Holding

The Court, under Article 142, directed that private medical colleges whose recognition was not renewed may admit students for the 2014-15 session upon filing specified undertakings, with fees limited to government‑college rates and admissions based on state merit lists.

Summary

The Supreme Court was approached by several private medical colleges whose recognition for the 2014-15 academic session had not been renewed, risking a large number of vacant MBBS seats. The petitioners argued that defects identified in earlier inspections had been remedied and sought permission to admit students. The Union of India and the Medical Council of India contended that without fresh compliance verification, admission could not be allowed. Considering the acute shortage of physicians and the imminent admission deadline of 30 September 2014, the Court exercised its powers under Article 142 and issued interim directions permitting admissions, provided the institutions filed undertakings affirming no defects and agreeing to forfeit their deposits if violations were later found. The order also mandated that fees be limited to those prescribed for government colleges and that admissions be made from state‑prepared merit lists, applying to all similar petitions pending renewal.

Issues considered

The legality of allowing private medical colleges to admit students for 2014-15 despite non‑renewal of recognition.
Whether the petitioners can be required to file undertakings as a condition for admission.
The applicability of the Supreme Court's earlier decision in Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh to the present petitions.
The Court's authority to issue such interim directions under Article 142 of the Constitution.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 142

Subjects

medical college recognitioninterim orderArticle 142private medical collegesadmission of MBBS studentsundertakingsfee regulationshortage of physiciansSupreme Court

Judgment

[2014] 14 S.C.R. 1361

HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT. A
LTD.
v.
UNION OF INDIA &ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 469 of 2014) B
SEPTEMBER 18, 2014
[ANIL R. DAVE VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND
UDAY UMESH LAUT, JJ]
c
Education/Educational Institutions:
Medical admissions - Medical Colleges - Academic
session 2014-15- Non-renewal of recognition - Seats likely
to remain vacant- Interim directions - Keeping in view the
shortage of physicians in the country, medical colleges, on D
furnishing the required undertaking, permitted to admit
students from the merit list prepared by States and the fees
charged shall be that prescribed by Government Colleges
of respective States - These interim directions are given
under provision of Art. 142 of the Constitution - This order . E
shall also apply to all institutions which had filed petitions for
renewal of recognition for academic session 2014-15 but their
· petitions were rejected or withdrawn - Constitution of India,
1950-Art. 142- Interim orders.
Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh 2012 ., F
(5) SCR 768 : (2012) 7 SCC 433 - referred to.
Case Law Reference
2012 (5) SCR 768 referred to .Para 4 ·
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No .. G
· 469of2014 .
. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

•H
1361
,•<1'362 - 'SUPREM~ COURTR-EPORTS !• [20·14]14 s:c.R.

. A· ' ' - WITH
W.P.(C) Nos. 700, 705, 706, 707, 757, 784, 799, ·a19 of
2014 -
--~ - '_AND
,; B _· -. SLP {C) Nose 21765, 22755, 22756;'22757, - 22758-
22759, 22974, 23512, 23777, 22785, 23476, 23547, 24-154,
. 24150-24151,
. - '
' .
24154, 24665,
. 24686,
. .- 24913,
'. 25763
- .. '
' . -- of 2014
[

AND
C T.P.(C)No.1217of2014
Pinky Anand, ASG, Mohan Parasaran, Basava Prabhu
S. Patil, A. Sharan, Kapil Sibal, Nidhesh Gupta, Vikas Singh,
K. Shashi Kiran Shetty, P. Vishwaoatha Shetty, Rajeev Dhawan,
· Shyam Divan, Sr.Advs., S.U.K. Sagar,_ Ms. Bina Madhavan,
D Ms. Praseena Elizabeth Joseph, Shivendra Singh, Ms.
Akanksha Mehra (For M/s Lawyer's Knit &Co.), V. Balaji, Asai
Thambi, Rakesh K. Sharma, M. Gireesh Kumar, Ankur S.
Kulkarni, Sriram P., Vijay Kumar, Amit Kurnai, K.P. Gautam,
Ramesh Alanki', rvis. Rekha Bakshi, AnkitRajgarhia, A.K. Kaul,
_ ' E · Avijit Mani Tripathi, Atul Kumar: R.D. Upadhya'y, Giridhar G.
Upadhyay, Awai:Jesh Kumar Singh, Ms.Asha Upadhyay, Si!njay
Bhatt, Rudra Prasad, Dushyant Kumar, Rabin Mjuriider,
Jaimon Andrews, Sivaramakrishnan, Zulfiker Ali P.S., Ashish
Kumar, Ravinder Kumar Katna, Neeraj Shekhar, Prasanth P.,
- F Shaurya Sahay, Yogesh Raavi, Tatini Basu, Avadesh
Choudhary, Amit Jaiswal, Jalin Zaveri,Amit Mehta, Neel Kamal
Mishra; V. Balaji, C. Kannan, Rakesh K. Sharma, Manish
Singhvi, Gaurav Sharma, Prateek Bhatia, Amandeep Kaur,
Ms. Deepeika Kalia, Kapish Shetty,.R.K~Rathore, Ms. Rekha
G· Pandey, R.S. Nagar, Ms. SunitaSharma, Rohitash Nagar, M .
. - l:<hairatj, D.S. M_ahra, Rohit Bhat, Kush Chaturvecii, M~. Farah
,- - ;._ - ~ - ··- . .., ; • - --· I " '~ • . . .
. Fathim<J, y. Ni!vef:!n Kumar, Vybh_avHamesh, Ma~e~h;fha_kur,
•;:~-:~ .K.' ~ci9~r,'.A.8i!ya,Sin~1ci, M_s.:s'ypriya Junaja; M~" Briya
_ Puri, Sharan Thakur, Tara, Vijay Kumar Paradesi,, Ramesh
H
HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT. . 1363
LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA& ORS.

