Shri Ramnath Singh Homeopathic Medical College v. Union Of India & Ors.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

Vivek Agarwal, J.:— This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 5.10.18 passed by the Government of India, Ministry of Ayurved, Yog and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy (Ayush), whereby the petitioner/College has been denied permission for taking admission to BHMS course with 85 undergraduate seats for the academic sessions 2018-19 terming the shortcomings and deficiencies mentioned in para 5 to 7 of the impugned order to be violative of the provisions of Homoeopathic Central Council Act and it has been further informed that college is provided a period upto 31.12.2018 to fulfill the shortcomings observed during this year as mentioned in para 5-7 above alongwith the following requirements, so that the CCH (i.e Central Council for Homoeopathy) may carry out inspection of the college for consideration of matter for grant of permission for taking admissions in undergraduate course from the academic year 2019-20:

“a) All the Minimum Standard Requirements of infrastructure and teaching & training facilities as specified in Regulation 3 of the “Homoeopathy Central Council (Minimum Standard Requirements of Homoeopathic Colleges and attached Hospitals) Regulations, 2013” by 31st December, 2018 and

b) all the requirements under the provisions of the HCC Act, 1973 and relevant Regulations made thereunder should be fulfilled in toto.”

2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner/college that petitioner is a registered society which was granted certificate of registration in the year 1986, Annexure P/2. President of the society Shri Shivnarayan Singh Kushwah has been authorized to file present petition before this Court vide Annexure P/3 and accordingly he appeared in person and has challenged the impugned order. It is pointed out that inspection of the college was carried out on 13.6.18 by the visitors/inspectors of CCH as is apparent from Annexure P/4 and thereafter another inspection was carried out by a team of three inspectors/visitors on 26th June, 18 as contained in Annexure P/5 and thereafter petitioner had fulfilled all the deficiencies as were pointed out by the inspectors/visitors in their visit on 26 June, 18, namely -

“(i) Last year compliance report issued by the Ministry of AYUSH was not provided by the college.

(ii) No new admission for BHMS courses for last two academic years because of lack of MSR.

(iii) No record/register maintained in OPDs & Dispensing levels.

(iv) In IPD, distance between two beds must be maintained properly.

(v) No Case records maintenance facility were available in College OPD.”

3. But despite that and overlooking the fact that these deficiencies as were pointed out by the team of inspectors were cured, vide impugned order, Annexure P/1, Union of India has refused to extend permission for taking the admission of students against undergraduate seats to BHMS for the academic sessions 2018-19. It is submitted that this act of the respondent is arbitrary, illegal and deserves to be set aside. It is also submitted that respondents be directed to permit the petitioner to include its name to the counselling for the year 2018-19 for BHMS course.

4. It is necessary to point out that as per the Regulations, it is the Central Council of Homoeopathy which has been authorized to lay down standards of undergraduate and postgraduate studies. Recommendation is granted on the basis of such report of Central Council of Homeopathy. It has come on record that Ministry had examined the inspection report, recommendation of the executive committee to Board of Governors to CCH, report of field verification team of the Ministry in the light of HCC Act, 1973 and the relevant regulations made thereunder and has observed as under:—

“The college authorities are not co-operated the inspectors of the Ministry as required under the provisions of HCC (MSR), 2013 and misbehaved the members of the field verification team. The Principal of the college did not allow interacting with other faculty or staff and during the visitation he objected for close look and used abusive words against the team. During the OPD visit in the reception and registration room he objected to take photograph of central OPD register and snatched the personal mobile of the team and use abusive words and objected to continue the visitation. The management and administration did not cooperate the visitation team to do visitation as per norms i.e access to master, registers, access to staff for interaction, to take signature of staff. Further, the management did not provide the requisite documents by the team.

(ii) The Hospital is not genuinely functional with requisite genuine bed occupancy in IPD and requisite genuine average number of patient in OPD. … …..

(iii) No records of OT procedure ….

(iv) The detail list of existing teaching staff for the academic year 2018-19 is not available. ……

(v) to xv ….

(xvi) There is no dedicated/separate web site with requisite information required as per MSR for the homoeopathic college.”

5. It has also come on record that opportunity of hearing was afforded to the college on 14.8.18 to present their case for the deficiencies conveyed by Ministry's letter dated 2.8.18 It was pointed out that field verification of college is going on 13.8.18 to 14.8.18, therefore, college was granted another opportunity of hearing on their request to present their case for the shortcomings pointed out by the Ministry's notice dated 2.8.18 Second hearing was afforded to the college on 14.9.18 and thereafter it was observed that no students were seen in any of the departments, laboratories, class rooms, hospital etc. Though college claimed an average OPD of more than 230 patients, yet no patient was seen in the reception area. Non-functionality of the clinical laboratory, as no staff or student was seen working in the laboratory. Bed occupancy in IPD and average patients in OPD register for last one year was not available. There were several other deficiencies as have been pointed out in para 7 of order Annexure P/1 in detail by the Government of India, like no evidence was produced towards the payment made for the procurement of the equipments/instruments, library visitors register was not genuine, no student was seen working on any of the five computers, non-genuineness of the documents submitted in an attempt to mislead the hearing committee. It was also pointed out that ‘small pox’ was written in the column of OPD register which has been eradicated from the world. Thus, records were not genuine and registers were filled randomly.

6. This issue has been dealt by the High Court of Patna in the case of Union of India v. B.N.M Homoeopathic Medical College in L.P.A No. 1610/2017 vide order dated 13 March, 2018 wherein the orders of learned Single Judge were under challenge as to whether Ministry of AYUSH while noticing certain deficiencies in the college in question was competent to deny permission from conducting BHMS Course and not permitting them to take admission for the academic year 2017-18. It has quashed the orders of the learned Single Judge interfering in the discretion of the Central Govt. refusing permission to admit students.

7. It will not be out of place to note that as per the provisions contained in the Homoeopathic Central Council Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the HCC Act) and the provisions as contained in Homoeopathic Central Council (Minimum Standards Requirement of Homoeopathic Colleges and attached Hospitals) Regulation, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the HCC (MSR) Regulation, 2013, the Central Government has authority to deny permission to erring medical colleges. Similar issue has been decided by the M.P High Court in the case of Vasundhara Raje Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital v. Union of India. Reliance has also been placed to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Seva Mandal v. Union of India as reported in 2013 (3) Scale 213 wherein it has been held that Courts ought not to interfere with the decision of the expert bodies. It rejected the prayer of the institution to permit students to continue in unrecognized institutions & observed in case of Shri Morvi Sarvajanik Kelavni Mandal, Sanchalit MSKM BED College v. National Council for Teachers' Education, (2012) 2 SCC 16 that continuance of education in unrecognized institutions is unwarranted on sympathetic consideration. M.P High Court in the case of Sofia Homoeopathic Medical v. Union of India has rejected the plea of the petitioner that the HCC Act 1973 being silent in regard to procedure for stopping the admission could not have been pressed into service for denying permission for admission. It has been held that Regulation 3(5) provides that it is only when college fulfills the requirement by 31.012.2014 or within the extended period, permission shall be granted to undertake admission which will be for a period of up to five years. Regulation 5 is regarding inspection of a college after having been granted permission up to five years on receipt of complaint or for random checks done by the Central Government and/or by the CCH, both. Regulation 3(9) further mandates the penal consequences and provides that all the existing colleges which are not able to achieve full compliance of the requirement as per HCC (MSR) Regulations 2013 cannot be granted permission from academic year 2015-16 onwards. Chapter IIA containing Section 12 A and Section 12 B deals with the subjects namely “permission” for establishment of a new medical institution, new course of study, etc. Sub-section (1) of Section 12A specifically provides that “notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force:—

(a) no person shall establish a Homoeopathy Medical College; or

(b) No Homoeopathy Medical College shall (1) open a new or higher course of study or training (including post graduate course of study or training) which would enable students of each course of training to qualify himself for the award of any recognized medical qualification; or (2) increase its admission capacity in any course of study or training (including the post graduate course of study or training), except with the previous permission of central government obtained in accordance with the provisions of this Section. Sub-section (2), (3), (4) & (5) prescribed the procedures to be followed in the matter of obtaining permission under sub-section (1).

8. Section 33 specifically provides that the Central Council, may with the previous sanction of the Central Government make, by notification in Official Gazette, regulations generally to carry out the purposes of this Act, and, without prejudice to the generality of this power, such regulations may provide for -

(a) the manner of election of the President and the Vice-President of the Central Council;

(b) the management of the property of the Central Council and the maintenance and audit of its accounts;

(c) the resignation of members of the Central Council;

(d) the powers and duties of the President and Vice-President;

(e) the summoning and holding of meetings of the Central Council and the committees thereof, the times and places where such meetings are to be held, and the conduct of business thereat and the number of members necessary to constitute a quorum;

(f) the functions of the committees constituted under Section 9;

(g) the tenure of office, and the powers and duties of, the Registrar & other officers & servants of the Central Council;

(ga) the form of the scheme, the particulars to be given in such scheme, the manner in which the scheme is to be preferred and the fee payable with the scheme under clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 12A;

(gb) any other factor under clause (g) of sub-section (7) of Section 12A;

(h) The qualifications, appointment, powers and duties of, and procedure to be followed by, inspectors and visitors;

(i) The courses and period of study of practical training to be undertaken, the subjects of examination and the standards of proficiency therein to be obtained, in any University, Board or medical institution for grant of recognized medical qualification;

(j) the standards of staff, equipment, accommodation, training and other facilities for education in Homoeopathy;

(k) The conduct of professional examinations, qualifications of examiners and the conditions of admission to such examinations;

(l) The standards of professional conduct and etiquette and code of the ethics to be observed by practitioners of Homoeopathy;

(m) The particulars to be stated, and the proff of qualifications to be given in applications for registration under this Act;

(n) The manner in which and the conditions subject to which an appeal under Section 25 may be preferred;

(o) The fees to be paid on application and appeals under this Act; and

(p) Any matter for which under this Act provision may be made by regulations.

9. Thus, in view of such provisions, it is apparent that Central Government has ample authority to interfere in the matter of grant of permission and when the inspection carried by the council has found several deficiencies and it is the responsibilities of the CCH and Central Government to maintain the standards of Homoeopathic education, it cannot be said that action of the Government refusing permission to run the college is arbitrary or illegal. Thus, the petition fails and is dismissed.