caselaws.org
Supreme Court of India
Saraswati Educational … vs Union Of India on 24 February, 2021Author: L. Nageswara Rao
Bench: Hon’Ble The Justice, L. Nageswara Rao, S. Ravindra Bhat
Non-Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Writ Petition (C) No.40 of 2018
Saraswati Educational Charitable Trust & Anr.
…. Petitioners (s)
Versus
Union of India & Ors.
…. Respondent (s)
With
Writ Petition (C) No.291 of 2019
JUDGMENT
L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
1. Writ Petition (C) No.40 of 2018 has been filed by
Saraswati Educational Charitable Trust challenging the notice
dated 29th September, 2017, issued by the second
Respondent-Medical Council of India by which the Saraswati
Medical College (hereinafter referred to as “the College”) was
directed to discharge 132 out of 150 students admitted in the
first year Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS)
Signature Not Verified course for the academic year 2017-2018.
Digitally signed by
Madhu Bala
Date: 2021.02.24
16:48:21 IST
Reason:
1 | Page
2. Writ Petition (C) No.291 of 2019 has been filed by 71
students who have been admitted in first year MBBS course
for the academic year 2017-2018 in Saraswati Medical
College to permit them to continue with their studies and to
direct the Registrar, Uttar Pradesh Medical Council, the
seventh Respondent herein to declare their results of the first
year MBBS course.
3. Saraswati Medical College was established by Saraswati
Educational Charitable Trust in the year 2016. The College
applied for grant of renewal of permission for admission of
150 students for the academic year 2017-2018. An
inspection was conducted in November, 2016 followed by a
second surprise inspection by the assessing team on 21 st and
22nd November, 2016. Renewal of permission was not
granted by an order dated 10 th August, 2017 which was
challenged by the Petitioner in Writ Petition No.515 of 2017
before this Court. This Court by its judgment dated 1 st
September, 2017 directed the Respondents therein to permit
the College to take part in the counselling process for the
year 2017-2018. The cut-off date for completion of
admission in respect of the College was extended till 5 th
September, 2017. The Respondents were directed to make
available students willing to take admission in the College
2 | Page
through central counselling in order of merit. The Petitioner
No.2 requested the Director General of Medical Education
and Training- Respondent No.3 herein to provide a list of
students from the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test
(NEET), 2017 merit list to enable the College to make
admission before 5th September, 2017. An email was sent by
the College to the third Respondent with the same request
for providing the list of students at 6:41 p.m. on 1 st
September, 2017. On 4th September, 2017, the Management
of the College reiterated the request of allotment of students
for admission into first year MBBS course.
4. The third Respondent informed all eligible students
about the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.515
of 2017 and asked them to apply/register themselves for
admission to first year MBBS course in the College from 4 th
September, 2017, 6:00 p.m. to 5th September, 2017, 1:00
p.m. 735 students applied/registered within the time
schedule for admission to 150 students in the College. On 5 th
September, 2017, the third Respondent forwarded a list of
150 students on the basis of their merit amongst 735
students. Only 9 out of 150 students reported and
completed their admission formalities by 7:00 p.m. on 5 th
September, 2017, according to the College. A letter was
3 | Page
written by the College at 7:00 p.m. on 5 th September, 2017 to
the third Respondent requesting the third Respondent to
provide students from the list of 735 students. Without
waiting for a response from the third Respondent, at 7:32
p.m. on 5th September, 2017 the College issued an urgent
notice informing all the 735 candidates who opted for
admission pursuant to the notice issued by third Respondent
on 4th September, 2017 to avail the opportunity of admission
in the College. It was stated in the said notice that
admissions will be made in the order of merit from amongst
735 students and the admissions would be completed by
11:59 p.m. on 5th September, 2017. In the meanwhile, 9
more students from the original list of 150 students sent by
the third Respondent were admitted by the College. The
College filled up 132 seats on 05.09.2017. On receipt of
information about the admission of 132 students by the
Petitioner-College on its own without being recommended by
the third Respondent, the Medical Council of India by a letter
dated 29th September, 2017 directed the Principal, Saraswati
Medical College to discharge the 132 students who were
admitted in violation of the Medical Council of India
Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997
(hereinafter, ‘the Regulations’). This Writ Petition has been
4 | Page
filed challenging the letter dated 29.09.2017 in which notice
was issued on 25.01.2018. The students continued to study
and were permitted to take the examinations for the first
year MBBS course by the Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj
University, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.
