Medical College SLP of Refusal to Permit Admission Dismissed

The Apex Court dismissed Special Leave Petition filed by Medical colleges in regard to admission in graduate and PG courses in colleges for the academic session 2011-2012 in Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal and others v. Union of India in SLP No. 31892, 33452, 33455, 33560, 34001, 34020, 34255, 34264, 30156, 30086, 31349, 23715, 33908, 33909, 33897, 35051, 39893 of 2012, SLP(C) Nos.1118-1119 of 2013 and SLP(C) No.381 of 2013.

The Supreme Court of India on 6th March 2013 dismissed series of Special Leave Petitions (SLP) that had been filed by Medical Colleges across the State of Maharashtra that had been imparting education in Indian form of medicine like Ayurveda, Naturopathy and Unani etc. These SLPs had been filed against the orders of Aurangabad and Nagpur bench of Bombay High court challenging the order of refusal to permit admissions of students to various courses provided by the colleges.

The dispute was with respect to the refusal by Government of India, Department of AYUSH (Ayurveda, Unani, naturopathy, yoga, homeopathy) in granting permission for admission to students to colleges for the academic session of 20112-2012 on account of failure by medical colleges in maintaining minimum prescribed standards (infrastructure and teaching staff) for imparting education in the respective courses of BAMS/Postgraduate courses under the Medical Central Council Act, 1970. The medical education for respective courses is governed by the Medical Central Council Act, 1970 and the act was amended in 2003 and 2006 respectively and provided necessary standards for the colleges to maintain forits operation as medical schools. The medical colleges or the petitioners were given time period of 3 years to rectify the deficiencies (after 2003 amendment) and were also thereafter provided with extended time of 2 years to do the same. The Petitioner were thereafter also provided extended time to rectify the same with further relaxed norms introduced for gradual removal of deficiencies and were also provided with conditional permission to admit students for academic sessions of 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 but the petitioners failed to remove the same.

The medical Council thereafter issued notice to shut down the institution upon the failure to comply with norms and thereafter the petitioner rectified the deficiencies to continue its operation as medical college. The court on removal of the deficiencies granted permission to students to apply for admission to the academic session of 2012-2013. The present petition was filed to set aside the order of refusal to grant permission for the admission to the academic session of 2011-2012.

The Petitioners contended that the court cannot grant refusal for admission to students in the wake of deficiencies being removed by the petitioners and contended further that there were no reasons for the admissions to be held for the academic session of 2011-2012 especially when many applications from the students for the admission to the said course had been received. The petitioner also contended that arrangements shall be accordingly made for the completion of the course of the entire year in 6 months to bring the students to the second level on account of the elapse of the time and further contended that the continuity of the course shall be disrupted in case of refusal of permission.

The counsel for the Union of India on the other hand contended that the petitioner had failed to maintain the standards prescribed by the Act, 1970 and were only granted permission to admit student for the academic session of 2012-2013 upon removal of deficiencies. The counsel also submitted that the permission for students to file application form could not be a ground for grant of admission when more than half of the study period for the course has ended. The Counsel also contended that there lied no scope for the conduct of bridge course for the completion of the course to enable students to catch up with the students of the subsequent semester.

The apex court after looking into the submissions and facts and circumstances of the case observed that though the application form for admission to medical colleges were filed with the leave of the court but the leave was granted without creating the right of equity in favour of students to seek admission to the said course. The court further observed that students who applied to the courses in the respective colleges did it at their own risk and this privilege granted to the students could not be transformed into a right to be admitted to the course.

The Court also observed that in practical view of the matter the students cannot pick up thread of teaching (understand and finish the course) when the entire course has been completed and the proposal of the colleges to bring new entrants to the level of those who had completed the major course could not be accepted.

The court also observed that the court cannot judge the questions relating to fulfillment of necessary criteria for institutions to be eligible for conduct of classes for the medicine discipline and the experts in said field had rightly decided that respective medical colleges were not eligible to conduct classes for the academic session of 2011-2012. The Apex Court dismissed the SLP that challenged the orders of High Court and refused to interfere with the orders of the High Court in respect to the matter.

Thus, the Apex Court came heavily on medical institutions that were failing minimum standards prescribed for the imparting of education in medicine and thereby by the said judgment assisted in upholding standards of professional education in India. The Court refused to set aside the judgment of High Court that refused to grant permission for admission of students to the respective medical colleges for the academic session of 2011-2012.