Krishna Mohan Medical College And Hospital Chairman Shri Kishan Choudhary vs. Union Of India Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare Secretary
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Mention Memo
Before:
Hon'ble Arun Mishra, Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice
Stage:
ORDERS (INCOMPLETE MATTERS / IAs / CRLMPs)
Remarks:
Disposed off
Listed On:
17 May 2018
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Interlocutory Applications:
73716/2017,67006/2018,
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.9 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition (Civil) No(s).448/2017 KRISHNA MOHAN MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for appropriate orders/directions) Date : 17-05-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gaurav Bhatia,AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Maninder Singh,ASG UOI Mr. Vipin Kumar,Adv. Ms. Rashmi Malhotra,Adv. For Mr. G.S. Makker,Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Sharma,AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
1. With respect to the academic year 2017-18, a Three-Judge Bench of this Court has decided against the petitioner-college in a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, on September 1, 2017. As such for the academic year 2017- 18 a decision has already been rendered by a Three-Judge bench of this Court and later on, for the year 2018-19 inspection was sought to be made by a team of the Medical Council of India (MCI), but that could not be done. The Digitally signed by BALA PARVATHI Date: 2018.05.21 Signature Not Verified
16:45:04 IST Reason:
MCI has sent a communication dated 30.10.2017, stating that no inspection could be made by their team as they were not permitted to do so. There was a lock put at the doors of the premises and key was not available and as such no inspection could be made. This fact that the premises was locked has been disputed by Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
2. As the Central Government is required to pass the final order in this regard, it would be open to the petitioners to question it before the appropriate forum/court, in accordance with law, as and when the order is passed.
3. In view of the above, nothing further survives in this matter for adjudication. The writ petition and pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
(Sarita Purohit) (Jagdish Chander) Court master Branch Officer
2