Supreme Court of India
HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT., LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
- Citation
- 2014 INSC 646
- Decided
- 25 September 2014
- Disposal
- Disposed off
Holding
The Court clarified that the 18 September 2014 order applies to all similarly situated private medical institutions seeking increased intake, mandates identical fee structures for management and state quotas, requires only a state‑quota list, and excludes institutions disqualified by the MCI or Central Government.
Summary
The Supreme Court issued clarifications to its earlier interim order dated 18 September 2014 concerning admissions to private medical colleges. It held that the order also applies to institutions that sought an increase in intake capacity but were denied permission after any renewal or inspection in the current academic year. The Court mandated that fees for students admitted under the management quota must be the same as those for the state quota and that only a single state‑quota list should be sent to private colleges, eliminating a separate management‑quota list. Institutions disqualified by the Medical Council of India or the Central Government remain excluded from the benefit. The petitioners subsequently withdrew their writ petition, leading to its dismissal.
Issues considered
- The scope of applicability of the Supreme Court's 18 September 2014 order to private medical colleges seeking increased intake capacity.
- Whether management‑quota admissions must be charged at the same fee levels as state‑quota admissions.
- Whether a separate management‑quota list can be prepared for private institutions under the order.
- The effect of disqualification by the Medical Council of India or the Central Government on the applicability of the order.
Subjects
medical college admissionsmanagement quotastate quotafee structureSupreme Court interim orderMedical Council of Indiaintake capacitywithdrawal of petition
Judgment
, (2014) 14.S.C.R. 1367 .· '.·· 1: 0 ~.J2
HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR.HOSPITAL PVT. ·.,,A
LTD. - .:'·', ,-1
. .
v.
~~
UNION OF INDIA &ORS.
'•. i. - ,-
(I.A. Nos. 4 and .5)
h:
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 469 of 2014) , . I
SEPTEMBER 25, 2014
c
[ANIL R. DAVE, VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND
UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.]
Education/Educational Institutions:
Medical admissions - Interim directions dated o
18.9.2014 by Supreme Court regarding medical colleges
facing non-removal of recognition - Clarifications - Held:
Order shall also apply to cases where colleges or institutions
were seeking increase in intake capacity and in the current .
year have been denied permission to admit students after E
first or second or third or fourth renewal /inspection - Such
institutions where renewal/inspection with respect to increase
in capacity were conducted in the current academic year are
also entitled to the benefit under the order date 18.9.2014-
The order shall also apply to all similarly situated institutions F
irrespective of the fact whether any petitions were or are
pending in Supreme Court or in any of the High Courts or
even if they had not approached any court at all- The order
shall not apply to. colleges or institutions which have been
disqualified by the Medical Council of India and/or the Central G
Government and have been prohibited from making any
admissions for the current academic year 2014-15- There
shall not be any management quota list to be sent to private
colleges or institutions taking benefit under order dated
18.9.2014 - The management quota shall also be filled H·
1367
. 1368 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 14 S.C.R.
A through the State list and the fees chargeable for the
management quota shall also be charged at the same levels
and rates as applicable to State quota list.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: I.A. Nos. 4 & 5 in Writ
Petition (Civil) No. 469 of2014.
B
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
(
WITH
I.A. No. 3 in W.P.(C) No. 705 of 2014
C I.A. No. 6 in SLP (C) No. 21765 of 2014
. '
I .A. No. 2 in SLP (C) No. 22755 and 22756 of 2014
I.A. No 1-2 in SLP (C) No. 22758-22159 of 2014
I.A. No 2 in SLP (C) No. 23777 and 25763 of 2014
D I.A. No....... in SLP (C) No. 23476 of 2014
SLP (C) No. 24154 and 23561 of 2014
I.A. No 3-4, 5-6 & 7-8 in SLP (C) No. 23528-23529 of
2014 .
E
LA. No. 3,4,5, & 6 in W.P.(C) No . .799 of 2014
W.P.(C) No, 836 and 523 of 2014
LA. No. 2 & 3 in W.~.(C) No. 883 of 2013
F LA. No. 3 in SLP (C)No. 21517 of 2014
I.A. No. 3 in W.P.(C) No. 757 of 2014
.
Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG, S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, R.P. Bhat,
V. Giril, Basava Prabhu S. Patil, Krishnamoorthy Ramamoorthy,
Koka Raghava Rao, A. Sharan, Nidhesh Gupta, Kapil .Sibal,
G K.V. Vishvanathan, Vikas Singh, P.S. Patwalia, Harin P. Rawal,
Guru Krishna Kumar, P. Vishwanatha Shetty, Sr.Advs., lrshad
Ahmed, AAG, Bina Madhavan; Ms. Praseena Elizabeth
Joseph, Ms. Akanksha Mehra, Ravindra .Keshavarao
(For M/s Lawyer's Knit & Co.), D.K. Chidananda, Rakesh K.
H
HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT. 1369
LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA& ORS.
