CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench

Mahavir Institute Of Medical Sciences & Anr vs Union Of India & Anr

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 23 May 2018 · Citation: (2019) 14 SCC 798

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.M. Khanwilkar, J · Navin Sinha, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 487 Of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 326 words

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Essentially, two reliefs have been claimed in this writ petition. The first relief is to quash and set aside the recommendation submitted by the Medical Council of India dated 24.3.2018. However, this relief is not pressed during the arguments.

The second relief which is an alternative relief, is to direct the respondent no. 1 - Union of India to afford a personal hearing to the petitioner-institute.

In the context of this relief, our attention has been drawn by Mr. Sandeep Sethi, learned ASG appearing for the Union of India to the schedule appended to the writ petition incorporated in the notification dated 29.12.2015, which clearly provides for personal hearing after receipt of reply/compliance. Learned counsel for the petitioner has candidly accepted that such hearing was given to the petitioner-institute on 16.1.2018.

The grievance of the petitioner, however, appears to be in respect of some further material gathered by the petitioner-institute after the conclusion of the personal hearing on 16.1.2018, and the petitioner wants that material to be duly considered by the Union of India before taking the final decision in the matter.

The petitioner-institute is free to submit that material supported by an affidavit by 5.00 p.m. tomorrow. It is open to the Union of India to consider the same before taking the final decision in the matter, if already not taken. In case, the Union of India is of the opinion that the said material cannot be taken into account, it may record reasons therefor, which can be assailed by the petitioner-institute in appropriate proceedings, if and when occasion arises.

We are not expressing any opinion on the correctness of the submissions of the petitioner institute that such further material need be considered by the Union of India after conclusion of the personal hearing. All aspects in that behalf are kept open.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.