Court: Supreme Court of India.

Case Type: Civil Appeal.

Case No.: 8429 of 2018.

Date of Judgement: 21/08/2018

Petitioner: Medical Council of India.

Respondent: The Principal, KMCT Medical College and Anr.

Bench:

  • Justice S.A. Bobde
  • Justice Nageswara Rao.

Statutes Referred:

  • Establishment of Medical College Regulation Amendment Act, 2010.
  • Medical Council of India Act, 1956.

Cases Referred:

  • Royal Medical Trust (Registered) & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.
  • Madha Medical College and Research Institute v. Union of India & Anr.
  • I.Q. City Foundation & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Facts:

  • With an intake of 100 students, Respondent no.1 (referred to as ‘the College’) was granted permission to start a medical college for the academic year 2008-2009.
  • The College applied to increase the intake of students from 100 to 150 for the academic year 2016-2017.
  • The Government of India accepted the Appellant’s recommendation for a grant of approval to increase the intake of students.
  • The application for renewal of permission with an enhanced intake of 150 students for the academic year 2017-18 was also considered favourably by the Appellant and Respondent No.2.
  • The College applied for renewal of permission for the academic year 2018-2019.
  • On 18th /19th September, an inspection was conducted.
  • Upon considering the Assessment Report of the inspection, the Executive Committee of the Appellant found a few deficiencies in the condition of the College.
  • In light of the deficiencies, the Appellant decided against recommending for renewal the third request of the College.
  • The College was notified about the deficiencies discovered in the inspection and was informed that a hearing would be conducted on the 19th December, 2017.
  • The Hearing Committee found that two of the deficiencies mentioned in the Assessment Report were rectified by the College.
  • The Hearing Committee suggested that the Appellant “may review and make a revised recommendation without any need for compliance verification.” Respondent no.2 requested the Appellant to conduct a review.
  • Another inspection was conducted on 14th March 2018, and a Compliance Verification Assessment was filed, which again consisted of several deficiencies.
  • The Appellant’s Executive Committee considered reports of both the inspections, i.e. 18th/19th September 2017 and 14th March 2018, respectively. It decided not to recommend for grant of permission of increasing the intake to 150.
  • Respondent no.2 accepted the Appellant’s decision and directed the College to not admit more than 100 students for the academic year 2018-2019.
  • The College was given the liberty to apply for the next academic year in accordance with the provisions of the India Medical Council Act, 1956.
  • The College challenged Respondent no. 2’s decision in the Kerala High Court. It sought a mandamus to Respondent no.2 that the decision must be taken based on the earlier inspection, i.e. the one conducted on 18th/19th September 2017.
  • The High Court allowed the Writ Petition on the ground that after the 2017 assessment, the Appellant should have made a recommendation to the without any further verification.
  • The High Court found that the Appellant is bound to comply with Respondent no. 2’s direction and the inspection carried out on 14th March 2018 was unwarranted.
  • The High Court directed the Appellant to recommend increasing the intake from 100 to 150 students to Respondent no.2 within three days from the judgement. And Respondent no.2 was also directed to issue the letter of permission within three days after that.
  • Based on the said conclusion, the High Court found the recommendation for disapproval made by the Appellant on 20th April 2018 and the order of Respondent No.2 accepting such recommendation by an order dated 31st May 2018 to be illegal and arbitrary.

Issues:

  • Was the second inspection of the Appellant valid?
  • Was the Appellant compelled to comply with the directives of Respondent no.2 – the Union of India?

The contention by the Petitioner:

  • There is no restrain on the Medical Council of India’s power to conduct an inspection to verify compliance.
  • The Council is not bound by the directions of the Union of India with regards to the manner of compliance verification.
  • The last date for the issuance of the permission letter was 31st May 2018. Thus, the High Court should not have issued a direction favouring the College as the last date had passed.

The contention by the Respondent:

  • Only two deficiencies had been found in the inspection conducted on 18th/19th September. Both the deficiencies had since been rectified.
  • Respondent no.2 is the final authority for grant of approval, and the Appellant is bound by its directions.
  • The findings of the inspection conducted on 14th March 2018 were baseless.

Obiter Dicta:

  • There was no restriction on the Medical Council of India in conducting a second inspection.
  • The Medical Council of India may have prima facie reasons to believe that the actual possession of resources and infrastructure is at variance with what was portrayed before its team of assessors. The Council is a custodian of public interest and acts in trust for the welfare of society.
  • The Council was not bound to comply with the directives issued by the Government of India.
  • It was up to the Medical Council of India to choose the manner of verification.

Judgement:

  • The Judgement by the High Court was set aside.
  • The appeal was allowed.

Rationale:

  • The sole purpose of the inspection is to ensure that the Colleges and institutes have the necessary wherewithal to educate the medical students effectively.
  • Verifying the conditions of the medical colleges is one of the primary functions of the Medical Council of India.
  • The Council was competent to inspect and verify the conditions of the College.

Conclusion:

  • The Medical Council of India is an able and competent authority. The Council performs a very important public-interest function. The Council’s primary duty is to ensure that the medical colleges in India are up to code. Highly skilled doctors are the backbone of an effective healthcare system—this why it is extremely critical that the medical colleges in the country are always in top-notch condition.

Prepared by Mihir Poojary.

Related Post