Allowed

Karavali Ayurvedic Medical College v. the Union of India

Karnataka HC11 Sept 2023WP/14192/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging an order denying admission permission. The Court found the order non-speaking and non-compliant with prior directions. The petitioner was directed to be reconsidered by the NCISM, with admitted students protected.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 16.07.2021 quashed; matter remitted to 2nd Respondent (NCISM) to reconsider the claim.

Karavali Ayurvedic Medical College Vs the Union… — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 14192 OF 2021 (EDN-REG)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

KARAVALI AYURVEDIC MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE, AN INSTITUTION SPONSORED AND MANAGED BY G.R. EDUCATION TRUST (REGD) NEERMARGA, MANGALORE-575 029. REP. BY ITS CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, MR.ANIL KUMAR .G S/O LATE MR.K.GOPINATHA PILLAI AGED 54 YEARS, R/O BENGALURU-560 064.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by SUNITHA GANGARAJU Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

(BY SRI. MADHUSUDHAN R. NAIK, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SURAJ NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF AYURVEDA, YOGA AND NATUROPATHY, UNION SIDDHA AND HOMOEOPATHY (AYUSH) AYUSH BHAWAN, B BLOCK, G.P.O. COMPLEX, INA, NEW DELHI-110 023 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY/SPECIAL SECRETARY.

¶14

THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES 4^TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶17

BENGALURU-560 041 REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR.

¶18

NATIONAL COMMISSION OF INDIAN SYSTEM OF MEDICINE 61-65, INSTITUTIONAL AREA, JANAKPURI D-BLOCK, NEW DELHI – 110058 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C ULLAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI. B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 SMT. MANASIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.07.2021 PASSED BY THE R1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE R1 TO ACCORD / GRANT CONDITIONAL PERMISSION TO THE PETITIONER INSTITUTION TO CONDUCT UG-BAMS COURSE FOR THE ACADEMIC SESSION 2018-19 WITH AN INTAKE CAPACITY OF 60 SEATS.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated

¶25

16.07.2021 passed by the 1^st respondent vide annexure A

¶26

has filed the present writ petition.

¶27

Brief facts leading rise to filing of this petition are as under:

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶29

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 issued a notification for

¶30

consideration of the applications, inspections and grant of permissions. That 'the last date' by which the 1^st respondent to communicate the grant or denial of permission is to be notified on or before 31^st May of the relevant academic year. On 06.02.2018, respondent No.2 conducted a suo moto inspection of the petitioner – Institution and the inspectors opined that the institution had all the relevant infrastructure and facilities, recommended continuation of permission for academic year 2018-19 to be granted. The petitioner –institution was subjected to another inspection dated 21-22/05/2018. The Inspectors opined that the institution had all the requisite infrastructure and facilities recommended for 'continuation of permission' for the academic year 201819. The 1^st respondent issued a communication dated 16.08.2018 directing the petitioner to appear before a 'Hearing Committee' and to produce all relevant and valid documents, to substantiate the claim regarding the deficiencies pointed out. The petitioner appeared before

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶32

the Hearing Committee and submitted a written submission. The 1^st respondent without a proper consideration and incomplete contravention of the proceedings drawn by the Hearing Committee passed an order dated 25.09.2018 rejected the permission to admit students to the BAMS course for the academic year 2018-

¶33

The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 25.09.2018 preferred a writ petition in WP No.46238/2018. The Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated 05.02.2021 allowed the writ petition and quashed the order dated 25.09.2018 and remitted the matter to

¶34

the 1^st respondent to adjudicate the notice dated 16.08.2018 issued to the petitioner –Institution (Annexure-A), by considering the reply dated 24.08.2018 and recorded findings with regard to the compliance report submitted to the 1^st respondent expeditiously at any rate within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Pursuant to the order passed by the Division Bench the 1^st respondent on the basis of inspection report dated 06.02.2018 and revisited on 21-22/05/2018 passed an

¶35

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶36

order denying permission to the petitioner-Institution for taking admission to BAMS course with 60 UG seats under Section 13A of The Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 (for short 'the Act, 1970) for the academic session 2018-19. The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 16.07.2021 vide Annexure-A filed this writ petition.

¶37

Respondent No.1 filed a statement of objections contending that pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble Division bench in the aforesaid writ petition the 1^st respondent re-examined the reports and found that the petitioner-college could not produce sufficient documents/evidence to substantiate it's claim for grant of conditional permission for the academic year 2018-19. The petitioner could not fulfill the major deficiencies mentioned in para Nos.8 and 9 of the fresh order dated 16.07.2021 passed by the 1^st respondent. It is contended that the order passed by the 1^st respondent is in accordance with law and prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶38

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶39

Heard Sri. Madhusudhan R. Naik, learned Senior

¶40

counsel for petitioner, Sri. Gowthamdev C. Ullal, learned counsel for respondent No.1, Sri. B.S. Sachin, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and

¶41

Smt. Manasi Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.3.

¶42

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent is not in compliance with the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.46238/2018. He submits that this Court directed the 1^st respondent to consider a reply dated 24.08.2018 and record it's finding with regard to the compliance report submitted to the 1^st respondent. He submits that the 1^st respondent has not recorded any finding on the compliance report submitted to the 1^st respondent and simply reiterated the order dated 25.09.2018. The impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent is arbitrary and erroneous. He further submits that the matter requires reconsideration by the 1^st respondent as per Section 58 (2) (d) of the National

¶43

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶44

Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition.

¶45

Per contra, learned counsel for the 1^st respondent submits that pursuant to the direction issued by the Hon'ble Division bench of this Court the 1^st respondent considering the inspection report and compliance report passed an impugned order. He submits that the impugned order is in accordance with law. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶46

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that inspectors of the 2^nd respondent have pointed out the deficiencies in the petitioner-Institution by submitting two inspection reports. She submits that the petitioner has not complied with a deficiencies pointed out by the inspectors. She further submits that even if the matter is remitted no purpose would serve as the petitioner-Institution has not complied with the deficiencies pointed out by the inspectors. Hence, she submits that if this Court comes to

¶47

¶48

NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶49

a conclusion that matter requires remand, it has to be remanded to the 2^nd respondent as per Section 28 of the Act, 2020. Hence, she prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶50

Perused the records and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶51

It is not in dispute that the petitionerInstitution submitted an application for grant of permission to admit the students of 60 seats intake in BAMS course for the academic year 2017-18. The 2^nd respondent conducted a suo-moto inspection on 06.02.2018 and 2122/05/2018. The inspectors opined that the institution had all relevant infrastructure and facilities for continuation of permission for the academic year 2018-19. The Hearing Committee called upon the petitioner to appear in person for hearing on 24.08.2018 and produce the relevant records evidencing proof of compliance of deficiencies pointed out by the 2^nd respondent. The representatives of the petitioner submitted a compliance report and also enclosed relevant documents in support of such

¶52

9 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶53

compliance. The 1^st respondent vide order dated 25.09.2018 rejected the permission to admit students to BAMS course for the academic year 2018-19. The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 25.09.2018 preferred writ petition in W.P No.46238/2018. This Court vide order dated 05.02.2021 allowed the writ petition and

¶54

quashed the order dated 25.09.2018 and remitted the matter back to the 1^st respondent to adjudicate the notice dated 16.08.2018 issued to the petitioner Institution by considering the reply dated 24.08.2018 vide Annexure-E and recorded finding with regard to the compliance report

¶55

submitted to the 1^st respondent. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition, the 1^st respondent passed an order dated 16.07.2021 vide Annexure-A. This Court has perused Annexure-A. The respondent except extracting the deficiencies pointed out in the inspection reports dated 06.02.2018 and 2122/05/2018 passed an impugned order. The 1^st

¶56

respondent has not recorded it's findings with regard to compliance report submitted by the petitioner- Institution

¶57

10 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶58

to the 1^st respondent vide Annexure-E. The impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent is not in compliance with the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition. The 1^st respondent has not applied it's mind while passing the impugned order. Further, the impugned order is not a speaking order. Hence, on this ground alone the impugned order is liable to be quashed.

¶59

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 in order to buttress his arguments, she has placed reliance on the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/S. ASHWINI AYURVEDIC MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE VS. UNION OF INDIA BY MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE AND OTHERS in W.P.No.49756/2019 disposed of on 15.09.2022, wherein this Court held that in view of coming into force of Section 28 of the Act of 2020, it is deemed to be just and appropriate to dispose of the petition by directing respondent No.2-CCIM (presently NCISM) to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law in so far

¶60

11 - NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶61

as the additional intake of students, who are continuing their studies by virtue of the interim orders passed by this Court. This Court concurs with the finding recorded by the Co-ordinate bench of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition.

¶62

This Court is the opinion that it is just and appropriate to dispose of the petition by directing the respondent No.2 to reconsider the claim of the petitioner, in terms of the directions issued by this Court in W.P No.46238/2018 dated 05.02.2021 in accordance with law.

¶63

ORDER

¶64

The writ petition is allowed.

¶65

The impugned order dated 16.07.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 vide Annexure-A is quashed. Matter is remitted to the 2^nd respondent to adjudicate the claim of the petitioner in terms of the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition No.46238/2018 dated 05.02.2021.

¶66

12 -

¶67

NC: 2023:KHC:34149 WP No. 14192 of 2021

¶68

It is made clear that the respondents shall not disturb the students admitted for the academic year 2018-19 in the petitioner - Institution till the respondent No.2 takes a decision.

¶69

All the contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶70

SD/JUDGE

¶71

SKS

Karavali Ayurvedic Medical College v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karavali Ayurvedic Medical College v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Shivalingamma Vs Smt Kamalamma

V N Rangaiah Vs the Chief Secretary

Smt Hayath Bee W/O Sadanahalli Jabar Sab Vs Smt Najamunnissa W/O Shafiullah

Darshan Kumar M H Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. Bhargavi v Alva Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Dr Arjun Das Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences