LexM. C. GUPTA ETC. versus A. K. GUPTA & ORS., ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
I • -"':'\.· a: I ~ ' ' \ , " l ~ ;,;l_ .. 853 M. C. GUPTA ETC. v. A. K. GUPTA &: ORS .• ETC. December 15, 1978 [V. R. KRISHNA IYE!t AND. D. A. DESAI, JJ.] Indian M1dical Council Act, 1956. S. 2(/) read with General Regulations, R. 4, "Medicine", includes specialist branch of cardiology-''Research expe- rience'', computation, holding of specified post whether pre-requisite while con- ducting research-"Teaching experience" in foreign institutions when can be taken into account. B The appellant Dr. M. C. Gupta and the· sixth respondent Dr. R. N. Tandon, C were appointed to the post of 'Professor in medicine in State Government Medical Colleges. The appointments were made by the State Government, on the rccon1ntendation of U.P. Public Service Commission, which ha<l earlier with the assistance of four medical experts, selected them through an interview. The respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 who were also candidates for the post filed! a writ petition ,in the High Court, challenging the selection and appointment of Dr. M. C. Gupta and Dr. R. N. Tandon, though no mala fides were D attributed to the Commission. A Single Judge of the High Court issued a writ quashing the selection, on the ground that neither of the two selected. doctors had the requisite teaching experience and that neither of them was. qualified for selection as Professor of Medicine. In appeal, the appellate Bench of the High Court confirmed the order quashing the selections, and further quashed the order of appointment, remitting the matter to the Commission, directing it to make fresh selection in consonance with the interpretation put Er upon the relevant regulation, by the court. Allowing the three connected appeals, one by Dr. M. C. Gupta, and 1\vo by the State of U .P ., the Court HELD . I. Medicine includes cardiology. The ~ledical Council of India, a body composed of experts, have in the regulations clearly 1nanifested their approach when they s;aid that cardiology is a specialist branch under n1edi.. F cine. Where general subject such as medicine or surgery is being dealt with, in a regulation, the specialist branch under it would be covered, though not vice versa, because if one wants to hold a post in the specialist branch, he must of necessity have teaching experience in the specialist branch. [859 G, 860 D, 861 E]. II. If general regulation 4 is properly analysed for the purpose of computing G research experience, the prerequisite is that the research must be done after obtaining the requisite post-graduate qualification. It has no reference to the post held by the person engaged in research at the time of conducting the research, and, to say that holding of the post specified in the regulation, is a pre-requisiite while conducting research, is to read in regulation 4, what is not prescribed thereunder. [862 D·F]. Ill. Teaching experience in foreign teaching institutions can be taken into account, but, they must be some recognised institutions of repute and not any institution outside the territory of India. f865 G, 866 CJ. l 6-40SCI /79 854 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1979] 2 s.c.R. --A State of Bihar &: Anr. v. Dr. Asis Kun1ar Mukherjee &: Ors., [1975] B c D E F G H 2 SCR 894; followed. Vade Mecum : In view of the twilight zone of Court's interfe-rcncc in appointment to posts requiring technical experience made consequent upon selection by Public Service Commission, aided and advised by experts having technical experience and high academic qualifications in the specialist field, probing teaching/re~ search experience in technical subiects, within the framework of Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India, under s. 33 of tho Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and approved by the Government of India, the courts should be slow to interfere with the opinion expressed by the experts, unless lhere are allegation• of ma/a fie/es against them. [857 E-G]. University of Mysore &:: A11r. v. C. D. Govinda Rao le A.nr., [1964] 4 SCR 575; applied. State of Bihar &: Anr. v. Dr. A.sis Kumar Mukherjee & Ors., [1975] 2 SCR 894; explained. CML APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 357 /77 and 1142-1143178. Appeals by Special Leave from tho Judgment and Order dated 28-8-75 and 17-9-75 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal Nos. 233, 254 and 264 of 1975. L. N. Sinha, Santosh Chatterjee, Vi~et Kumar and P. P. Singh for t!J~ Appellant in CA 357177. S.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.