LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
โš–๏ธ Ask the AI about your situation:๐Ÿš— Car Accident๐Ÿ’ผ Work / Job๐Ÿ  Housing / Eviction๐Ÿ‘ช Family / Divorce๐Ÿ“‹ Contract Dispute๐Ÿ’ฐ Money Owed

MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH CENTRE & ORS. versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 9 S.C.R. 845 · Decided: 27-05-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MARKANDEY KATJU, DEEPAK VERMA · Disposal: Hearing Adjourned

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009]..9 S.C.R. 845 
~ 
I 
MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH CENTRE & 
A 
ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 4060 of 2009) 
MAY 27, 2009 
B 
~ 
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND DEEPAK VERMA, JJ.] 
Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavsayik Shikshan Sansthan 
(Pravesh Ka Viniyaman Evam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) c 
Adhiniyam, 2007: 
Admissions in private unaided Medical/Dental Colleges 
- Extent of control and regulation by State - Held: Prima f~cie 
the 2007 Act appears to handover the entire admission 
D 
process for under-graduate, graduate and post-graduate 
medical/dental colleges and fee fixation to the State 
Government or the agencies appointed by it - This, prima 
facie, appears to be contrary to, and inconsistent with the 
observations made by the 11 Judge Bench decision of this 
Court in T.M.A. Pai's case, and, thus the 2007 Act would 
E 
become unconstitutional if it is read literally - Therefore, the 
2007 Act and Rules will have to be read down to make them 
' 
constitutional - A balance has to be struck between the interest 
of State Government and ~'rivate unaided institutions who 
have to generate their own resources and funds and 
F 
4 
consequently they must have a larger degree of autonomy 
as compared to the aided or Government institutions, besides 
keeping the interest of the students in mind - It is, therefore, 
directed that admissions in the private unaided madicall 
.. 
dental colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh will be done 
G 
by first excluding 15% N.R.I. seats (which can be filled up by 
the private institutions as per para 131 of lnamdar's case), and 
allotting half of the 85% seates for admission to the under-
graduate and post-graduate course to be filled in by an open 
845 
H 
846 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009) 9 S.C.R. 
,,,. 
j._ 
A competitive examination by the State Government, and the 
remaining half by the Association of the Private Medical and 
Dental Colleges - Both th(,;] State Government as well as the 
Association of Private Medical and Dental colleges will hold 
their own separate entrance examination for this purpose. As 
B regards the 'NRI Seats', they will be filled as provided under 
the Act and Rules, in the manner they were done earlier - It 
is made clear that these directions will for the time being only 
be applicable.for the academic year 2009-10- It is also made 
ยท~ 
clear that if there are odd number of seats then it will be 
c rounded off in favour of the private institutions -: In Specialities 
in P. G. courses also half the seats will be filled in by the State 
Government and half by the Association of Private Medical/ 
Dental Colleges and any fraction will be rounded off in favour 
of the Association - Capitation fee is prohibited, both t0- the 
D State Government as well as the private institutions. by 
lnamdar's case -
Both the State Government and the 
Association of Private Medical/Dental Colleges will 
separately hold single window examinations for the whole 
State - Although this order is only for the academic year 
E 
2009-10, it is recommended that it may also be considered 
; 
for future sessions - Interpretation of Statutes - Principle of 
reading down - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 19(1)(g) 
- Interim Order - Educational Institutions - Admissions to. 
T.M.A. Pai Foundation vs. State of Kamataka (2002) 8 
F SCC 481; Islamic Academy of Education vs. State of 
Kamataka (2003) 6 SCC 697; P.A. lnamdar & Ors. vs. State 
of Maharashtra & Ors. (2005) 6 SCC 537; Unni Krishnan vs. 
.. 
State of A.P. (1993) 1 sec 645 and Kedamath vs. State of 
Bihar AIR 1962 SC 1995, referred to. 
}
G 
'Principles.of Statutory Interpretation' (Ninth Edn. P. 496) 
+ 
by G.P. Singh, referred to. 
Case Law Referetice: 
H 
c2002) a sec 481 
referred to 
Para 9 
MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH CENTRE & 84 7 
ORS. v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. 
~ 
(2003) 6 sec 697 
referred to 
Para 10 
A 
(2005) s sec 537 
referred to 
Para 11 
(1993) 1 sec 645 
referred to 
Para 18 
AIR 1962 SC 1955 
referred to 
Para 28 
B 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
4060 of 2009. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 15.05.2009 of the High 
Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Writ Petition No. 2732 c 
of 2009. 
WITH 
C.A. Nos. 4061, 4062, 4063, 4064, 4065 of 2009. 
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Vivek K. Tankha, Ravi Shankar 
D 
1-
Prasad, S.K. Dubey, lndu Malhotra, Sushil Kumar Jain (NP), 
Pratibha Jain (NP), B.K. Satija, Siddharth Gupta, Ratna Kaul, 
Anubha Singh, Prashant Kumar, Ra

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