denying
permission as there is nothing to show that the respondent
authorities have failed to exercise or has wrongly
exercised the discretion conferred upon it by the statute.
The appellants have failed to show that the decision of the
respondent authority is a mala fide one or is based on
irrelevant considerations or that relevant materials have
been ignored by it while passing the order denying
permission to admit the students for the academic session
2018-2019.
1