Justice Vikas Mahajan, Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Grant Recognition To S.S. Ayurveda Medical College And Hospital
|The Delhi High Court allowed the Writ Petition filed by the students of the medical college.
The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to grant recognition to S.S. Ayurveda Medical College and Hospital which was established by Shree Vijay Shanti Suri Education Trust.
The Court was hearing a Writ Petition filed by the students of the aforesaid medical college.
A Single Bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan observed, “In the present case as well, though the respondent no.2/college was, and is still, not recognized, but the respondent no.3/university which has conducted or is conducting, the exams of the petitioners, is indisputably, a recognized university.”
Advocate Amit Prasad appeared on behalf of the Petitioners while SPC Farman Ali, Advocates Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, and M.A. Niyazi appeared on behalf of the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Trust/college had applied for recognition of college to the Central Council of Indian Medicine under Section 13A of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 for 60 seats in Under Graduate Course in Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (UG-BAMS) for the academic year 2018-19 vide its application in the year 2017. An inspection of the college was conducted, however, no decision in regard to recognition was communicated to college till the last date for counselling. The Trust/college, therefore, filed a Writ Petition seeking mandamus to the Respondents to pass an Order on its application for recognition as well as praying for permission to participate in the counselling process. In the interim, the High Court passed an Order whereby the college was permitted to proceed with admissions and counselling for 66 seats of UG-BAMS Course.
The Petitioners were admitted by the college on the basis of an Interim Order passed in a Writ Petition filed by the Respondent College. The Petitioners were not parties to the said Petition, nor the Respondent College was recognised at the time when the Petitioners were admitted in the college. In fact, the college was never recognised either prior to or any time subsequent to the admission of the Petitioners. However, the Petitioners continued in the college and were also permitted to take their exams with an intervention of the Court. 13 Petitioners cleared all their exams and were given provisional degrees by the University whereas 15 students were in the process of clearing their backlog exams or undergoing internships.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the above facts, noted, “Reference may also be had to the decision in Apollo College of Veterinary Medicine (supra) wherein the students were admitted in the college pursuant to the open entrance test of Rajasthan Pre Medical/Rajasthan Pre-Veterinary but the colleges were not recognised. The students had completed their entire course successfully but the said colleges were still not recognised, however, the University which had conducted the exams of the appellants therein was a recognised university. In light of the said facts, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that degrees possessed by the students ought to have been treated as valid degrees and accordingly, directed the Central Government to grant recognition to the colleges.”
The Court, therefore, issued the following directions –
(i) Respondent no.6/UOI shall grant recognition to the Respondent no.2/College insofar as the batch of Petitioners is concerned;
(ii) Respondent no.3/University shall issue permanent degrees to Petitioners subject to their passing all requisite exams and completing their internships;
(iii) Respondent nos. 1 and 4 shall recognise qualifications of the Petitioners and grant them permanent registrations as Medical Practitioners.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title- Shubhanshu Sharma and Ors. v. National Commission for Indian System of Medicine and Others (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:4909)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates Amit Prasad, Sanchit Gawri, Shubhankar Sengupta, and Aarush Bhatia.
Respondents: SPC Farman Ali, Advocates Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, M.A. Niyazi, Kumar Prashant, Parmod Kumar Vishnoi, Kartik Nigam, Samiksha, Usha Jamnal, Krishan Kumar, Sanjay Khanna, Pragya Bhushan, Tarandeep Singh, Vilakshana Dayma, Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Kirti Bhardwaj, Nehmat Sethi, and Arquam Ali.