5. Thereafter, this Court by an order dated 22th July, 2019
directed the result of the first year MBBS course to be
declared provisionally, subject to the outcome of the Writ
Petition. It was made clear in the said order that the
students shall not claim any equities on the declaration of
the result. I.A. No.14176 of 2021 has been filed by the
students seeking a direction to permit them to appear in the
second year MBBS examinations.
6. We have heard Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Mr. Ranjit Kumar and
Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
College, Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Mr. Nikhil Nayyar,
learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Trideep Pais, learned counsel for
the students and Mr. Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel for the
Medical Council of India. The contention of the College is
that 132 students were admitted on 5 th September, 2017
from the list of 735 candidates who have applied pursuant to
a notice dated 4th September, 2017, strictly on the basis of
merit amongst those who approached the College under
5 | Page
extraordinary circumstances. It was argued on behalf of the
College that the third Respondent was lethargic in not
allotting sufficient number of students for admission to first
year MBBS 2017-2018 till 4th September, 2017 though he was
informed about the order passed by this Court on 1 st
September, 2017 itself. On 5 th September, 2017, the third
Respondent allotted only 150 students out of whom initially 9
and thereafter 9 students took admission. The third
Respondent was informed about the fact that only a few
students took admission. However, the third Respondent did
not allot students from the list of 735 students. Having no
other alternative, the College made admissions from the list
of 735 candidates who have applied pursuant to the notice
issued by the third Respondent on 4 th September, 2017. It
was also argued on behalf of the College that the admissions
were based on merit of the candidates who have applied and
till date there is no complaint from any student that he/she
was ignored in spite of being more meritorious than the
students who were admitted.
7. The students pleaded ignorance about any illegality or
irregularity in the matter of their admission to the first year
MBBS course for the year 2017-2018. They responded to the
notice issued by the third Respondent on 4th September,
6 | Page
2017. They were hopefully waiting for their admission, in
case the 150 students who have been allotted to the College
do not join. Only 18 from the list of 150 students sent by the
third Respondent joined the College. Pursuant to the urgent
notice, they participated in the selection process conducted
by the College and were admitted on the last date fixed by
this Court i.e. 5th September, 2017. As they cannot be held
responsible for any violation of the Regulations, if any, they
request this Court to permit them to complete the course as
they are all NEET qualified candidates and their names were
in the list of 735 students who applied pursuant to the notice
issued by third Respondent on 4th September, 2017.
8. The learned counsel for the Medical Council of India
relied upon Regulation 5 A of the Medical Council Regulations
on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 to argue that all
admissions to the MBBS course shall be on the basis of the
merit list of the NEET. Admissions shall be made from the list
sent by the Director General Medical Education on the basis
of ranking of the students in NEET. The College can make
admissions of students allotted by the Director General
Medical Education. In case students from the list of 150 did
not join before the last date, the College should have
approached this Court for extension of time and for a
7 | Page
direction to the Director General Medical Education to allot
more students. It was argued on behalf of the Medical
Council of India that the students who were admitted
contrary to the Regulations are not entitled to claim any
equity and the College which acted in blatant violation of the
Regulation is liable to be penalized suitably.
9. Regulation 5 A of the Regulations provides for
counselling for admission to MBBS course in all medical
educational institutions on the basis of merit list of NEET.
According to the said Regulations, no admissions can be
made by the Petitioner-College on its own. (See: Modern
Dental College and Research Centre & Ors. v. State of
Madhya Pradesh & Ors.1 and State of Maharashtra and
Others v. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth and Others 2). By an
order dated 22nd September, 2016 in State of Madhya
Pradesh v. Jainarayan Chouksey & Ors.3, this Court held
that all admissions to medical colleges shall be made only as
per the centralized counselling done by the State
Governments.
10. The College ought not to have admitted 132 students
by conducting a selection on its own without requesting the
1 (2016) 7 SCC 353
2 (2016) 9 SCC 401
3 (2016) 9 SCC 412
8 | Page
third Respondent to send more candidates. The third
Respondent cannot be blamed for any delay on his part in
carrying out the directions issued by this Court by its order
dated 1st September, 2017 in Writ Petition No.515 of 2017.
The College sent an email to the third Respondent at 6:32
p.m. on 1st September, 2017. Admittedly, 2nd and 3rd
September were not working days. The third Respondent
acted swiftly on 4th September 2017 and sought for
applications from interested students for admission to the
college in the first-year MBBS course. 735 students made
applications. 150 meritorious students out of 735 were
allotted to the College for admission to the first-year MBBS
course for the academic year 2017-2018. Only 9 out of 150
students, according to the College took admission. The third
Respondent cannot be said to have been negligent. On the
other hand, the College ought not to have issued a notice at
7:30 p.m. on 5th September, 2017 and admitted 132 students
in four hours. Admissions were made by the College from
students who have approached the college after 7:30 p.m. on
5th September, 2017. It is very difficult to accept the
submission on behalf of the College that students who were
not in the list of 150 students, sent by the Director General
Medical Education were all waiting for their admission after
9 | Page
7.30 p.m. on 5th September 2017. We reject the submission
of the College that there was no other alternative, except to
make admission from the list of 735 students who have
applied pursuant to the notice dated 4 th September, 2017
issued by the third Respondent.
11. The students who have secured admission cannot be
said to be innocent as they knew fully well that their names
were not recommended by the Director General Medical
Education. We also do not agree that students and their
parents were not aware that their admissions in College are
contrary to the Regulations. In spite of the letter dated 29 th
September, 2017 issued by the Medical Council of India, the
College did not discharge the students. The said direction
issued by the Medical Council of India was not stayed by this
Court. In spite of this, the students continued their first
year MBBS course and managed to write the first year MBBS
course examinations after being permitted by the University.
Thereafter, they approached this Court for declaration of
their results for the first year MBBS course examinations
which was granted. 6 students out of 132 students failed in
their first year examination. At present, 126 students have
completed their second year MBBS course and are seeking
10 | P a g e
permission to appear and write the examination for second
year MBBS.
12. The admission of 132 students in the College for the
academic year 2017-2018 being completely contrary to the
Regulations, the Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed.
However, taking note of the fact that the students have
completed the second year MBBS course, cancelling their
admissions at this stage would not serve any useful purpose.
The students who joined the College knowing fully well that
their admissions are contrary to the Regulations are directed
to do community service for a period of two years after
completing their MBBS course. The National Medical
Commission shall decide the details and workout the
modalities of the community service to be rendered by the
132 students. The Respondent No.6-University is directed to
conduct the second year MBBS examination for 126 students
admitted in the Petitioner-College and who completed their
second year course at the earliest and declare their results.
They shall be permitted to complete the MBBS course. This
direction is issued only to save the students from losing three
academic years in the peculiar facts and circumstances of
this case and shall not be treated as a precedent.
11 | P a g e
13. Being aware of the fact that admissions cannot be
made from students not allotted by the third Respondent, the
College admitted 132 students on its own. Thereafter, the
College permitted the students to continue their studies in
spite of the direction by the Medical Council of India to
discharge the students not being stayed. Intentional violation
of the Regulations by the Petitioner-College while granting
admission to 132 students in the first year MBBS course for
the academic year 2017-2018 cannot be condoned. The
Petitioner-College is directed to deposit an amount of Rupees
Five Crores in the Registry of this Court within a period of 8
weeks from today. The Petitioners are directed not to recover
the amount from the students in any manner whatsoever.
We direct the National Medical Commission to constitute a
Trust which shall include the Accountant General of the State
of Uttar Pradesh, an eminent educationist and a
representative of the State of Uttar Pradesh as Members of
the Trust. The Trust constituted to manage the amount of
Rupees Five Crores to be deposited by the Petitioner-College
shall extend financial assistance to needy students seeking
admission to medical colleges in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
An Action Taken Report along with the copy of the Trust-Deed
12 | P a g e
shall be filed by the National Medical Commission within a
period of 12 weeks from today.
14. The Writ Petitions are disposed of with the above
directions.
……………………………J.
[L. NAGESWARA RAO]
………………………….J
.
[S. RAVINDRA BHAT]
New Delhi,
February 24, 2021.
13 | P a g e
Comments