1

REPORTABLE            

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12845  OF  2017 (Arising out of SLP(CIVIL) No.20197 of 2017)

Karpagam Faculty of Medical     ….Appellant Sciences and Research   

Versus  Union of India and Ors. ....Respondents

J U D G M E N T

A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal emanates from the judgment and order dated

19th July, 2017 passed by the High Court of Madras in Writ

Petition No.18334 of 2017.  The said writ petition has been

filed by the appellant for quashing of the order dated 31st

May,  2017,   passed  by  the  Under  Secretary  to  the

Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare

(Department of Health and Family Welfare)  debarring the

appellant college from admitting students against 150 seats

in MBBS course for the academic session 2017-18. The said

order was passed by the Competent Authority of the Central

2

Government on the proposal for confirmation of conditional

Letter of Permission (for short “LOP”) granted in favour of

the appellant college for the 5th batch of 150 seats in MBBS

course  for  the  academic  session  2016-17  and  to  grant

recognition/approval to the appellant college under Section

11(2) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (for short “the

Act”).  The communication dated 31st May, 2017, informing

about  the  decision  of  the  Competent  Authority  of  the

Central Government, which has been challenged before the

High Court, reads thus:

“ANNEXURE-P/10

No.U.12012/127/2016-ME.I[FTS.3084749] Government of India

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Department of Health & Family Welfare)

Nirman Bhawn, New Delhi Dated the 31st May, 2017

To  

The Principal/Dean, Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences & Research Pollachi Main Road, L & T By Pass Road junction Eachanari Post, Eachnari, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu-641021.

Subject: Confirmation of conditional permission granted in 2016-17 and disapproval of renewal permission for 2017-18 Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical  Sciences  &  Research, Coimbatore.

Sir/Madam,

3

In  continuation  to  this  Ministry’s  letter  dated 20.08.2016  granting  conditional  renewal  permission  for admission  of  5th Batch  of  (150  seats)  in  MBBS course  at Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical  Sciences  &  Research, Coimbatore for the academic year 2016-17 on the basis of approval  communicated  by  Supreme  Court  Mandated Oversight  Committee  on  MCI  (OC)  and  after  granting  an opportunity  of  hearing  to  the  college  with  reference  to recommendation of MCI dated 24.03.2017 and considering the  contents  of  MCI  letter  No.  MCI-34(41) (RG-17)/2017-Med./107428  dated  29.04.2017.   I  am directed to confirm the renewal of  permission granted vide this  Ministry’s  letter  dated  20.08.2016  for  2016-17  and remove the conditions imposed there on. MCI is also being requested  to  return  the  Bank  Guarantee  of  Rs.2  Cr. submitted  by  the  College  in  the  Ministry  as  per  the conditions laid down by the OC which is now in possession of MCI.

2. Further, I am directed to convey the decision of the Central  Government  not  to  permit  admission  of students in MBBS Course (150 seats) for the academic year 2017-18 at Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences & Research, Coimbatore.

3.  Admission  made  against  the  decision  of  the  Central Government will  be treated as irregular and action will  be initiated under IMC Act & Regulation made thereunder.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

(D V K Rao) Under Secretary to the Govt. of India

Telefax: 011-23061120”

(emphasis supplied)

3. As the said decision refers to the recommendation made by

the Medical Council  of  India (for short “MCI”) vide letters

dated  24th March,  2017  and 29th April,  2017,  it  may  be

4

apposite to reproduce the same for discerning the real issue

that arises for our consideration. The communication dated

24th March, 2017, sent by the Joint Secretary of the MCI to

the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Health

& Family Welfare, reads thus:    

“ANNEXURE-P/5

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA

No. MCI-34(41)(RG-17)/2016-Med./   Date: 24/03/2017 ITEM NO. 35

The Secretary,  Govt. of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110011

Sub: Recognition/Approval of Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences & Research, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu for the award of MBBS degree (150 seats) granted by The Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai u/s 11(2) of the IMC Act, 1956 and Compliance Verification Assessment for renewal of permission for admission of 5th batch (150 MBBS seats) u/s10(A)  of  the  IMC  Act.,  1956  for  the  Academic  Year 2016-17.

Sir, I am directed to inform you that an assessment to assess the standard of  examination held by the Tamilnadu Dr.  MGR Medical University, Chennai and to assess the physical and the  other  teaching  facilities  available  for Recognition/Approval  of  Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical Science & Research, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu for the award of MBBS degree (150 seats) granted by the Tamilnadu Dr. MGR Medical University, Chennai u/s 11(2) of the IMC Act, 1956  as  well  as  Compliance  Verification  Assessment  for renewal of permission for admission of 5th batch (150 MBBS seats) u/s 10(A) of the IMC Act, 1956 for the Academic year 2016-17 with reference to the conditional approval accorded by  Oversight  Committee  were  carried  out  by  the  Council

