Disposed

Krishnaveni M P H W (F) Training Institute v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2021WP/20122/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the competent authorities to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.08.2021 as an application for renewal of a nursing course under Resolution No.17 of the Indian Nursing Council and dispose of it within four months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representation as an application under Resolution No.17 of the Indian Nursing Council and dispose of it within four months.

Krishnaveni M P H W (F) Training Institute… — Education and Admissions | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20122 of 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner was granted permission to run a nursing course by way of G.O.Ms.No.192 Health, Medical & Family Welfare (K2) Department, dated 23.11.2013. This permission was renewed on 04.07.2014 granting recognition upto 2017. However, admissions to this course did not take place, according to the petitioner, from the year 2015 onwards. As there was a renewal in the admission process for the nursing course, the petitioner sought renewal its earlier recognition by way of a representation dated 19.08.2021, requesting respondent Nos.2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to restart the nursing course.

¶5

Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in considering his request, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶6

Sri K.Raja Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is entitled for renewal of recognition and permission in accordance with the resolution No.16 passed by the Indian Nursing Council on 29.10.2014.

¶7

The learned Government Pleader for Medical & Health contends that this writ petition is premature, as the representation of the petitioner is 19.08.2021 and the petitioner

¶8

¶9

cannot rush to this Court at such an early stage. He further submits that the resolution No.16 would not apply in the present case, as the admission to the institution had been suspended since 2015 and any application for renewal would have to be made within five years of such closure.

¶10

A perusal of the resolution No.16 would show that a nursing programme is deemed to be closed, wherever admissions are not made for two consecutive academic years. However, it would still be open to such an institution to submit an application to restart the programme by paying first inspection fee within five years after such closure. The advantage or benefit that would accrue to an institution by resolution No.16 is that the guidelines applicable when the institute was first permitted to run a nursing course would continue to be applicable irrespective of any change thereafter.

¶11

As rightly contended by the learned Government Pleader, the benefit of resolution No.16 would not be available to the petitioner, as the petitioner had not admitted any students, even according to the petitioner from 2015.

¶12

However, this would not mean that the petitioner cannot apply for renewal of the recognition at all. It would only mean that resolution No.17, which is the provision relating to grant of permission for starting a nursing programme would still be applicable.

¶13

¶14

In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.08.2021 as an application under resolution No.17 of the Indian Nursing Council and dispose of the said application within a period of four (4) months. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶16

____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J. 16.09.2021 SDP

¶17

¶18

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.20122 of 2021

¶20

16-09-2021

¶21

SDP

Krishnaveni M P H W (F) Training Institute v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnaveni M P H W (F) Training Institute v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N. Ravi Kumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Vadde Venkateswarlu Naidu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Kunche Vijaya Kumari Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Gooli Ramireddy Vs Dy.Commr/Endoments/Kurnool and Another

A. Venkat Reddy, Vs Basi Reddy

Sri Lakshmi Venkateswaraa Educational Society Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh