http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

PETITIONER: U.P. JUNIOR DOCTORS’ ACTION COMMITTEEAND ORS. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DR. B. SHEETAL NANDWANI AND ORS. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT22/11/1991

BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) RAY, G.N. (J) ANAND, A.S. (J)

CITATION:  1991 SCR  Supl. (2) 384  1992 SCC  Supl.  (1) 680  JT 1992 (1)   571        1991 SCALE  (2)1103

ACT:     Admission   to   Professional    (ourse,---post-graduate courses   in   Medical   Colleges--Reasonable   period    of study--prescription by the Medical Council--Dates of  admis- sion and commencement of courses--Directions of Court--To be followed  strictly--Interlocutory  orders  for   provisional admission--Not to be granted unless for special reason to be indicated in clear terms. Practice & Procedure:     Main relief prayed  for---As a rule not to be granted at the interlocutory stage.

HEADNOTE:     These  matters  relate  to  admission  in  post-graduate courses in the Medical Colleges in Uttar Pradesh.     On  a Writ Petition, which later turned out to be  fake, the High Court had ordered that admission could be  effected on the basis of the MBBS Examination. This has been disputed in appeal before this Court.     In  another  Writ Petition, pending  hearing,  the  High Court  directed that provisional admission be given  to  two candidates,   one  in  MS  (Surgery)  and  another   in   MD (Medicine). The Principal of the Medical college and  others preferred an appeal against the High Court’s order.     It was contended that granting admission, though  provi- sional,  at an interlocutory stage in a  pending  proceeding creates  a lot of adverse consequences and  indiscipline  in the system of imparting education. Dismissing the matters, this Court, 385     HELD: 1.1 It transpires that the proceedings before  the High  Court were totally fraudulent and no one by  the  name given in the petition as petitioner could really be  identi- fied.  This  Court had clearly indicated that  no  admission should be permitted on the basis of the MBBS results.  Noth- ing survives now, as the High Court’s order has already been reversed. [386 F,G]     2.1 It is already settled that admission for 25 per cent of the seats in post-graduate courses should be regulated on the  basis of all-India selection and in regard to  the  re- mainder  of 75 per cent the States were left to  decide  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

procedure for admission. [387-E]     2.2  Unless there is a sincere and thorough  educational discipline to be gone through as a precondition to the grant of the requisite certificate the lives of citizens would  be at  peril. The Indian Medical Council has prescribed a  rea- sonable  period of study, on expert advice, and upon  taking into  consideration the experience over the years as to  how much  study is necessary for the requisite qualification  to be  gathered.  This Court has also indicated  the  dates  of admission  and commencement of the courses of  study.  These are  prescriptions for a purpose and are not intended to  be empty formalities to be violated. [387 G, H; 388-A]     Dr. Pradeep Jain & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., [1984] 3 S.C.C. 654, relied on.     3.   It is a well-known rule of practice  and  procedure that at an interlocutory stage, a relief which is asked  for and  is  available  at the disposal of the  matter,  is  not (generally)  granted.  To have it granted at  the  threshold creates a lot of difficulties. In a case where the petition- er ultimately loses in a case of this type a very embarrass- ing  situation crops up. If he has by then read for  two  to three  years, there is a claim of equity raised on the  plea that  one  cannot reverse the course of time. In a  case  of this type, equities should not be claimed or granted. Unless there  is any special reason to be indicated in clear  terms in  an interlocutory order, as a rule no provisional  admis- sion  should be granted and more so into technical  courses. [388 C, D]     4.1  The  order of the High Court in  the  instant  case should be reversed but this is not being done so, on account of  the  fact that nine similarly placed  medical  graduates have already been given admission pursuant to such interloc- utory orders by the respondents 386 without  even  raising a challenge. The order  was  made  as early as in February, 1991 and for nine months no steps have been  taken by the appellants to comply with the  order  and they are in fact facing a contempt proceeding. [388-F] 4.2  Notice had been issued to the Principals of  the  seven medi   cal  colleges  who have appeared  and  given  written undertakings to the Court by way of affidavit that there was some  misunderstanding  in regard to the  requirement  of  a selection test for post graduate admission. Though there was hardly  any scope for being misled, the benefit of doubt  is being given to the Principals. The contempt proceedings  are discharged, but their undertakings are kept on record.  [388 G, H; 389-A]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: I.A. No 1 IN C.A. No 4444 of 1990 etc. etc..      From the Judgment and Order dated 25.5.90 of the  Alla- habad High Court in CWP No. 5267 of 90.      Yogeshwar Prasad, Gopal Subramanium, S.K. Mehta,  Dhruv Mehta,  Arvind Verma, Aman Vachher, Pradeep Misra  and  R.B. Misra for the appearing parties. The following order of the Court was delivered:     The  dispute  in  these cases relates  to  admission  in post-graduate  courses of the medical wing. There are  seven medical  colleges  in the State of Uttar  Pradesh.  Sometime back  in  a fake writ petition the High Court  of  Allahabad made an order that admission could be effected on the  basis of  the  MBBS results. That can counter to the  decision  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

this  Court and on being looked into it transpired that  the proceedings  before the High Court were  totally  fraudulent and  no one by the name given in the petition as  petitioner could  really  be identified. This Court at that  stage  had clearly  indicated that the prescription by this  Court  has been that there should be a selection test for post-graduate admission  as admission has become very competitive  and  to have  compliance of Article 14 of the Constitution a  broad- based arrangement should be made. On that account this Court had clearly indicated that no admission should be  permitted on  the basis of the MBBS results. In view of the fact  that the Allahabad High Court’s order has already been  reversed, nothing more need be done. 387 SLP (C)  .....  of 1990     This  petition  is  directed against the  order  of  the learned  Single  Judge  of the Allahabad  High  Court  dated 25.5.1990.  U.P. Junior Doctors’ Action Committee  in  their special  leave  petition  which has not  yet  been  numbered challenge  the order referred to above where the  petitioner could not be identified and challenge was to the decision of the High Court dated 25.5.1990 which permitted admission  on the  basis of MBBS results. Since we have already  clarified the  position and reiterated the requirement of a  selection test  the  order  of the High Court must be  taken  to  have already been vacated. 11 is not necessary to entertain  this special leave petition. CA in SLP 15354/91 Special leave granted.     In  this appeal by special leave Principal of  the  Agra Medical college along with some others is the appellant. The High Court by the impugned order required provisional admis- sion in M.S. (Surgery) and in M.D. (Medicine) to be given to respondents  1 and 2 respectively in the Medical College  of Agra  while the writ petition was yet to be heard. The  con- ten-tion  raised before us is that grading admission  at  an interlocutory stage in a pending proceeding even by  styling it  as  provisonal create lot of  adderse  consequences  and leads to indicipline in  the system of imparting  education, Admission  into  post-graduate degrees in the  medical  wing through  out the country has become very competitive and  it has become clear thatstrict regulation is necessary. .  This Court  by  its judgement  in   Dr. Pradeep, Jain &  Ors.  v. Union of India & Ors  [1984] 3 sec 654 indicated that admis- sion  for 25 percent of the seats in  post-graduate  courses should be regulated on the basis of all-India selection  and in   regard to the remainder 75 per cent of the States  were left to decide the procedure for admission.     Appropriate  knowledge and expertise are a  prerequisite for a person to be allowed to register himself as a  medical practitioner.  Very  often, health problems  require  expert treatment.  If anyone is authorised in society  to  practise medicine  or undertake medical-care without the  appropriate qualification, society exposes itself to health hazards. The prescriptions by the Indian Medical Council and the attempts made by Government for regulating the medical study are  for establishing  basically uniform knowledge to be imparted  to the students before they can be entrusted with the  nation’s medicare. Unless there is a sincere and thorough educational discipline to be gone through as a precondition to the grant of the requisite certificate the lives of citizens would  be at peril. 388     The  Indian Medical Council has prescribed a  reasonable period  of study on expert advice and upon taking into  con-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

sideration  the  experience over the years as  to  how  much study  is  necessary for the requisite qualification  to  be gathered. This Court has also indicated the dates of  admis- sion  and  commencement of the courses of study.  These  are prescriptions for a purpose and are not intended to be empty formalities to be violated.     One of the prescriptions of the Medical Council is  also the ratio between the teachers and the students. That  again is a factor which cannot be brushed aside.     It  is a well-known rule of practice and procedure  that at interlocu-. tory stage a relief which is asked for and is available at the disposal of the matter is not granted.  The writ  petitioners wanted admission into postgraduate  course as the main relief in the writ petition. To have it  granted at  the threshold creates a lot of difficulties. In  a  case where the petitioner ultimately loses in a case of this type a  very embarrassing situation crops up. If he has  by  then read  for  two to three years, there is a  claim  of  equity raised  on  the plea that one cannot reverse the  course  of time. In a case of this type equities should not be  claimed or grained. ’Faking an overall picture of the matter we  are of  the view that unless there is any special reason  to  be indicated in clear terms in an interlocutory order as a rule no provisional admission should be granted and more so  into technical courses.     On the basis of what we have said the order of the  High Court should be reversed but we are not doing so on  account of  the  fact that nine similarly placed  medical  graduates have already been given admission pursuant to such interloc- utory  orders  by  the respondents without  even  raising  a challenge. The order was made as early as in February,  1991 and  for all these nine months no steps have been  taken  by the appellants to comply with the order and they are in fact facing a contempt proceeding. While on principle we indicate that  such provisional admission should not be  granted.  We dismiss  this special leave petition and sustain  the  order not on merits but for the reason indicated. The interlocuto- ry application in the civil appeal need not be further dealt with in view of what we have said above.     We  had  issued notice to the Principals  of  the  seven medical colleges. They have appeared and have given a  writ- ten undertaking to the Court by way of affidavit that  there was some misunderstanding in regard to the requirement of  a selection test for post-graduate admission. There were  two- year and three-year courses running simultaneously for  some period  and some confusion was there as to whether the  two- year course 389 students were covered by the direction of this Court. Though we are of the view that there was hardly any scope for being misled, we are prepared to give the benefit of doubt to  the Principals.  The contempt proceedings are withdrawn but  the undertaking are kept on record. G.N.                                                 Appeals dismissed. 390