5

assessors on 17th February, 2017 and 15th & 16th March, 2017. The assessment reports (17th February, 2017 & 15th & 16th March, 2017) and a letter dated 15/03/2017 from the Assessors  regarding  complaint  dated  03.01.2017  of  the students  of  Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical  Sciences  & Research,  Coimbatore,  Tamilnadu were considered by the Executive  Committee  of  the council  at its  meeting  held on 21/03/2017 and it was decided as under:-  

“The Executive Committee of the Council noted that the compliance  verification  assessment  report  (19th February 2016)  along  with  previous  assessment  report  (2nd &  3rd November, 2015) with regard to renewal of  permission for MBBS course for 5th batch (150 seats) of Karpagam Faculty of  Medical  Sciences  & Research,  Coimbatore,  Tamil  Nadu under  The  Tamilnadu  Dr.  M.G.R.  Medical  University, Chennai u/s 10A of the IMC Act, 1956 for the academic year 2016-2017 was considered by the Executive Committee of the Council  at its meeting held on 13.05.2016 and it was decided as under:-  

“The  Executive  Committee  of  the  Council  considered the compliance verification assessment report (19th February 2016)  along  with  previous  assessment  report  (2nd &  3rd November, 2015) and noted the following:-

1. As  per  O.T.  &  Ward  records  in  Surgical  &  allied branches,  Radiodiagnosis  and  obstetrics  & Gynaecology,  full  time  working  of  many  faculty members  in  the  rank  of  Professors  and  Asso.  Prof. could not be verified.

2. Many  patients  were  admitted  with  minor  ailments without any major problem. The occupancy was tailor to  suit  assessment.  E.g.  One  referred  patient  from Ophthalmology was lying in medical ward.

3. There  were  only  4  Major  operations  &  3  minor operations on day of assessment.

4. Other deficiencies as pointed out in the assessment report.

In  view  of  above,  the  Executive  Committee  of  the Council  decided to  recommend to the Central  Govt.  not to renew the  permission  for  admission  of  5th batch  of  150 MBBS students at Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences & Research, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu under The Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai u/s 10A of the IMC Act, 1956 for the academic year 2016-17.

6

The above  decision  of  the  Executive  Committee  was communicated  to  the  Central  Govt.  vide  this  office  letter dated 14/05/2016. The Central Government vide its letter dated 10.06.2016 had conveyed its decision to the college authorities  as  well  as  other  concerned  authorities  not  to admit any students for the academic year 2016-17.

Thereafter,  the  Central  Govt.  vide  its  letter  dated 20.08.2016  had  granted  approval  to  the  said  college  for renewal of permission for admission of 5th batch (150 seats) u/s  10A  of  the  IMC  Act,  1956  for  the  academic  year 2016-17, in the light of  the directive of  the Supreme Court Mandated Oversight Committee (OC) subject to submission of bank guarantees, affidavit and some other conditions.   In continuation to the earlier  letter dated 20.08.2016 the  Central  Govt.  vide  its  letter  dated  31.08.2016  had forwarded  the  following  documents  as  submitted  by  the college to the Ministry on 24.08.2016.

i. An  affidavit  dated  22.08.2016  from  the Chairman  of  the  Trust/Society  and  the Dean/Principal of the college concerned.

ii. A  bank  guarantee  bearing  No. 0507116BG0000170  dated  22.08.2016 Rs. 2 Cr. issued by State Bank of India in favour of MCI, with a validity of 1 year.

The Executive Committee of  the Council  further noted that upon receipt of request through the Central Government u/s 11(2) of the IMC Act, 1956, the assessments to assess the standard of  examination held by The Tamilnadu Dr.  MGR Medical University, Chennai and to assess the physical and the  other  teaching  facilities  available  for Recognition/Approval  of  Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical Science & Research, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu for the award of MBBS degree (150 seats) granted by The Tamilnadu Dr. MGR Medical University, Chennai u/s 11(2) of the IMC Act, 1956  as  well  as  Compliance  Verification  Assessment  for renewal of permission for admission of 5th batch (150 MBBS seats) u/s 10(A) of the IMC Act, 1956 for the Academic year 2016-17 with reference to the conditional approval accorded by  Oversight  Committee  have  been  carried  out  by  the Council  assessors on 17th February, 2017 and 15th & 16th March, 2017 and noted the following:-

1. OPD attendance of 1,343 on day of assessment as provided by Institute appear to be highly inflated.

7

On physical verification at 11 a.m. & 11:30 a.m., total OPD statistics as recorded in registers of all the departments was only 286.

2. There  were  NIL  Normal  Delivery  &  2  Caesarean Section on day of assessment.  

3. Histopathology & Cytopathology workload for the whole  Institute  was  only  05  each  on  day  of assessment.  

4. Data of radiological investigations as provided by Institute appear to be inflated.  

5. Wards: Ancillary facilities are not properly used in the wards.  

6. RHTC: No independent activity in National Health Programmes is carried out.  

7. Other deficiencies as pointed out in the assessment report.

In view of the above, the college has failed to abide by the undertaking it had given to the Central Govt. that there are  no  deficiencies  as  per  clause  3.2  (i)  of  the  directions passed  by  the  Supreme  Court  mandated  Oversight Committee  vide  Communication  dated  12/08/2016.   The Executive Committee, after due deliberation and discussion, has decided that the college has failed to comply with the stipulation  laid  down  by  the  Oversight  Committee. Accordingly,  the Executive Committee recommends that as per the directions passed by Oversight Committee in 19 as even after giving an undertaking that they have fulfilled the entire  infrastructure  for  recognition/approval  of  Karpagam Faculty  of  medical  sciences  &  Research,  Coimbatore, Tamilnadu  for  the  award  of  MBBS  degree  (150  seats) granted by The Tamilnadu Dr.  M.G.R.  Medical  University, Chennai u/s 11(2)  of  the IMC Act,  1956 and Compliance Verification  Assessment  for  renewal  of  permission  for admission of  5th batch (150 MBBS seats) u/s 10(A) of  the IMC Act, 1956 for the Academic year 2016-17, the college was found to be grossly deficient. It has also been decided by  the  Executive  Committee  that  the  Bank  Guarantee furnished  by  the  college  in  pursuance  of  the  directives passed by the Oversight Committee  as well  as  GOI letter dated 20/08/2016 is liable to be encashed.

The  above  decision  of  the  Executive  Committee  is subject to approval of Oversight Committee.

Two copy of assessment report is enclosed herewith.  

8

Your faithfully,

Sd/- (Dr. Rajendra Wabale)

Joint Secretary  Encl: As above. Endst.  No.  MCI-34(41)(RG-17)/2016-Med./179222 Date:24/03/17

Copy forwarded for information and necessary action to:-

1. The Secretary to Oversight Committee on MCI, 2nd Floor, Academic  Block,  National  Institute  of  Health  &  Family Welfare, Munirka, New Delhi 110067

2. The  Dean/Principal,  Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical Sciences  &  Research,  Pollachi  Main  Road, Othakkalmandapam,  Coimbatore-641032  (Tamilnadu), Email:  info@karpagam.com, karpagammedicalcollege@gmail.com with  the  request  to submit the detailed point-wise compliance with regard to recognition/approval  (softcopy-in  editable  word  format with C.D. also) with the documentary evidence in respect of  the  rectification  of  deficiencies  pointed out as  above within  15  days  to  the  Council  office  alongwith  the demand draft worth Rs. 3.00 lakhs (Rupees three lakhs only) in favour of The Secretary, Medical Council of India payable at New Delhi.

Sd/-

(Dr. Rajendra Wabale) Joint Secretary”

(emphasis supplied)

The second communication sent  by the Joint Secretary of  the

MCI  to  the  Secretary  to  the  Government  of  India,  Ministry  of

Health and Family Welfare dated 29th April, 2017 reads thus:

9

“ANNEXURE P/9

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA

No. MCI-34(41)(RG-17)/2017-Med./

Date: 29th April, 2017 ITEM NO.61

The Secretary Govt. of India Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi- 110011,

Sub: Recognition/Approval of Karpagam Faculty of medical  Scienences  &  Research,  Coimbatore,  Tamilnadu  for  the Award  of  MBBS  degree  (150  seats)  granted  by  the Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai u/s 11(2) of the IMC Act, 1956.  

Sir,  I  am directed  to  inform you  that  an  assessment  to

verify the compliance submitted by the college authorities on the deficiencies pointed out in the assessment report (15th & 16th March,  2017)  with  regard to  Recognition/Approval  of Karpagam  Faculty  of  Medical  Science  &  Research, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu for the award of MBBS degree (150 seats)  granted  by  the  Tamilnadu  Dr.  MGR  Medical University, Chennai u/s 11(2) of the IMC Act, 1956 as well as  Compliance  Verification  Assessment  for  renewal  of permission for admission of 5th batch (150 MBBS seats) u/s 10(A) of the IMC Act, 1956 was carried out by the Council Assessors on 10th April,  2017. The compliance verification assessment  report  (10th April,  2017)  along  with  previous assessment report (15th & 16th March, 2017) was considered by the Executive Committee of the Council at its meeting held on 28.04.2017 and it was decided as under:

‘The  Executive  Committee  of  the  Council  considered  the compliance verification assessment report (10th April  2017) alongwith  previous  assessment report (15th & 16th March,

10

2017)  alongwith  a  letter  dated  12.04.2017  from Dr.  L.P. Thangavelu,  Faculty,  Department  of  Surgery,  Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences and Research, Coimbatore and noted the following:- 1. Deficiency of faculty is 17.16% as detailed in the report.  2. Shortage of Residents is 16.25% as detailed in the report.  3. OPD attendance at 1.209 as claimed by Institute is highly  inflated.  When  the  assessors  reached  the Institute at 10:15 a.m., a few patients were seen at Registration. After this the Institute brought healthy persons to register to inflate OPD attendance.  4.  Bed  Occupancy  at  10  a.m.  is  62.76% Institute’s figure of  78% is highly inflated. The figures in the histopathology  registers,  grossly  mismatch  the number of surgeries. There is no register maintained in  OT  for  handing  over  the  specimens  in histopathology. Many specimens, paraffin blocks and slides  were  missing  on  random  checking. Cytopathology reported by Astt. Prof. and repetition of same diagnosis with the same findings.  These were signed digitally.  

