- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 1 September 2015
- Bench
- Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
- Case no.
- W.P.(C) 7128/2015
Judgment
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.
SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 "gsr"/"pp"
Case details
Parties and counsel
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 1st September, 2015 + W.P.(C) No. 7128/2015 KANACHUR ISLAMIC EDUCATION TRUST (R) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Kaushal Gautam & Mr. Gagan Yadav, Advs. Versus THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr. Harsh Ahuja and Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. T. Singhdev, Ms. Biakthansangi & Ms. Puja Sarkar, Advs. for R-2. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The petition impugns the communication dated 15th June, 2015 of the respondent No.1 Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India (UOI) disapproving the application of the petitioner for establishment of a new medical college with effect from the academic year 2015-16. The petition also seeks a direction to the respondent No.2 Medical Council of India (MCI) to inspect the petitioner"s College for establishment of new medical college for the academic year 2015-16 and a further direction to the respondent to consider the compliances (of the deficiencies earlier pointed out) submitted by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner earlier approached the Supreme Court by way of W.P.(C) No.461/2015 with the same grievance as urged in this petition and after withdrawing the said petition on 24th July, 2015, filed this petition which came up first before this Court on 29th July, 2015. On the contention of the senior counsel for the petitioner that the application of the petitioner had been disapproved by the UOI without giving a fresh opportunity of hearing to the petitioner vis-à-vis the second negative recommendation made by the MCI, notice of the petition was issued. The UOI and the MCI have filed counter affidavits. The senior counsel for the petitioner and the senior counsel for the MCI have been heard. The counsel for the UOI adopted the arguments of the MCI. 3. The factual position not in dispute is as under: A. In pursuance to the Scheme submitted by the petitioner to the UOI for establishment of a new medical college with an intake capacity of 150 students annually, the MCI on 29th and 30th December, 2014 inspected the petitioner Medical College and vide its letter dated 21st January, 2015 to the UOI communicated the decision of its Executive Council not to issue letter of permission for establishment of a new medical college to the petitioner for the reason of the position of the petitioner medical college during the inspection having been found to be as under: "1. Deficiency of faculty is 15% as detailed in report. 2. Lecture Theaters: Facility for E class is not available. 3. Students" Hostels: They are not furnished. Toilet facilities are inadequate. Mess is not available. Visitors" room, A.C. study room with computer & Internet are not available. 4. Residents" Hostels: They are not furnished. Toilet facilities are inadequate. Mess is not available. Visitors" room, A.C. study room with computer & Internet are not available. 5. Nurses" Hostels: They are not furnished. Toilet facilities are inadequate. Mess is not available. Visitors" room, A.C. study room with computer and Internet are not available. 6. OPD: Injection room for males / females, Dressing room for males / females, plaster cutting room are not available. In Ophthalmology OPD, dark room, Refraction room, Dressing room / Minor procedure room are not available. 7. Audiometry & Speech Therapy are not available. 8. There were no major or minor Surgical operations on day of assessment. 9. There was no delivery – normal or Caesarean on day of assessment. 10. MRD: It is partly computerized. 11. OT: Although 5 OTs as required are available, one is not furnished, resulting in shortage of 1 OT. 12. ICUs: SICU, PICU/NICU are not available. There was no patient in ICU. There were only 2 patients in ICCU. 13. Labour Room: Eclampsia room is not available. 14. CSSD is not functional. 15. Anatomy department: Cooling chamber
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.