Babu M.R., Jatin Zaveri, Amit Mehta, Neel Kamal Mishra, Tarun A
Gupta, Guntur Prabhakar, Advs. for the appearing parties.
The following Order of the Court was passed :
ORDER
Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for both the · B
sides.
Looking at the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case and, especially, when several seats for medical
admission are likely to remain vacant for the academic year C
2014-15, we are of the view that these matters require urgent
· . consideration and we are giving these interim directions under
the provisions of Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
There is one more reason for passing this interim order.
We are conscious of the fact that number of physicians in our D
country is much less than what is required and because of
non-renewal of recognition of several medical colleges, our
citizens would be deprived of a good number of physicians
and therefore, we are constrained to pass this order, whereby
·at least there would be some increase in the number of . E
physicians after five years. We are running against time
because the last date for giving admissions to MBBS Course
for the academic year 2014-15 is 30'h September, 2014.
We also desire to reconsider the directions given by this
. Court in the judgment of Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh F
[(2012) 7 sec 433], but at this juncture, as we do not have
sufficient time to decide all. these petitions finally, we are
passing this interim order and the matter with regard to
reconsideration of the aforestated judgment would be
considered while finally disposing of this group of petitions. G
It has been submitted on behalf of the learned senior
counsel appearing for all the petitioners/ respondents, who are
. managing medical colleges, that the defects which had been
recorded at the time of the last inspection by the
H
1364 SUPREME COURT REPORTS · [2014] 14 S.C.R.

A representatives of the Medical Council of India have been duly
rectified and at present, the defects pointed out in the reports
do· not exist. The said fact can be ascertained only by having
a fresh Compliance Verification/Inspection. However, the stand
taken by the Central Government and th.e Medical Council of
B India is to the effect that no such inspection can be undertaken
. in the present academic session because of paucity of time
and it would violate the time schedule laid down by this Court
· in the case of Priya Gupta (supra).
The learned senior counsel appearing for the Medical
C Council of India has also submitted that the petitioners do not
have any legal right for getting renewal of the recognition,
especially in view of the fact that the Verification/Inspection
Reports are not available for the period in question.· The learned
senior counsel has relied u'pon some of the Judgments to
D 'substantiate his case and according to him, it would not be
just and proper to permit the said medical colleges to take
fresh batCh of students.
Looking at the peculiar facts of, the case and the
E circumstances stated hereinabove, we direct the petitioners
. to file undertakings by PresidenUChairman and Secretary of ·
. the petitioners' institutions running medical colleges within 10
· day.s from today, to the effect that there is no defect in the
medical colleges run by them and they would also state that
·. their deposit with the MCI, which is around Rs.10 crores, be
· F . forfeited by way of penalty if the statement made in the·
undertaking is found to be incorrect at the time of the next
inspection.Adraft undertaking has been given to this Court. A
copy of the undertaking, which might be filed by the institutions,
G shall be served upon the office of the Medical Council of India
as well as to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt.
of India, New Delhi.

We also record the fact that in the recent past, the Medical
H
HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT.. 1365
LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA& ORS.

Council of India has renewed recognition of Government A
Medical Colleges on the basis of undertakings and therefore;.
we see no reason not to permit the private colleges to admit
students on the basis of undertakings given by their office
bearer as a special case. .
Notwithstanding any direction given in the case of Priya B
· Gupta (supra), if undertakings as stated hereinabove are filed
by the institutions managing medical colleges for the academic
year 2014-15, admissions shall be given to the students frorji
the merit list prepared by the States and they shall be charged
fees prescribed by the Government Medical Colleges of their C
respective States. The State Authorities, i.e., the Directorate
of Medical Education &. Research, of ihe respective States
shall send students, in order of their merit, to the medical
colleges run by the petitioners, which are situated within their
States, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of D
this order and the said students shall be admitted to the MBBS
Course in accordance with the rules and regulations· of the
MCI and also regulations dated 16.04.2010 framed by.the
Medical Council of India, provided undertakings as mentioned
above are filed on behalf of the concerned institutions. E
It is also clarified that there would be no further counselling
in respect of the students who are to be given admission, even ·
if it might result into some heart burning among other students,
but in the peculiar facts ofthe case, we give this direction.
F -
In no case, the admission shall be given after 30'h
September, 2014. This order shall also apply to all the
institutions which had filed their petitions earlier for renewal of
their recognition for the academic year 2014-15, .but their
petitions were rejected or withdrawn for whatever reason, G
provided undertakings as stated hereinabove are filed by
President/Chairman and the Secretary of those institutions.
All those petitions shall be deemed to have been revived and
this ordef shall be deemed to have been passed in those cases
H
; 1366 SUPREME COURT REPORTS· 1 [2014) 14 S.C.R.

A also. This order shall only. be in respect of renewal of
recognition and not for creation of additional seats or for new
colleges. · ·
We also record that the Union of India has supported the
petitioners in the interest of students. We also direct the Union
B of India to give wide publicity to this order in print as well as
electronic media in the interest of the concerned students.
It is directed that the list of students getting admission in
pursuance of this order shall be placed ori record of this Court
c by 1., October, 2014 by the concerned institutions and a copy
thereof shall also be sent to the MCI. ·
These matters shall be treated as part-heard and shall
be notified for further hearing in the month of December, 2014.

D

Rajendra Prasad Directions issued.

•

,.:,.·

,. ' I·:
-~~·(.. -,..,