Disposed

Gitam Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (Gimsr) and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr.

Delhi HC16 May 2018W.P.(C)/5236/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this order disposed by the High Court of Delhi, the petitioner sought quashing of MCI recommendations disapproving a medical college admission scheme. The court directed the Supreme War Assets Commission to decide the pending application within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Union of India to take a final decision on the petitioners' application within ten days and communicate the same.

Gitam Institute of Medical Sciences and Research… — Education and Admissions | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~38

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5236/2018 & C.M. No.20287-20288/2018

¶4

GITAM INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND RESEARCH (GIMSR) AND ANR. ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rajesh Gupta, Adv. & Mr.Harpreet Singh, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA AND AN	R. ..... Respondents
Through	Ms.Monika Arora, Adv. with
	Mr.Kushal Kumar, Adv. for UOI.
	Mr.T. Singhdev, Adv. for R-2/MCI.
	Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Adv. with
	Mr.R.M. Tripathi, Adv.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 16.05.2018

¶10

Vide the present petition, the petitioners/Institutes have sought inter alia quashing of the Respondent No. 2’s recommendation dated 24.03.2018, whereby the respondent no.2 had recommended disapproval of the petitioners’ application/scheme under Section 10A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, for renewal of permission for the fourth batch of the MBBS course with an intake of 150 students for the Academic Year 2018-19. The petitioners have also sought quashing of the Oversight Committee’s decision dated 28.03.2018, approving the respondent no.2’s aforesaid recommendation. The petitioners have also sought the issuance of a

¶11

direction to respondent no.2, to accept their aforesaid scheme and grant them a letter of permission.

¶12

Ms.Arora, who appears on advance notice for the respondent no.1, submits that the respondent no.1 will pass a final order deciding the petitioners’ pending application as expeditiously as possible.

¶13

Mr.T. Singhdev, learned counsel for respondent no.2, submits that its recommendations in respect of the petitioners’ application have already been sent to respondent no.1 on 20^th April, 2018 itself. In view of the categoric statement made by learned counsel for the respondent no.2 that the recommendations have already been forwarded on 20^th April, 2018, the respondent no.1 is directed to take a final decision on the petitioners’ application within ten days from today.

¶14

Needless to say that the said final decision taken by respondent no.1, will be communicated to the petitioners who will be free to take legal recourse as permissible under law.

¶15

The petition and pending applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶16

DASTI under signatures of Court Master.

¶17

MAY 16, 2018/aa

¶18

REKHA PALLI, J

Gitam Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (Gimsr) and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gitam Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (Gimsr) and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Six Dee Telecom Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Central Board of Trustees, E.P.F. Organization

Jaswant Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Gajraj Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

K.D. College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Shamshuddin Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

Sh Bhagwan Dass and Ors. Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation

Ayush Tiwari Vs Faculty of Law & Ors.

Garuav Dahiya Vs State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

K.D. College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

College of Modern Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Ankita Meena Vs University of Delhi

Dr Raj Kumar Sharma & Anr. Vs G N C T of Delhi & Ors.

Indira Ahuja Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Deepak Vs UOI & Ors.