MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA versus STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 10 S.C.R. 213 · Decided: 12-09-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARUN MISHRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
213
MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA
v.
STATE OF KERALA & ORS.
(Writ Petition (C) No. 231 of  2018)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
[ARUN MISHRA AND INDIRA BANERJEE, JJ.]
Constitution of India:
Articles 14, 50 and 213 (1) – Principle of ‘Separation of
Powers’ – Admission of 180 students to MBBS course were quashed
by Admission Supervisory Committee – The order was affirmed by
High Court as well as Supreme Court – State Government thereafter
notified Ordinance whereby it sought to regularise the admission of
those 180 students – Writ petition challenging the Ordinance on the
ground that the Ordinance amounted to nullifying the judgments/
orders of the Court – Held: The impugned Ordinance is clear
entrenchment upon the field of judicial review which is reserved for
judiciary – Provisions in the Ordinance were in violation of the
doctrine of separation of powers enshrined under Art. 50 –
Ordinance is not only impermissible and beyond legislative
competence of the State, it also had the effect of perpetuating
illegality and arbitrariness committed by the College in question in
not following the mandate of law laid down by the Court –
Independence of judiciary is fundamental to the rule of law – A
legislation can be invalidated on the basis of breach of separation
of judicial power since such breach is negation of equality provided
u/Art. 14 – There cannot be an attempt to interfere with the judicial
process – Law which interferes with the judicial process may be
invalidated – The Ordinance is ultra vires  and entrenchment upon
the field earmarked for judiciary, as it sought to nullify judgments
of the Court.
Art. 141 – Judgment – Binding effect of – Held: If an Order
refusing to grant leave to appeal is by speaking order, it is a
declaration of law within the meaning of Art. 141 – Whatever is
stated in the order, other than law, are the findings of the Court
which would  bind the parties and also the Court, Tribunal or
Authority – Precedent.
   [2018] 10 S.C.R. 213
213
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
214
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 10 S.C.R.
Art. 142 – Power under – Scope of – Held: Power u/Art. 142
cannot be exercised by the court to nullify its own judgment and to
perpetuate illegality.
Allowing the Writ Petitions, the Court
HELD: 1.1 A bare reading of the Kerala Processional
Colleges (Regularisation of Admission in Medical Colleges)
Ordinances, 2017, makes it clear that the same aims at
regularisation of admissions of students during the academic year
2016-17 which were set aside by the Admission Supervisory
Committee (ASC), the High Court and by this Court to benefit
only two colleges and students in question. [Para 18] [223-E-F]
1.2 What has been done by the impugned Ordinance by the
State Government is clearly entrenching upon the field of judicial
review and it was obviously misadventure resorted to. It was not
at all permissible to the State Government to promulgate the
Ordinance/legislate in the matter. Not only the judgment of the
court is nullified and the arbitrariness committed in admissions
was 17 glaring, and the decision of the High Court which was
affirmed by this Court with respect to applications to be
entertained if they were online applications has been undone. It
was clearly an act of nullifying judgment and is violative of judicial
powers which vested in the judiciary. It was not open for the State
Government to nullify the judgment/orders passed by the  High
Court or by this Court. It was not a case of removal of a defect in
existing law. Various Constitution Bench decisions of this Court
have settled the principles of law governing the field. It passes
comprehension how the State Government has promulgated the
Ordinance in question. [Para 21] [229-G-H; 230-A-C]
1.3 Independence of the judiciary is fundamental to the rule
of law. A legislation can be invalidated on the basis of breach of
separation of judicial power since such breach is negation of
equality under Article 14. Law can be declared void if it is found
to have transgressed the constitutional limitations. The
legislature cannot declare any decision of a court of law to be
void or of no effect. It can remove the defects of the law pointed
out by the court or on coming to know of it aliunde; otherwise, a
court’s decision must always bind unless the conditions on which
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
215
it is based are so fundamentally altered that the decision could
not have been given in such altered circumstances. The
legislature can make a validating law. Making validat

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