Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal  ||  Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination  ||  Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal  ||  Allahabad High Court: Law Treats All Equally, State Cannot Gain Undue Benefit from Delay Condonation  ||  SC: SARFAESI Act Was Not Applicable in Nagaland Before its 2021 Adoption, Dismisses Creditor’s Plea  ||  SC: Lis Pendens Applies To Money Suits on Mortgaged Property, Including Ex Parte Proceedings  ||  Kerala HC: Civil Courts Cannot Grant Injunctions in NCLT Matters and Such Orders Can Be Set Aside  ||  Bombay High Court: Technical Breaks to Temporary Employees Cannot Deny Maternity Leave Benefits  ||  NCLAT: Appellate Jurisdiction Limited to Orders Deciding Parties’ Rights, Not Procedural Directions    

Is there a doctor in the house - (31 Aug 2015)

MANU/SC/0950/2015

Education

“The time schedule is required to be strictly observed”, the Supreme Court held, as it dismissed a petition by a medical college to increase the number of seats offered in its MBBS course for the academic year 2015-2016. The issue stemmed from the Medical Council of India rejecting the Petitioner's application for not having submitted the 'essentiality certificate' with the application, which itself was made one day after the final day for submissions. The Court opined that it was “too late in the day to direct inspection for the session 2015-16 as all the dates fixed in the time schedule are over and fixation of time schedule has a purpose behind it”. It instead directed the application be considered for the following academic year.

Relevant : The Medical Council of India, perennially portrayed as the pantomimic villain, has usually been on the receiving end of opprobrium. Deriding the rejection of applications in a 'mechanical manner' and its failure to perform its duty commensurately within time limits, Courts have been vocal in expressing a less than neutral train of thought on the MCI. Yet, they too have tread a meandering precedent. Time limits sometimes flexible sometimes absolute, a right to be heard at some stages but not at others, and differing rules for fresh applications and renewals, Court's have contributed to obfuscating an already contentious issue. Perhaps the next time MCI is summoned to the courtroom for not having consulted a crystal ball, it will prefer to gaze at the stars for some guidance. MANU/SC/0905/2015 MANU/SC/0958/2013 MANU/SC/0029/2005

Tags : MCI   MBBS   APPLICATION   REJECT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved