Association of Managements of Unaided Private Medical & Dental College & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors, on 9th May 2016, Supreme Court of India – Read Judgement

data-matched-content-ui-type="image_card_sidebyside" data-matched-content-rows-num="1" data-matched-content-columns-num="4"

CORRECTED REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.2
(For directions)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).7 OF 2013

ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENTS OF UNAIDED PVT. MEDICAL & DENTAL COLLEGE & ANR. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)
&

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.3
(For directions)
IN TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).58 OF 2013

P.A. INAMDAR & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS.4-6
(For directions)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).132-134 OF 2012

KARNATAKA PVT. MEDICAL DENTAL COLLEGE
& ANR. … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.10
(For impladment)
IN TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).98 OF 2012

CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)
&
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.2
(For stay)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).99 OF 2012

CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE ASSO. … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.275 OF 2016

SWAMI RAMA HIMALAYAN UNIVERSITY … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. … RESPONDENT(S)

&

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.1
(For stay)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).11 OF 2013

DATTA MEGHE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL
SCIENCES & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS.2 TO 30
(For impleadment, modification of Court’s order
intervention and directions)
IN
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.261 OF 2016

SANKALP CHARITABLE TRUST & ANR. ….PETITIONER(S)

Vs.

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ….RESPONDENT(S)
&

WRIT PETITION (C) NO.292 OF 2016

KOMAL TAPASVI THROUGH HER GUARDIAN & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.293 OF 2016

MIHIR ABHIJIT PATHAK & ORS. THROUGH
HIS GUARDIAN … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. … RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

These applications have been filed by the private medical
colleges and also by some of the States seeking modification of order dated
28th April, 2016 in W.P.(C)No.261 of 2016.
The Medical Council of India (MCI) and the Dental Council of India (DCI)
issued notifications dated 21st December, 2010, amending the existing
statutory regulations to provide for a single National Eligibility-cum-
Entrance Test (NEET) for admission to the MBBS/BDS course.
The said notifications were struck down in Christian Medical College,
Vellore Vs. Union of India, 2014 (2) SCC 305.

The said judgment stands recalled vide order dated 11th April, 2016 in
Review Petition (C) Nos.2159-2268 of 2013.
On 28th April, 2016, in W.P.(C)No.261/2016 a statement was made by the
learned counsel for MCI, CBSE and Union of India that for the academic year
2016-17, NEET would be held.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In recent Constitution Bench judgment dated 2nd May, 2016, in Modern Dental
College & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.4060 of 2009
etc., the stand of the private medical colleges (including minorities) that
conducting of entrance test by the State violated right of autonomy of the
said colleges, has been rejected. The State law providing for conducting
of entrance test was upheld, rejecting the contention that the State had no
legislative competence on the subject. At the same time, it was held that
the admission involved two aspects. First, the adoption of setting up of
minimum standards of education and coordination of such standards which
aspect was covered exclusively by Entry 66 of List I. The second aspect is
with regard to implementation of the said standards which was covered by
Entry 25 of List III. On the said aspect, the State could also legislate.
The two entries overlap to some extent and to that extent Entry 66 of List
I prevailed over the subject covered by Entry 25.
Prima facie, we do not find any infirmity in the NEET regulation on the
ground that it affects the rights of the States or the private
institutions. Special provisions for reservation of any category are not
subject matter of the NEET nor rights of minority are in any manner
affected by NEET. NEET only provides for conducting entrance test for
eligibility for admission to the MBBS/BDS course.
We thus, do not find any merit in the applications seeking
modification of order dated 28th April, 2016.
Only other contention relates to perceived hardship to the students who
have either applied for NEET-I but could not appear or who appeared but
could not prepare fully thinking that the preparation was to be only for
15% All India seats and there will be further opportunity to appear in
other examinations. To allay any such apprehension, we direct that all
such eligible candidates who could not appear in NEET-I and those who had
appeared but have apprehension that they had not prepared well, be
permitted to appear in NEET-II, subject to seeking an option from the said
candidates to give up their candidature for NEET-I. It would be open to
the respondents to reschedule the date of holding NEET-II, if necessary. To
this extent the earlier orders stand modified.
We may also add here that to ensure total credibility of the examination to
be held by the CBSE, the Oversight Committee appointed by this Court vide
the aforesaid judgment dated 2nd May, 2016 shall also oversee the NEET-II
examination to be conducted by the CBSE.
In view of the above, it is also clarified that only NEET would enable
students to get admission to MBBS or BDS studies.
In view of the above order, all the applications and writ
petitions seeking modification of order passed on 11th April, 2016, stand
disposed of.

W.P.(C)261/2016 :
In view of the above order, W.P.(C)No.261/2016 also does not survive and
that is also disposed of.

