U.P.
Junior Doctors' Action Committee & Ors Vs. Dr. B. Sheetal Nandwani &
Ors [1991] INSC 312 (22
November 1991)
Misra,
Rangnath (Cj) Misra, Rangnath (Cj) Ray, G.N. (J) Anand, A.S. (J)
CITATION:
1991 SCR Supl. (2) 384 1992 SCC Supl. (1) 680 JT 1992 (1) 571 1991 SCALE
(2)1103
ACT:
Admission
to Professional (ourse,---post-graduate courses in Medical Colleges--Reasonable
period of study--prescription by the Medical Council--Dates of admis- sion and
commencement of courses--Directions of Court--To be followed
strictly--Interlocutory orders for provisional admission--Not to be granted
unless for special reason to be indicated in clear terms.
Practice
& Procedure:
Main
relief prayed for---As a rule not to be granted at the interlocutory stage.
HEAD NOTE:
These
matters relate to admission in post-graduate courses in the Medical Colleges in
Uttar Pradesh.
On a
Writ Petition, which later turned out to be fake, the High Court had ordered
that admission could be effected on the basis of the MBBS Examination. This has
been disputed in appeal before this Court.
In
another Writ Petition, pending hearing, the High Court directed that
provisional admission be given to two candidates, one in MS (Surgery) and
another in MD (Medicine). The Principal of the Medical college and others
preferred an appeal against the High Court's order.
It was
contended that granting admission, though provi- sional, at an interlocutory
stage in a pending proceeding creates a lot of adverse consequences and
indiscipline in the system of imparting education.
Dismissing
the matters, this Court, 385
HELD:
1.1 It transpires that the proceedings before the High Court were totally
fraudulent and no one by the name given in the petition as petitioner could
really be identi- fied. This Court had clearly indicated that no admission
should be permitted on the basis of the MBBS results. Noth- ing survives now,
as the High Court's order has already been reversed. [386 F,G]
2.1 It
is already settled that admission for 25 per cent of the seats in post-graduate
courses should be regulated on the basis of all-India selection and in regard
to the re- mainder of 75 per cent the States were left to decide the procedure
for admission. [387-E]
2.2
Unless there is a sincere and thorough educational discipline to be gone
through as a precondition to the grant of the requisite certificate the lives
of citizens would be at peril. The Indian Medical Council has prescribed a rea-
sonable period of study, on expert advice, and upon taking into consideration
the experience over the years as to how much study is necessary for the
requisite qualification to be gathered. This Court has also indicated the dates
of admission and commencement of the courses of study. These are prescriptions
for a purpose and are not intended to be empty formalities to be violated. [387
G, H; 388-A] Dr. Pradeep Jain & Ors. v. Union
of India & Ors., [1984] 3 S.C.C. 654, relied on.
3. It
is a well-known rule of practice and procedure that at an interlocutory stage,
a relief which is asked for and is available at the disposal of the matter, is
not (generally) granted. To have it granted at the threshold creates a lot of
difficulties. In a case where the petition- er ultimately loses in a case of
this type a very embarrass- ing situation crops up. If he has by then read for
two to three years, there is a claim of equity raised on the plea that one
cannot reverse the course of time. In a case of this type, equities should not
be claimed or granted. Unless there is any special reason to be indicated in
clear terms in an interlocutory order, as a rule no provisional admis- sion
should be granted and more so into technical courses. [388 C, D]
4.1
The order of the High Court in the instant case should be reversed but this is
not being done so, on account of the fact that nine similarly placed medical
graduates have already been given admission pursuant to such interloc- utory
orders by the respondents 386 without even raising a challenge. The order was
made as early as in February, 1991 and for nine months no steps have been taken
by the appellants to comply with the order and they are in fact facing a
contempt proceeding. [388-F]
4.2
Notice had been issued to the Principals of the seven medi cal colleges who
have appeared and given written undertakings to the Court by way of affidavit
that there was some misunderstanding in regard to the requirement of a
selection test for post graduate admission. Though there was hardly any scope
for being misled, the benefit of doubt is being given to the Principals. The
contempt proceedings are discharged, but their undertakings are kept on record.
[388 G, H; 389-A]
CIVIL
APPELLATE JURISDICTION: I.A. No 1 IN C.A.
No 4444 of 1990 etc. etc..
From
the Judgment and Order dated 25.5.90 of the Alla- habad High Court in CWP No.
5267 of 90.
Yogeshwar
Prasad, Gopal Subramanium, S.K. Mehta, Dhruv Mehta, Arvind Verma, Aman Vachher,
Pradeep Misra and R.B. Misra for the appearing parties.
The
following order of the Court was delivered:
The
dispute in these cases relates to admission in post-graduate courses of the
medical wing. There are seven medical colleges in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Sometime back in a fake writ
petition the High Court of Allahabad made an order that admission could be
effected on the basis of the MBBS results. That can counter to the decision of
this Court and on being looked into it transpired that the proceedings before
the High Court were totally fraudulent and no one by the name given in the
petition as petitioner could really be identified. This Court at that stage had
clearly indicated that the prescription by this Court has been that there
should be a selection test for post-graduate admission as admission has become
very competitive and to have compliance of Article 14 of the Constitution a
broad- based arrangement should be made. On that account this Court had clearly
indicated that no admission should be permitted on the basis of the MBBS
results. In view of the fact that the Allahabad High Court's order has already
been reversed, nothing more need be done.
387
SLP (C) ..... of 1990 This petition is directed against the order of the
learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court dated 25.5.1990. U.P. Junior
Doctors' Action Committee in their special leave petition which has not yet
been numbered challenge the order referred to above where the petitioner could
not be identified and challenge was to the decision of the High Court dated
25.5.1990 which permitted admission on the basis of MBBS results. Since we have
already clarified the position and reiterated the requirement of a selection
test the order of the High Court must be taken to have already been vacated. 11
is not necessary to entertain this special leave petition.
CA in
SLP 15354/91 Special leave granted.
In
this appeal by special leave Principal of the Agra Medical college along with
some others is the appellant. The High Court by the impugned order required
provisional admis- sion in M.S. (Surgery) and in M.D. (Medicine) to be given to
respondents 1 and 2 respectively in the Medical College of Agra while the writ
petition was yet to be heard. The con- ten-tion raised before us is that
grading admission at an interlocutory stage in a pending proceeding even by
styling it as provisonal create lot of adderse consequences and leads to indicipline
in the system of imparting education, Admission into post-graduate degrees in
the medical wing through out the country has become very competitive and it has
become clear thatstrict regulation is necessary. . This Court by its judgement
in Dr. Pradeep, Jain & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors [1984] 3 sec 654
indicated that admis- sion for 25 percent of the seats in post-graduate courses
should be regulated on the basis of all-India selection and in regard to the
remainder 75 per cent of the States were left to decide the procedure for
admission.
Appropriate
knowledge and expertise are a prerequisite for a person to be allowed to
register himself as a medical practitioner. Very often, health problems require
expert treatment. If anyone is authorised in society to practise medicine or
undertake medical-care without the appropriate qualification, society exposes
itself to health hazards. The prescriptions by the Indian Medical Council and
the attempts made by Government for regulating the medical study are for
establishing basically uniform knowledge to be imparted to the students before
they can be entrusted with the nation's medicare. Unless there is a sincere and
thorough educational discipline to be gone through as a precondition to the
grant of the requisite certificate the lives of citizens would be at peril.
388
The Indian Medical Council has prescribed a reasonable period of study on
expert advice and upon taking into con- sideration the experience over the
years as to how much study is necessary for the requisite qualification to be
gathered. This Court has also indicated the dates of admis- sion and
commencement of the courses of study. These are prescriptions for a purpose and
are not intended to be empty formalities to be violated.
One of
the prescriptions of the Medical Council is also the ratio between the teachers
and the students. That again is a factor which cannot be brushed aside.
It is
a well-known rule of practice and procedure that at interlocu-. tory stage a
relief which is asked for and is available at the disposal of the matter is not
granted. The writ petitioners wanted admission into postgraduate course as the
main relief in the writ petition. To have it granted at the threshold creates a
lot of difficulties. In a case where the petitioner ultimately loses in a case
of this type a very embarrassing situation crops up. If he has by then read for
two to three years, there is a claim of equity raised on the plea that one
cannot reverse the course of time. In a case of this type equities should not
be claimed or grained. 'Faking an overall picture of the matter we are of the
view that unless there is any special reason to be indicated in clear terms in
an interlocutory order as a rule no provisional admission should be granted and
more so into technical courses.
On the
basis of what we have said the order of the High Court should be reversed but
we are not doing so on account of the fact that nine similarly placed medical
graduates have already been given admission pursuant to such interloc- utory
orders by the respondents without even raising a challenge. The order was made
as early as in February, 1991 and for all these nine months no steps have been
taken by the appellants to comply with the order and they are in fact facing a
contempt proceeding. While on principle we indicate that such provisional
admission should not be granted. We dismiss this special leave petition and
sustain the order not on merits but for the reason indicated. The interlocuto- ry
application in the civil appeal need not be further dealt with in view of what
we have said above.
We had
issued notice to the Principals of the seven medical colleges. They have
appeared and have given a writ- ten undertaking to the Court by way of
affidavit that there was some misunderstanding in regard to the requirement of
a selection test for post-graduate admission. There were two- year and
three-year courses running simultaneously for some period and some confusion
was there as to whether the two- year course 389 students were covered by the
direction of this Court. Though we are of the view that there was hardly any
scope for being misled, we are prepared to give the benefit of doubt to the
Principals. The contempt proceedings are withdrawn but the undertaking are kept
on record.
G.N.
Appeals dismissed.
Back