Sharma, M. Gireesh Kumar,Ankur S. Kulkarni, Sriram P., Vijay A
Kumar, K.L. Sastry, Amit Kumar Srivastava, Hireesh Kumar,
Amit Kumar, Ramesh Alanki, Ms. Rekha Bakshi, Ankit
Rajgarhia, A.K. Kaul, Naresh Sharma, K.P. Gautam, K.K.
Sharma, Avijit Mani Tripathi, Atul Kumar, R.D. Upadhyay,
Giridhar G. Upadhya'{, Awadesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Asha B
Upadhyay, Sanjay Bhatt, Rudra Prasad, Dushyant Kumar,
Rabin Majumder, Ashish Kumar, Ravinder Kumar Katna,
Neeraj Shekhar, Prasanth P., Amit Jaiswal, Neeraj Shekhar,
Ashutosh Thakur, Rana Prashant, Gaurav Sharma, Prateek
Bhatia, Amandeep Kaur, Arch it Upadhyay, R. K. Rathore, Ms. C
Rekha Pandey, R. S. Nagar, Ms. Sunita Sharma, M. Khairati,
D. S. Mahra, Rc:ighavendra S. Srivastav, Amit Pal, Rahat
Bansal, Abhisht Kumar, Sumer Singh, Som Raj Chaudhary,
Aditya Singla, Ms. Supriya Juneja, Ms. Priya Puri, Sharan
Thakur, Tara, Vijay Kumar Paradesi, Ramesh Babu M. R., . D
Kuna! Verma, Si.ldhanshu S. Chaudhari, Advs. for the
appearing parties.
The following Order of the Court was passed:
ORDER E
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we deem
it appropriate to issue following clarifications with regard to
our earlier order dated 181h September, 2014. These
clarifications shall be read into the said order as if they were
always part thereof : - F
1. The order dated 1ath September, 2014 shall also apply
to cases where colleges or institutions were seeking increase
in intake capacity and in the current year have been denied
permission to admit students after first or second or third or
forth renewal/inspection. In our view such institutions where G
Renewal/Inspection with respect to increase in capacity were
conducted in the present academic year are also entitled to
the benefit underthe order dated 1ath September, 2014.
H
'f37b. ; \,'SUPREME COURT REP-ORTS ~)~[2ci14]14 s:c.R.
.::,.;..-,._: ;'.:_: :.. i[~i!-'li ::1~::-1. ;,:·;;; ;; j < ~- ;~; J -,
A ' .. , I 2. We also 'clarify that f~es charg~able fr~rn the students
admitted pursuant to our order dated 1sth, September,12014
shall be atthe same rates as applicable.to:the,students in
. Government medical
--.,1,..-·:·-.~····--:---,-
colleges in respective
.. ·. .-·· ,,,,_, -.-. ·-i··--
Stafos'and such
·:·.-r :--._ -- -.-··~,,.,,;
fees.shall be' at the same levels as that ofthe Government
·. s ·. ffiedic~i'C:611eiiesti1i the students'so.admitteCI i>ass'ouf trorri
.the private medical colleges or institutions. ". . . '." •:•:
;"'-•i'.llJ"~"-~' ~ ,., ·.; r: i.-_,, ·:..--;:< • •• ; 0·. · • ·, 1. l .• ,.. '~· --.-- .. , .•. • . ;, - ::;, • i · ,~~ ._,J·:· ·
"''. .3.,0ur'order shall 'also·apply to all similarly'situated
institutions irrespective of the fact whetherany petitions were
or, are pending in this Court or in any of the High Courts.or
C even ifthey had riot approached any court at all. This order
. shall also apply even in caseswhere there were orders of stay
in favour of ttie Medical Council of India restraining the colleges
. fronl"admitting students'forthe current academic session. . .
•. ·· •. ;4.Th~ o~de~ ~hall not applY to 'eolleg~s o~ institutions~hich
0
have been disqualified by the Medical Council of India and/or
the Central Government and have been prohibited from making
. .. any admissions for thecurrent academic year 2014-15. '
• - . ,-• • ' - )' . •; ' " " .. " ' . .. • ,- ·1 l
5. In cases where tWo separate lists are prepared and
E sent by the State agencies one relating to State quota and the·
other relating to management quota in private institutions, we
clarify that for the current academic year there shall be oniy
one list and that shall be the "State quota" alone. There shall
not be any management quota list to be sent to the private
. F: collegeser institutions
~ .
taking the benefit under.our
.
order
..
dated
. · .
18 September, 2014 ..The Management quota shall also be
be filled through the State list and the fees chargeable fo~ the
management quota shall also be charged at the same levels
arid rates as applicable to State quotaJist. ',. . : . . ' '
. -. . . -- -· ' '. - " .. : - . '··, , ~
G • 6. We further clarify that private institutions taking benefit
under our order dated .1 sth September, 2014 shall have to·
. take students only from the State:agencies and at fees
chargeable for students in Government medical colleges as
H
HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT. 1371
LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA& ORS.
stated above, regardless of their status or claim as Minority A
Institutions or Deemed Universities.
W.P. (C\836/2014
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to
withdraw the petitior:i. Permission i.s granted to withdraw the B
same.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.
Rajendra Prasad IAs disposed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "medical college admissions"Sign in to search