High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 08 UK CK 0022

Dr. Taukeer Ahmad & others vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 2 August 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J
RESULT
List this case on 16.08.2018
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 209 of 2018, 2157 of 2017, 2572 of 2017, 2574 of 2017, 3161 of 2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 397 words

SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J.

1.

All the petitioners before this Court are doctors and most of them, barring Dr. Taukeer Ahmad (petitioner in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 209 of 2018)

has completed their post-graduation degree in M.D. Radiology. Dr.Taukeer Ahamd has completed his post-graduation degree in Bio-Chemistry.

2.

In all cases, for the medical course undergone by the petitioners, the Medical Council of India had granted “letter of permission†under Section

10-A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Learned counsel for the Medical Council of India has apprised this Court that when the “letter of

permissionâ€​ is granted, recognition in normal cases follows until deficiency is detected in the college.

3.

For the reason best known to the respondents, though the petitioners had already undergone the course, but their degree is still not recognized. The

net result is that they are not able in getting job as a senior resident in any medical college.

4.

Neither the Medical College, which is a Government College nor the Medical Council of India has been able to give a satisfactory reply before this

Court. Admittedly, the recognition has not been granted as the college was not having sufficient medical staff required for recognition.

5.

There is a serious lapse on the part of the Medical Council of India, inasmuch as even though they had clearly detected a deficiency in the medical

college, they continued to allow this medical college to fill seats in future years as well. Similarly the medical college is also at fault for having admitted

students in such P.G. Courses where recognition was not there. The students who had undergone these courses, had a legitimate expectation that

since they have undergone such course in a Government Medical College, the recognition will follow.

6.

Before proceeding in the matter, this Court would like that Secretary, Medical Education, Government of Uttarakhand and the Secretary, Medical

Council of India, New Delhi to give a reply before this Court as to why an exemplary cost and penalty be not imposed on them against each of the

petitioner as they have failed in their statutory duty and spoiled the career of these students.

7.

Let a detail reply be filed within two weeks.

8.

List this case on 16.08.2018 in the daily cause list.

9.

Let a certified copy of this order be issued within twenty-four hours on payment of usual charges.