…………J. [ANIL R. DAVE]

…………J.[SHIVA KIRTI SINGH]

…………J[ADARSH KUMAR GOEL]

New Delhi;
9th May, 2016.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

data-matched-content-ui-type="image_card_sidebyside" data-matched-content-rows-num="1" data-matched-content-columns-num="4"

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.2
(For directions)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).7 OF 2013

MEDICAL & DENTAL COLLEGE & ANR. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)
&

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.3
(For directions)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).58 OF 2013

P.A. INAMDAR & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS.4-6
(For directions)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).131-134 OF 2012

KARNATAKA PVT. MEDICAL DENTAL COLLEGE
& ANR. … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.10
(For impladment)

IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).98 OF 2012
CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.2
(For stay)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).99 OF 2012

CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE ASSO. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.275 OF 2016

SWAMY RAMA HIMALAYAN UNIVERSITY … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. … RESPONDENT(S)

&

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.1
(For stay)
IN
TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(S).11 OF 2013

DATTA MEGHE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL
SCIENCES & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)

&
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS.2 TO 30
(For impleadment, modification of Court’s order intervention and directions)
IN
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.261 OF 2016

SANKALP CHARITABLE TRUST & ANR. ….PETITIONER(S)

Vs.

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ….RESPONDENT(S)
&
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.292 OF 2016

KAMAL TAPASVI THROUGH HER GUARDIAN & ORS. … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)
&

WRIT PETITION (C) NO.293 OF 2016

MIHIR ABHIJIT PATHAK & ORS. THROUGH
HIS GUARDIAN … PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. … RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

These applications have been filed by the private medical
colleges and also by some of the States seeking modification of order dated
28th April, 2016 in W.P.(C)No.261 of 2016.
The Medical Council of India (MCI) and the Dental Council of India (DCI)
issued notifications dated 21st December, 2010, amending the existing
statutory regulations to provide for a single National Eligibility-cum-
Entrance Test (NEET) for admission to the MBBS/BDS course.
The said notifications were struck down in Christian Medical College,
Vellore Vs. Union of India, 2014 (2) SCC 305.

The said judgment stands recalled vide order dated 11th April, 2016 in
Review Petition (C) Nos.2159-2268 of 2013.
On 28th April, 2016, in W.P.(C)No.261/2016 a statement was made by the
learned counsel for MCI, CBSE and Union of India that for the academic year
2016-17, NEET would be held.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In recent Constitution Bench judgment dated 2nd May, 2016, in Modern Dental
College & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.4060 of 2009
etc., the stand of the private medical colleges (including minorities) that
conducting of entrance test by the State violated right of autonomy of the
said colleges, has been rejected. The State law providing for conducting
of entrance test was upheld, rejecting the contention that the State had no
legislative competence on the subject. At the same time, it was held that
the admission involved two aspects. First, the adoption of setting up of
minimum standards of education and coordination of such standards which
aspect was covered exclusively by Entry 66 of List I. The second aspect is
with regard to implementation of the said standards which was covered by
Entry 25 of List III. On the said aspect, the State could also legislate.
The two entries overlap to some extent and to that extent Entry 66 of List
I prevailed over the subject covered by Entry 25.
Prima facie, we do not find any infirmity in the NEET regulation on the
ground that it affects the rights of the States or the private
institutions. Special provisions for reservation of any category are not
subject matter of the NEET nor rights of minority are in any manner
affected by NEET. NEET only provides for conducting entrance test for
eligibility for admission to the MBBS/BDS course.
We thus, do not find any merit in the applications seeking
modification of order dated 28th April, 2016.
Only other contention relates to perceived hardship to the students who
have either applied for NEET-I but could not appear or who appeared but
could not prepare fully thinking that the preparation was to be only for
15% All India seats and there will be further opportunity to appear in
other examinations. To allay any such apprehension, we direct that all
such eligible candidates who could not appear in NEET-I and those who had
appeared but have apprehension that they had not prepared well, be
permitted to appear in NEET-II, subject to seeking an option from the said
candidates to give up their candidature for NEET-I. It would be open to
the respondents to reschedule the date of holding NEET-II, if necessary. To
this extent the earlier orders stand modified.
We may also add here that to ensure total credibility of the examination to
be held by the CBSE, the Oversight Committee appointed by this Court vide
the aforesaid judgment dated 2nd May, 2016 shall also oversee the NEET-II
examination to be conducted by the CBSE.
In view of the above, it is also clarified that only NEET would enable
students to get admission to MBBS or BDS studies.
In view of the above order, all the applications and writ
petitions seeking modification of order passed on 11th April, 2016, stand
disposed of.

W.P.(C)261/2016 :
In view of the above order, W.P.(C)No.261/2016 also does not survive and
that is also disposed of.

…………….J.[ANIL R. DAVE]
……………..J.[SHIVA KIRTI SINGH]

……………..J.[ADARSH KUMAR GOEL]

New Delhi;
9th May, 2016.

data-matched-content-ui-type="image_card_sidebyside" data-matched-content-rows-num="4" data-matched-content-columns-num="4"

Read Also : Case Brief – Association of Managements of Unaided Private Medical & Dental College & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors