Disposed

Kunj Bihari Brij Rani Welfare Trust, Lucknow Thru. Authorized Signatory Dr. Shyam Singh v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Ayush, New Delhi and 4 Others

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2024WRIC/9691/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging reduction of a BAMS college's intake from 60 to 42 seats for 2024-25 and rejection of its appeal. The court found the appeal had been filed before the wrong authority and directed the petitioner to file a fresh appeal before the Secretary, Ministry of Ayush, to be decided expeditiously within four days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file fresh appeal under Section 9(6) NCISM Act before Secretary, Ministry of Ayush, to be decided within four days; consequential relief steps if successful.

Kunj Bihari Brij Rani Welfare Trust, Lucknow… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:80462

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9691 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Kunj Bihari Brij Rani Welfare Trust, Lucknow Thru. Authorized Signatory Dr. Shyam Singh Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Ayush, New Delhi And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhanu Bajpai,Parth Anand Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Devak Vardhan,Umesh Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Mayank Manish, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Umesh Singh, leaned counsel for opposite party No.1, Sri Deeraj Awasthi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Devak Vardhar, learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 and learned State counsel for opposite party No.5.

¶7

In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party No.4 stands dispensed with.

¶8

Petition has been filed challenging letter dated 08 July, 2024 and 27 July, 2024 whereby permission to the petitioner institution has been granted for intake capacity of 42 seats for the academic session 2024-25 instead of the originally sanctioned 60 seats for the subject of Bachelor and Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery course. Also under challenge is the letter dated 09 September, 2024 whereby petitioner's appeal dated 01 August, 2024 has been rejected. Prayer for a direction to the concerned authority to decide petitioner's second appeal dated 11 September, 2024 has been sought.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in earlier years, petitioner was granted permission for intake of sanction 60 seats in the aforesaid course but has been drastically reduced to 42 seats for the academic session 2024-25. It is submitted that petitioner had filed an appeal against such reduction of seats but the same has been rejected as convened to the petitioner vide impugned order dated 09 September, 2024.

¶10

It is submitted that the said order was thereafter challenged by the petitioner institution in terms of Section 9(6) of the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020. It is submitted that the same is still pending consideration without any final decision thereupon, although the process for

¶11

counselling is stated to come to a close today at 5.00 pm.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for opposite parties on the basis of instructions submits that the appeal to be preferred under Section 9(6) of the Act, 2020 was required to be presented before the Secretary, Ministry of Ayush, Government of India, New Delhi, but has in fact been preferred before the Minister concerned and therefore could not be decided by the Secretary since he was not aware with regard to the said appeal. It is submitted that in case the petitioner furnishes a fresh appeal to the authority concerned it shall be decided in accordance with law expeditiously with appropriate consequent action being taken.

¶13

In view of submission advanced and particularly in view of fact that statutory appeal has already been filed by the petitioner although before a wrong authority, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh appeal before the Secretary, Ministry of Ayush, Government of India, through e-mail, today itself. In case, such an appeal is preferred, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4 days from today.

¶14

In case, the petitioner succeeds in his appeal, the concerned authority shall also take appropriate steps with regard to fulfillment of the relief which may be granted to the petitioner institution.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 3.12.2024 Reena/-

¶17

(Manish Mathur,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kunj Bihari Brij Rani Welfare Trust, Lucknow Thru. Authorized Signatory Dr. Shyam Singh v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Ayush, New Delhi and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunj Bihari Brij Rani Welfare Trust, Lucknow Thru. Authorized Signatory Dr. Shyam Singh v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Ayush, New Delhi and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Naresh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Stamp and Registration Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Lalit Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dr. Aditya Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Med.Health and Family Welfare Lko. and 3 Others

Madan Ji Shukla Pno. 842462859 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Kayam Singh Pharmacy College, Mainpur Thru. Its Manager Shiv Darshan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Technical Education, Lucknow and Others

Rahul Singh vs Learned Upayukt Stamp Ayodhya Region Ayodhya and 4 Others