Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24594 of 2019 Petitioner :- Arjun Singh And 13 Others Respondent :- Union Of India And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohit Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Avanish Mishra,Avijit Saxena,C.S.C.,Mahendra Pratap
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Petitioners are the students of respondent's college namely Glocal Medical College, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, and they are pursuing their second year of M.B.B.S. course in the said College.
The said College was granted letter for permission for the year 2016-2017 and also permitted to participate in counselling for the Academic Year 2016-17 for NEET Examination.
The petitioners - students were granted admission by the College on the last date of counselling (MOP-UP round), however, the students were not selected through the centralized counselling and were granted direct admission. As per the case of the petitioners - students, they were selected in the NEET examination 2016.
It is admitted case that respondent no.4 - Director General of Medical Education (DGME) has given permission to only 23 candidates as mentioned in the list provided by the DGME. However, 67 other students, to which, petitioners - students are also part, were granted admissions directly by the respondent - Medical College and they did not figure in the DGME list.
Anuragh Khanna, Learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners - students are from the NEET merit list. It has been further submitted that the respondent - University has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, being SLP (c) No.31037-31038 of 2016, challenging the order passed by this Court on 20.03.2017 wherein following order was passed by Apex Court:-
"Mr. A.K. Panda, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India prays for some time to obtain instructions in the matter.
List the matter on 3rd April, 2017.
As an interim measure, it is directed that the students prosecuting their studies in the petitioner-University in S.L.P. (c) Nos. 31037-31038 of 2016, may appear in the examination, but their results shall not be published. Needless to say, no equity shall be claimed on the basis of the present interim order."
Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that respondent - College has also filed writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, being Writ Petition (C) no.411 of 2017 for extension of benefit of the 'Letter of Permission' for the Academic Year 2017-18 also, which was disposed of, vide order dated 18.09.2017. The operative part of the said order is quoted hereinafter:-
"Having said that we do not intend to remit the matter to the Hearing Committee as it is not possible on the part of any authority at present to extend the benefit of Letter of Permission for the academic year 2017- 2019. However, regard being had to the totality of facts and circumstances, we direct the applications submitted for the academic year 2017-2019. The bank guarantee that has been submitted by the petitioner institution in pursuance of the conditional order passed by the Oversight Committee while granting renewal of Letter of Permission for the academic year 2016-2017 shall not be encashed by the Medical Council of India but the same shall be kept alive. Fresh inspection shall be conducted within a span of three months. The students who have been admitted in pursuance of the letter of permission granted for the year 2016-2017 shall be permitted to continue their studie Two aspects we would like to clarify. The institution or college appearing before the Hearing committee shall carry all the documents what it intends to produce to establish its case before the Hearing committee. The hearing Committee shall also think of granting adjounment to enable the institution to produce the documents so that no grievance remains to be agitated in the court of law in that regard.
With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs."
According to the petitioners, the respondent - Medical Council of India had communicated, vide letter dated 27.01.2017 to the College about the decision taken by Monitoring Sub-Committee as well as Executive Committee regarding the status of 67 students who were additionally admitted by the College without counselling. It was further mentioned in the said letter that the said 67 students should be discharged. The Medical Council of India has further communicated through letter dated 07.06.2017 to the College reiterating the same direction to discharge the said 67 students. The decision of the Monitoring Sub- Committee dated 09.01.2017 and decision of Executive Committee dated 13.01.2017 are quoted hereinafter:-
Decision dated 09.01.2017:-
"All the 23 candidates in the list given by DGME have been admitted however, the college has additionally admitted 67 students, whose name does not figure in the DGME list.
Accordingly all candidates whose name does not figure in DGME list or whose allotment letter issued by DGME has not been provided by the college should be discharged."
Decision dated 13.01.2017:-
"The Executive Committee of the Council approved the minutes of the Monitoring Sub-Committee meeting held on 09/07/2017. The Institute be asked to submit compliance within 2 weeks. Copy of the Discharged Notice be also sent to Secretary (ME), DME, affiliating University, State Medical Council & the nominee of the State/UT on the MCI."
The petitioners - students have now approached this Court by way of filling instant writ petition challenging the orders dated 22.01.2017 and 04.06.2017 passed by respondent - Medical Council of India.
Learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the petitioners - students came to know about the impugned order only on 02.07.2019 when it was placed by the Counsel for the Medical Council of India while hearing of Writ C No.19399 of 2019, filed by the petitioners - students before this Court. The said writ petition was dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file a fresh petition, vide order dated 02.07.2019, passed by this Court.
Learned Senior Counsel has placed reliance on orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 20.03.2017 and 18.09.2017 (referred above) in order to show that the petitioners - students are protected by these orders and they are continuing their studies. Further reliance has been placed on the judgment passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Saraswati Medical College Thru. President Dr. Rajat Mathur versus Union of India and others, wherein the Division Bench has set aside the communication sent by the Medical Council of India for discharging the students who have not been selected through counselling on the ground that the Colleges therein have send list of the admitted students to the Medical Council of India. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the impugned order be set aside following the said judgment.
We have perused the records and considered the submissions made by learned Senior Counsel. It is an admitted fact that petitioners - students are part of the list of 67 students who have not been selected through counselling and are selected additionally/directly by the said College. It is also an admitted fact that these 67 students does not figure in the DGME list. The respondent - College has not acted upon the impugned orders passed by respondent - Medical Council of India regarding the discharge of these 67 students.
From the perusal of the orders dated 20.03.2017 and 18.09.2017 as mentioned hereinabove, passed by the Supreme Court, it appears that the petitioners - students were also granted benefit of the said orders, and as such, they continued their studies. However, it appears that the impugned orders dated 22.01.2017 and 04.06.2017 passed by Medical Council of India were not placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court despite the order dated 18.09.2017 having passed later on. Though the Writ Petition (C) no.411 of 2017 was disposed of, SLP (C) no.31037- 31038 of 2016 is still pending and till date, the impugned orders have also not been placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the College or by the students. On one hand, the impugned orders are not placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court despite continuing their studies on the basis of the interim order passed by Supreme Court and on the other hand, they have filed the present writ petition before this Court challenging the impugned order.
In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that since the interim order has been passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the said matter is still pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it will not be appropriate for this Court to pass any order on merit in the present petition. Therefore, this writ petition is finally disposed of, at this stage, with the liberty to the petitioners - students to approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court, if so advised, ventilating their grievances by filling an appropriate application or petition.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019
A. Dewal