LexTHIRUMURUGA KIRUPANANDA VARIYAR THA VATHIRU SUNDARA SWAMIGAL MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A c D THIRUMURUGA KIRUPANANDA VARIYAR THA VATHIRU SUNDARA SWAMIGAL MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS FEBRUARY 12, 1996 [S.C. AGRAWAL AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.] . Constitution of India, J950: Article 254(J) and proviso. Legislation on concun-ent subject-State and Central Acts-Repugnan- cy between-Test to detennine-Central Act expressely or impliedly inteiided to cover the entire field-State Act-Plior enactment-Assent of President received-Held : Central Act would prevail over state Act-State Act to the extent of repugnancy would be repealed. · Indian Medical Council Act, J956: Sect~on JOA. New medical college-Establishment of-Prior pennission of Medical Council-Mandatory-Proviso to Section 5(5) of Dr. M.G.R. MedM:al Univer- sity, Tamil Nadu Act, J989 also providing affiliation of new medical college E to University-Prior pennission of State Govemment-Mandato~eld : Both provisions dealt with establishment of college-Section JOA covered the entire field-Hence proviso to Section 5(5) of State Act r.epugnant to Section JOA of Central Act-State Act-Assent of President received-Section JOA ( J )-Central Act--Non-obstante clause-Gave overriding effect to Section F JOA-Repealed proviso to Section 5(5) of State Act-Hence it would not prevail in State-Accordingly, under proviso to Article 254(2) of the Constitu- tion, Section JOA would prevail over proviso to Section 5(5) of State Act-Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Tamil Nadu Act, J989. G University : Establishment of New Medical Colleges, Opening of Higher Courses of Study and Increase of Admission CapaCity in .Medical Colleges Regulations, J993: Essentiality Certificate-Grant of-:l3y State Govemment--R.egarding H desirability and feasibility of proposed medical college at proposed loca- ,.. 422 - - T.K.V.T.S.S. MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUSTv. STATE 423 tion--not same as obtaining for plior pemiission from State Govenunent A under proviso to Section 5(5) of Dr. M.G.R. Medical University Tamil Nadu Act, 1989-State Govemment could not refuse. The appellant-Trust submitted an application to the University seek- ing affiliation of a medical college which it wanted to start. The University, however, refused to entertain the said application of the Trust on the ground that a no objection certificate should be obtained from the State Government for starting a medical college and without the no objection certificate the application could not be considered. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court again the aforesaid order of the University. B The High Court directed the University to consider the application of the C appellant-Trust on merits without insisting upon prior permission of the State Government. Thereafter, the ap11ellant submitted an application to the University for affiliation of the medical college. The University rejected the application as it was received beyond the prescribed period. The appellant filed another writ petition in the High Court challenging the D aforesaid order. The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the University to re-consider the said application of the appellant-Trust on merits. In the meanwhile, the State Legislature had enacted Dr. M.G.R. Medical University Tamil Nadu (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1989. It E was prescribed by the said Act that no college would be affiliated to the University unless permission of the State Government was obtained. In the meantime, pursuant to the decision of the High Court the University had conducted a joint inspection and rejected the application for affilia- tion of the appellant-Trust on the ground that there were certain deficien- F cies in the infrastructure that was made available for the medical college by it. The appellant Trust filed a third writ petition in the High Court against the aforesaid order. The said writ petition was allowed by Single Judge of the High Court and the matter was remitted to the University for reconsideration. The respondents filed writ appeal in the High Court against the aforesaid Judgment. The appellant-Trust also filed an appeal G against the said judgment of the High Court. During the pendency of both these appeals the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 1993 was enacted by Parliament which inserted Section lOA in the Central Act section lOA prescribed that establishment H 424 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] 2 S.C.R. A
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.