Skip to main content

Rejection of application u/s 13-A of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act due to delay in submission of documents would be a pedantic and purposeless approach: Delhi High Court

Rejection of application u/s 13-A of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act due to delay in submission of documents would be a pedantic and purposeless approach: Delhi High Court

By - Shriya Singh*

In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court held that an application for the establishment of Medical College under Section 13-A of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, cannot be rejected on the grounds of non-submission of documents within the specified time period. The Court further opined that the applicant’s diligent efforts must be taken into consideration.


The Delhi High Court jointly took up three petitions to address the issue of rejection of application seeking permission for the establishment of a new Ayurvedic medical college. The first petition filed by a trust here is referred to as CC Trust. Section 13-A deals with the permission for the establishment of a new medical college or a new course of study. 


Along with the application for permission, the applicant is required to submit other documents including a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the state government, and a Consent of Affiliation (COA) from the affiliating university. 


Also Read - CBSE will direct all institutions to announce the scores granted by the results committee; No refund of exam fee.


In the case of CC Trust, petitioner no.1 failed to submit the COA in the specified format which resulted in the rejection and return of the same by the Union of India (UOI). Petitioner no. 1 again obtained a COA in the correct format and submitted it to the UOI. However, the COA was again rejected on the grounds of late submission.


Similar is the case of petitioner no.3, K.L. Shastri Smarak Sansthan (KLSSS) where the COA was rejected due to incorrect format. In the case of petitioner no. 2, during the time of submission of application, the NOC was under process, for which the petitioner filed an affidavit stating the reason for the same. The NOC was rejected and returned to petitioner no.2 on the ground of late submission.


Also Read - Delay in compassionate appointment by government causing more grief to the family is unjustifiable: Bombay High Court.


The counsel for petitioner no.1 and no.3 argued that although the COAs were not in proper format the COA issued by the affiliated university were submitted before the last date of submission. The counsel for petitioner no.2 emphasized that applicant/ petitioner no.2 was diligent in the submission of NOC as soon as it was received. Opposing the claims of the petitioners, the respondents claimed the late submission to be against the provisions of the regulations. 


The Court in the matter of petitioner no.1 and no. 3 observed that though in the wrong format still, the University indicated its consent to the affiliation. In para 27 of its judgment, the Court observed, “…I find that the University signified its consent to the association of the proposed college, and referenced the NOC to be obtained from the State Government.” “… The purpose of Regulation 6(1)(c) is to ensure that the proposed college would be in a position to confer degrees under the aegis of its affiliating university and would have to abide by the standards prescribed by the university. These purposes were met by the University’s communications and the petitioners are, therefore, entitled to the benefit of the equitable doctrine of substantial compliance”. 


Also Read - Pegasus Row: Supreme Court says allegations are serious if reports are true.


Furthermore, the court noted, "that rejection after the date of submission of the required documents on the ground of their non-submission within time would be a pedantic and purposeless approach…these judgments are squarely applicable and the rejection of the petitioner’s application must be held to be unreasonable”.


The court after considering all the facts and circumstances held that petitioners were put in such a position due to the failure of the UOI to adopt a more reasonable approach to deal with such situations. Therefore, UOI must approve their applications for further consideration in accordance with the law.


CLICK HERE TO READ JUDGMENT.


*Shriya Singh is a 1st year student pursuing B.A.LL.B.(Hons.) from National Law University, Delhi. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

  In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...
Post a Comment
Read more

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another.  Also Read:  Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...
Post a Comment
Read more

Counsel's failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review: Bombay High Court

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.”   The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...
Post a Comment
Read more