CENTRAL COUNCIL FOR INDIAN MEDICINE versus KARNATAKA AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND OTHERS

Citation: [2022] 2 S.C.R. 1120 · Decided: 11-04-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L. NAGESWARA RAO · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1120
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 2 S.C.R.
[2022] 2 S.C.R. 1120
1120
CENTRAL COUNCIL FOR INDIAN MEDICINE
v.
KARNATAKA AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND
OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 2892 of 2022)
APRIL 11, 2022
[L. NAGESWARA RAO AND B. R. GAVAI, JJ.]
Medicine Central Council Act,1970:s. 13A – Permission for
establishment of new Medical College, new course study, etc. – On
facts, Union of India rejected the permission to respondent no. 1-
State Ayurvedic Medical College to admit students for the PG course
for academic year 2018-19 on the ground of non-availability of
Central Research Laboratory and Animal House, however, granted
permission to admit students to Under Graduate (BAMS) Course
with an intake of 50 seats for the academic year 2018-19 subject to
it fulfilling the deficiencies mentioned therein – Writ petition by
respondent no. 1 – Meanwhile, Union of India granted permission
to admit students for the Post Graduate course for academic year
2019-2020 – Single Judge allowed the writ petition – Said order
upheld by the Division Bench of the High Court – On appeal, held:
Statutory scheme is clear that no medical college can open a new
or higher course of study or training, including a post-graduate
course, except with the previous permission of the Central
Government – Prior to such a permission being granted, the
procedure as prescribed u/s. 13A has to be followed – Furthermore,
as per Reg 3(1)(a), it is clear that in order to be eligible for grant of
permission for undertaking admissions in a particular academic
session, the institution must fulfill the requirements of minimum
standard as on 31st December of the earlier year – It cannot be
said that the permission granted for a subsequent academic year
would also enure to the benefit of earlier academic year though the
said institution was not fulfilling the criteria of minimum standard –
Single Judge as well as the Division Bench erred in not taking into
consideration the scheme of the Act as also the judgment of this
Court in Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal’s case, thus the order of the
Single Judge and the Division Bench quashed and set aside –
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1121
Medicine Central Council (Amendment) Act, 2003 – Medicine
Central Council (Post-Graduate Ayurveda Education) Regulations,
2012 – Medical Central Council (Post-Graduate Ayurveda
Education) Regulations, 2016 – Precedent.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Section 13A read with Sections 22 and 36(1)(j)
of the Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 Act provides a
complete scheme for establishment of medical college, opening
a new or higher course of study or training, including a post-
graduate course of study or training, and also increasing the
admission capacity. From the perusal of the scheme of the said
provisions, it is clear that no person is entitled to establish a
medical college except with the previous permission of the
Central Government. Similarly, no medical college can open a
new or higher course of study or training, including a
postgraduate course of study or training without the previous
sanction of the Central Government. Likewise, no medical
college can increase its admission capacity in any course of study
or training, including a post-graduate course of study or training.
Sub-sections (2) to (5) of Section 13A of the said Act prescribe
a detailed procedure for submitting a scheme and consideration
thereof by the Central Council and the Central Government. It
also provides for in-built safeguards inasmuch as the principles
of natural justice are provided at two stages, one before the
Central Council and another before the Central Government.
The second proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 13A of the
said Act also enables a person or medical college whose scheme
has not been approved by the Central Government, to again
submit a fresh scheme, which is required to be considered as if
the same is made for the first time under sub-section (2) of
Section 13A of the said Act. Sub-section (6) of Section 13A of
the said Act provides that when no order is communicated within
a period of one year from the date of submission of the scheme,
by a deeming provision, such scheme shall stand approved and
it will be deemed that the permission of the Central
Government as required under subsection (1) of Section 13A of
CENTRAL COUNCIL FOR INDIAN MEDICINE v. KARNATAKA
AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND OTHERS
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1122
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 2 S.C.R.
the said Act has been granted. Su

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.