5. (a) No. of at the time of visit at 1030 a.m. the pre operative OT list showed 21 patients for surgeries of All OTs but in pre OP waiting there were 5 patients. Completed  surgeries  were  2,  and  2  surgeries  were ongoing.  Institute  Statistics-18  inflated  to  suit  the requirement.    (b)  3  Surgeries  were  completed  at  11  a.m.  Minor surgeries  were  done  in  Major  OT.  Institute statistics-29 appear to be highly inflated.

6. Many patients in the hospital were admitted which were  for  superspeciality  category,  Superspeciality doctors are coming and attending these patients.

(a)  In  Surgery  ward  C1  patient  named Chandranesi was admitted for chemotherapy.

(b)  Mrs.  Mylathal  No.  1703038727/K/T030936 was admitted under urology as per records

11

(c)  In  D2  Pediatrics  ward  there  were  total  14 patients at 11 a.m. All were admitted on 10th April, 2017. Hence no old patient.

(d) Few case sheet of patient like Charudershna were blank i.e. not seen in OPD before admission.

7.  Inadequate clinical material  as per verified case records and indoor register.

(a)  Number  of  admissions  in  Pediatrics  on  8th April, -03, 7th April-02, 9th April-02, 6th April-02.

General Surgery department on 8th April-05, 5th April-06, 6th April-09

(b) TB Chest male ward as per Indoor register no admission on 8th, 9th, 4th, 5th April. No admission from 27th March to 3rd April, 22nd March to 27th March no admissions.  

(c) Skin ward male no admission from 23rd March to 29th March no admission. 20th February to 6th March No  admission.  5th April-2  admissions,  8th April-2 admissions.

(d)  Many  of  senior  faculty  on  clinical departments  are  not  working/participating  in teaching.

(e) In Radiology – only one faculty was available. TB – No faculty.

(f)  Histopathology  section  is  in  the  Central Clinical  Lab.  No  Histopathology  section  Pathology department.

(g)  No  attendance  register  or  Biometric  record was available with Dean at 10 a.m.

8. Data of Radiological investigations as provided by the Institute are highly inflated.  

9. Wards: Pantry in wards do not appear to be used.

10.  Other  deficiencies  as  pointed  out  in  the assessment report.

In view of the above, the Executive Committee of  the Council  decided to  recommend to  the Central  Government

13

(Dr. Rajendra Wabale) Joint Secretary”

(emphasis supplied)

4. As  mentioned  above,  the  appellant  has  challenged  the

decision  of  the  Competent  Authority  of  the  Central

Government  communicated  vide  letter  dated  31st May,

2017.  The decision was partly in favour of the appellant,

confirming the renewal of permission granted for admitting

students for the 5th batch in MBBS course for the academic

session 2016-17 and also directing the MCI to return the

bank guarantee of Rs.2 crore given by the appellant college.

The latter part of the said decision, however, is adverse to

the  appellant,  debarring  the  appellant  college  from

admitting  students  in  MBBS  course  (150  seats)  for  the

academic session 2017-18.   

5. The High Court vide order dated 19th July, 2017, which is

impugned  in  this  appeal,  has  issued  notice  to  the

respondents but refused to grant any interim relief to the

appellant to allow them to admit students in MBBS course

for  the  academic  session  2017-18.   As  a  result,  the

appellant approached this Court by way of present special

14

leave petition which was heard on 11th August, 2017. On

the basis of  the arguments advanced by the parties,  this

Court  directed the  Central  Government  to  reconsider  the

matter and accordingly, passed the following order:

“Heard Mr. Mukul Rohatgi and Mr. Dushyant Dave, learned senior counsel, Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the Union of India and Mr. Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel for  the  Medical  Council  of  India.  Having  heard  learned counsel  for  the  parties,  it  is  directed  that  the  Central Government shall  afford  an  opportunity  of  hearing  to  the representatives of the Institutions and take assistance of the newly constituted Committee as per the judgment passed by the  Constitution  Bench  in  Amma Chandravati  Educational and  Charitable  Trust  and  Others  v.  Union  of  India  and Another [Writ Petition (C) No.408 of 2017], within ten days hence and pass a reasoned order by end of August, 2017. Be  it  noted,  we  have  passed  this  order  as  the  order impugned is the communication by the Central Government which is dated 31st May, 2017.  List the matter in the first week of September, 2017.”  

6.  In view of the directions given by this Court, the Central

Government considered the matter afresh and has passed a

detailed order (running into 5 pages) on 31st August, 2017.

The relevant portion of the order is in paragraphs 16 & 17.

The rest of the paragraphs refer to the previous proceedings

reckoned by the Ministry. Paragraphs 16 & 17 of the said

order read thus:

“16. Now, in compliance with the above direction of Hon’ble Supreme  Court  dated  11.08.2017,  the  Ministry  granted

15

hearing  to  the  college  on  25.08.2017.  A  member  of  the Oversight  Committee  was  present  during  the  entire proceeding  of  the  Hearing  Committee.  The  Hearing Committee after  considering the record and submission of the  college  submitted  its  report  to  the  Ministry  with  the following conclusion:-

The  Hearing  Committee  is  of  the  view that the  bed occupancy as claimed by the college cannot be validated by this Committee and requires physical verification.

A copy of the Hearing Committee report containing the above observation is enclosed.

17. Accepting the recommendations of  Hearing Committee, the Ministry reiterates its earlier decision dated 31.5.2017 to confirm the conditional permission issued to the Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences & Research, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu and directs the college not to admit MBBS students for the academic year 2017-18.”  

(emphasis supplied)

7. Aggrieved, the appellant has filed I.A. No.84171 of 2017 to

challenge the correctness of the aforementioned decision of

the  Competent  Authority  of  the  Central  Government,

reiterating its earlier decision dated 31st May, 2017.   

8. During  the  arguments,  the  counsel  appearing  for  the

appellant invited our attention to the relevant documents to

question  the  observation  recorded  by  the  Executive

Committee  of  the  MCI  and  the  Hearing  Committee.  It  is

contended  that  the  impugned  decision  refers  to  the

observation  of  the  Hearing  Committee  as  reproduced  in

paragraph 16 of the impugned decision dated 31st August,

16

2017, which according to the appellant is contrary to the

factual  position  emerging  from  the  record.  In  any  case,

contends  learned  counsel  that  it  is  an  inconclusive

observation and could not have been the basis to pass the

impugned decision.  The  respondents,  on the  other  hand,

have  supported  the  orders  passed  by  the  Competent

Authority of the Central Government on 31st May, 2017 and

31st August, 2017 being well considered decisions.  

9. We  have  heard  Mr.  Mukul  Rohatgi,  learned  senior

counsel appearing for the appellant college, Mr. Vikas

Singh,  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the  MCI

and Mr.  Maninder  Singh,  learned Additional  Solicitor

General appearing for Union of India.  

10.Ordinarily, we would have relegated the parties before

the High Court where the writ petition is still pending.

However, as the appellant invited the order dated 11th

August,  2017  from  this  Court  and  thereafter

participated  in  the  proceedings  before  the  Competent

Authority  of  the  Central  Government,  which in turn,  has

passed the impugned order dated 31st August, 2017 after

re-consideration  of  the  matter  and  as  the  appellant  has

17

chosen to assail  the same by way of  an I.A. filed in this

appeal,  coupled  with  the  urgency  of  the  matter,  as  the

cut-off date for admission in MBBS course for the academic

session 2017-18 was to expire on 31st August, 2017; and

that  cut-off  date  can  be  extended  only  by  this  Court  in

exercise  of  the  plenary  power  under  Article  142  of  the

Constitution of India, we permitted the appellant to agitate

all the issues before this Court.

11. We  have  reproduced  the  order  dated  31st May,  2017,

passed  by  the  Competent  Authority  of  the  Central

Government,  in its entirety to discern the real  issue that

needs  to  be  answered  in  the  present  appeal.  As  noted

earlier, the said order is partly in favour of the appellant. It

is  adverse  only  to  the  extent  of  debarring  the  appellant

college from admitting students in MBBS course (150 seats)

for  the  academic  session  2017-18  and  also  not  granting

recognition/approval  to  the  appellant  college  which  had

already started MBBS course and admitted five batches of

students until the academic session 2016-17.   

12.From the factual narration in the communications sent by

the MCI to the Ministry vide letters dated 24th March, 2017

18

and 29th  April, 2017, which  inter alia were considered by

the Competent Authority of the Central Government to form

its opinion, it is indisputable that the appellant college was

granted  conditional  renewal  permission  by  the  Central

Government on 20th August, 2016 to admit 5th batch (150

seats) in MBBS course for the academic session 2016-17,

on  conditions  specified  by  the  Oversight  Committee  (for

short “OC” constituted by this Court) in its communication

dated 12th August,  2016.   The appellant  college accepted

those conditions and had filed an affidavit of undertaking to

remove all the deficiencies pointed out by the MCI within

specified  time.  Thereafter,  a  compliance  verification

assessment was carried out by the MCI on 17th February,

2017  and  15th &  16th March,  2017  when  the  following

deficiencies were noticed:   

“1.  OPD  attendance  of  1,343  on  day  of  assessment  as provided  by  Institute  appear  to  be  highly  inflated.  On physical  verification  at  11  a.m.  &  11:30  a.m.,  total  OPD statistics as recorded in registers of all the departments was only 286.  2. There were NIL Normal Delivery & 2 Caesarean Section on day of assessment.  3. Histopathology & Cytopathology workload for the whole Institute was only 05 each on day of assessment. 4. Data of radiological investigations as provided by Institute appear to be inflated.  5.  Wards:  Ancillary facilities  are  not properly used in the wards.

19

6.  RHTC:  No  independent  activity  in  National  Health Programmes is carried out.”  7.  Other  deficiencies  as  pointed  out  in  the  assessment report.”

      13.The Executive Committee of the MCI, in its meeting held

on  21st March,  2017,  considered  the  relevant

assessment  reports  submitted  by  the  Assessors

periodically and, noting the deficiencies, recommended

to the Central Government not to renew the permission

for  admission of  5th batch of  150 students  in  MBBS

course for the academic session 2016-17, and to debar

the  appellant  college.  The  relevant  portion  of  the

communication dated 24th March, 2017 sent by the MCI

to the Ministry, reproducing the recommendation, reads

thus:

“In view of the above, the college has failed to abide by the undertaking it had given to the Central Govt. that there are  no  deficiencies  as  per  clause  3.2  (i)  of  the  directions passed  by  the  Supreme  Court  mandated  Oversight Committee  vide  Communication  dated  12/08/2016.   The Executive Committee, after due deliberation and discussion, has decided that the college has failed to comply with the stipulation  laid  down  by  the  Oversight  Committee. Accordingly,  the Executive Committee recommends that as per the directions passed by Oversight Committee in 19 as even after giving an undertaking that they have fulfilled the entire  infrastructure  for  recognition/approval  of  Karpagam Faculty  of  medical  sciences  &  Research,  Coimbatore, Tamilnadu  for  the  award  of  MBBS  degree  (150  seats) granted by The Tamilnadu Dr.  M.G.R.  Medical  University,

20

Chennai u/s 11(2)  of  the IMC Act,  1956 and Compliance Verification  Assessment  for  renewal  of  permission  for admission of  5th batch (150 MBBS seats) u/s 10(A) of  the IMC Act, 1956 for the Academic year 2016-17, the college was found to be grossly deficient. It has also been decided by  the  Executive  Committee  that  the  Bank  Guarantee furnished  by  the  college  in  pursuance  of  the  directives passed by the Oversight Committee  as well  as  GOI letter dated 20/08/2016 is liable to be encashed.

The  above  decision  of  the  Executive  Committee  is subject to approval of Oversight Committee.”  

(emphasis supplied)

14.A  copy  of  this  communication  was  forwarded  to  the

Secretary of the OC as well as the appellant college with

a request to submit a detailed, point-wise compliance

with respect to  the recognition/approval  (soft  copy in

editable  word  format  with  CD  also)  along  with

documentary evidence in respect of the rectification of

the deficiencies pointed out by the Assessors.  

15.On  10th April,  2017,  a  compliance  verification

assessment  was  carried  out  in  respect  of  which  an

assessment report was submitted to MCI. The Executive

Committee  of  MCI  in  its  meeting  held  on  28th April,

2017  considered  the  relevant  assessment  reports

including the compliance verification report dated 10th

April, 2017 with regard to recognition/approval of the

21

appellant college under Section 11(2) of the Act.  The

Executive  Committee  noted  10  deficiencies  (as

reproduced  in  the  communication  dated  29th April,

2017 – Annexure P/9) and decided to send a negative

recommendation  to  the  Central  Government  on  the

proposal  for  recognition/approval,  including  to  debar

the appellant  college  from admitting students for  two

academic  sessions  2017-18  &  2018-19  as  per  the

directions passed by the OC in paragraph 3.2(b)  vide

communication  dated  12th August,  2016.   The  said

decision  of  MCI  was  communicated  to  the  Central

Government vide communication dated 29th April, 2017

and  copies  of  the  said  communication  were  also

forwarded  to  the  Secretary  of  OC  and  the  appellant

college with a request to submit a detailed, point-wise

compliance  with  regard  to  recognition/approval  along

with documentary evidence in respect of rectification of

deficiencies pointed out in the said communication. On

the basis of the aforesaid recommendation of the MCI,

the  Competent  Authority  of  the  Central  Government

22

took  a  decision  which  was  partly  in  favour  of  the

appellant college. In other words, the Ministry did not

accept  the  recommendation of  the  MCI  in  toto.   The

Ministry,  instead,  vide  order  dated  31st May,  2017

merely  directed  the  appellant  college  not  to  admit

students  for  the  academic  session  2017-18,  which

position  has  been  reiterated  in  the  order  dated  31st

August,  2017 passed after reconsideration.  It  is  this

part of the direction which is adverse to the appellant.  

16.The fact  that  the Competent Authority of  the Central

Government has confirmed the renewal of permission in

favour of the appellant for academic session 2016-17, it

would not follow that the appellant college is entitled to

grant of recognition/approval under Section 11(2) of the

Act from the academic session 2017-18 as a matter of

course, without removing the deficiencies pointed out in

the latest assessment report dated 10th April, 2017. The

appellant, however, would contend that the correctness

of  the  report  dated  10th April,  2017,  is  seriously  in

doubt. For, the previous assessment reports made no

23

reference  to  the  deficiencies  regarding  faculty  and

residents  in  particular.  The  Dean  of  the  appellant

college had registered his protest and made such noting

on the said report - that he did not agree with most of

the findings in the report and that he would submit a

detailed reply.   Indeed,  the  assessment reports  dated

17th February,  2017 and 15th/16th March,  2017 have

noted  deficiencies  which  are  not  identical  to  the

deficiencies noted in the assessment report dated 10th

April, 2017.  It must, however, be kept in mind that the

reports  are  in  respect  of  the  factual  position  noticed

during the inspection carried out on the relevant dates.

The  variation  of  deficiencies  may  be  on  account  of

different situations. Therefore, it may not be correct to

discredit the 10th April, 2017 assessment report on the

basis of such variations. It is one thing to say that the

college is in a position to explain the deficiencies but

whether  to  accept  that  explanation,  is  within  the

domain of the expert body.  There is nothing to indicate

in the communication dated 29th April, 2017 sent by the

24

MCI or, for that matter, the impugned decision of the

Competent Authority of the Central Government dated

31st May,  2017,  that  any  plausible  explanation  was

offered by the appellant college in regard to the stated

deficiencies.  Even the order  dated 31st August,  2017,

does not  indicate as to whether any explanation was

offered by the appellant college during the hearing for

reconsideration by the Central Government.  Notably, a

member  of  the  OC  constituted  by  this  Court  was

present during the hearing on 25th August, 2017. The

Hearing  Committee  was  of  the  view  that  the  bed

occupancy as claimed by the college cannot be validated

by the Committee unless physical verification was done

for  that  purpose.  That  finding  pre-supposes  that  the

explanation offered by the appellant college, if any, did

not commend to the Hearing Committee. The fulfilment

of  benchmark  regarding  bed  occupancy  for  grant  of

recognition/approval under Section 11(2) of the Act is

essential. That is a precondition for grant of recognition

25

and can certainly be a relevant factor to be considered

by the MCI as well as the Hearing Committee.   

17.The  bed occupancy  noticed  in  the  assessment  report

dated 10th April, 2017 is 62.76% as against the claim

made by the college of 78%.  The claim of the college

was  found  to  be  highly  inflated.  Even  in  the  earlier

assessment  reports  comments  have  been  made

regarding the bed occupancy to be tailor made to suit

the assessment. Suffice it to observe that the Hearing

Committee,  during  the  reconsideration,  was  not

convinced  about  the  deficiency  regarding  bed

occupancy until it was physically verified. It is not for

this Court to sit over the satisfaction of the expert body

and  of  the  Competent  Authority  of  the  Central

Government as a Court of appeal.

18.The  appellant  would  then  contend  that  it  was  not

permissible  for  the  MCI  to  carry  out  successive

inspections.  Reliance has been placed on the dictum of

this Court in Kanachur Islamic Education Trust Vs.

26

Union  of  India  and  Anr.1, decided  on  30th August,

2017. This submission does not commend us. For, in

the aforementioned case, this Court found that it was

unambiguously  clear  that  the  inspection  of  the

concerned college was already conducted on 17th/18th

November, 2016 and it did not divulge any substantial

deficiency  so  as  to  justify  disapproval.  Further,  no

reason was assigned for the surprise inspection carried

out on 9th/10th December, 2016, in a short span of less

than one month. In that backdrop the Court held that

the justification for  such surprise  inspection was not

explained by the MCI. In the subsequent decision in the

case  of  Royal  Medical  Trust  & Anr.  Vs.  Union of

India  &  Anr.2 ,  the  decision  in  Kanachur  Islamic

Education  Trust  (supra)  has  been  explained  and  the

argument  under  consideration  has  been  rejected.  Be

that as it may, in the present case, it is not a case of

successive  surprise  inspections.  For,  the  inspection

conducted  on  17th February,  2017  was  followed  by

1   (2017) 10 SCALE 321 2   W.P.(C) No.747 of 2017,  decided on 12th September, 2017

27

compliance verification assessment on 15th/16th March,

2017 for  considering the proposal  for  confirmation of

renewal of LOP for the academic session 2016-17; and

the inspection carried out on 10th April, 2017 was for

considering the proposal regarding recognition/approval

for the college from academic session 2017-18.  

19.Considering the above, it is not possible to doubt the

decision  of  the  Ministry  dated  31st May,  2017,  as

confirmed on 31st August, 2017 after re-consideration.

The fact that there are some factual errors committed in

paragraph  13  of  the  impugned  decision  dated  31st

August,  2017,  regarding  the  chart  pertaining  to  the

some other inspection has been fairly admitted by the

counsel for the respondents as a clerical error. But that

would  not  vitiate  the  order  dated  31st August,  2017.

Because, the decision dated 31st May, 2017 is founded

on the factual position stated in the recommendation of

the MCI vide communications dated 24th March, 2017

and  29th April,  2017,  in  particular.  The  latter

communication  pertains  to  the  proposal  for  grant  of

28

recognition/approval  to  the  appellant  college  under

Section 11(2) of the Act.   

20.Counsel  for  the  appellant  while  referring  to  the

communication dated 5th April, 2017 sent by the Under

Secretary  to  Government  of  India,  Ministry  of  Health

and  Family  Welfare  to  the  appellant  college

(Annexure-A/9)  vehemently  contended  that  the

personal hearing before the Ministry was scheduled on

11th April, 2017, but the inspection of the college was

conducted  one  day  earlier.  The  argument,  though

attractive at first blush, will have to be rejected. In that,

the personal hearing scheduled on 11th April, 2017, in

terms of the said communication dated 5th April, 2017,

was  for  considering  the  proposal  for  confirmation  of

renewal permission for 5th batch (150 seats) of students

in  MBBS  course  for  the  academic  session  2016-17,

under Section 10(A) of the Act and not related to the

issue  of  grant  of  recognition/approval  under  Section

11(2)  of  the  Act  which was for  the  academic session

2017-18.   Whereas,  the inspection conducted on 10th

29

April, 2017 was for considering the proposal for grant of

recognition  under  Section  11  of  the  Act  and  not

pertaining to the proposal for renewal of permission for

the  academic  session  2016-17.   Indisputably,  the

renewal of permission for the academic session 2016-17

has  been  confirmed  by  the  Central  Government  vide

order  dated  31st May,  2017,  despite  the  negative

recommendation  given  by  the  MCI  in  that  behalf.

Suffice it to observe that the argument of the appellant

is replete with confusion in reference to the record and

proceedings relating to two different proposals, namely,

one for confirmation of renewal of LOP for the academic

session  2016-17  under  Section  10A  of  the  Act  and

another  for  grant  of  recognition/approval  from

academic session 2017-18 under Section 11 of the Act.

The benchmark and the minimum standards for these

proposals  are  bound  to  be  different  and  we  must

presume that  the  expert  body,  such as  MCI  and the

Hearing Committee in which one member of the OC also

participated, were fully aware of the essentialities and

30

pre-conditions for grant of recognition/approval. Since

the decision of the Competent Authority of the Central

Government is based on such inputs, it is not open for

us  to  sit  over  that  decision  as  a  Court  of  appeal.

Further, as ordained in the decision of  Royal Medical

Trust (supra),  the  relief  to  permit  the  appellants  to

admit students for academic session 2017-18 cannot be

countenanced. In that decision, in paragraph 52, this

Court has also rejected the challenge to the order such

as  dated  31st August,  2017,  being  bereft  of  reasons.

That dictum applies on all fours to the present case.  

21.Accordingly, we find no merit in this appeal. Since we

have  already  examined  all  the  issues  raised  by  the

appellant  for  assailing  the  correctness  of  the  order

dated 31st May, 2017 and confirmation thereof on 31st

August, 2017 by the Competent Authority of the Central

Government, nothing would survive for consideration in

the writ petition filed by the appellant before the High

Court of Madras. As a result,  Writ Petition No.18334 of

31

2017  be deemed to have been disposed of in terms of

this judgment.  

22.We may, however, make it clear that the proposal for

grant  of  recognition/approval  submitted  by   the

appellant college for the academic session 2017-18 be

treated as having been made for the academic session

2018-19  and  be  processed  by  the  respondents

accordingly, in accordance with law. For that purpose,

the  MCI  is  directed  to  conduct  inspection  of  the

appellant  college  within  two  months  and  inform  the

appellant about the deficiencies, if any,  with the option

to remove the same within the time limit specified in that

regard.   The  appellant  college  shall  then  report  its

compliance and communicate the removal of deficiencies to

MCI,  whereafter  it  will  be  open to  the  MCI  to  undertake

verification of the compliance and then prepare its report to

be  submitted  to  the  Central  Government.  The  Central

Government  shall  take  appropriate  decision,  as  may  be

advised,  in  accordance  with  law,  within  one  month

therefrom  and  forthwith  communicate  the  same  to  the

32

appellant college. If the appellant college is aggrieved by the

said  decision,  it  will  be  open  to  the  appellant  to  take

recourse to remedies as may be available in law.  

23.The appeal and interlocutory application are disposed of in

the above terms. No order as to costs.

   ……………………………….CJI.     (Dipak Misra)

………………………………….J.     (A.M. Khanwilkar)

.………………………………...J.      (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud)

New Delhi, Dated: September 14, 2017.