JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Four notifications, two dated 21.12.2010 and the other two dated 31.5.2012, issued by the Medical Council of India and the Dental Council of India, are the subject matter of challenge in all these matters which have been heard together by us. Notification No. MCI-31(1)/2010-MED/49068 described as "Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (Amendment) 2010, (Part II)" has been published by the Medical Council of India to amend the "Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997". Notification No.MCI.18(1)/2010-MED/49070 described as "Post-graduate Medical Education (Amendment) Regulation, 2010 (Part II)" has been issued by the said Council to amend the "Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000". Both the Regulations came into force simultaneously on their publication in the Official Gazette. The third and fourth Notifications both bearing No. DE- 22-2012 dated 31.5.2012, relating to admission in the BDS and MDS courses published by the Dental Council of India, are similar to the notifications published by the MCI.
(2.) The four aforesaid Notifications have been challenged on several grounds. The major areas of challenge to the aforesaid Notifications are:
(i) The powers of the Medical Council of India and the Dental Council of India to regulate the process of admissions into medical colleges and institutions run by the State Governments, private individuals (aided and unaided), educational institutions run by religious and linguistic minorities, in the guise of laying down minimum standards of medical education, as provided for in Section 19A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, and under Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.
(ii) Whether the introduction of one National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) offends the fundamental right guaranteed to any citizen under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business
(iii) Whether NEET violates the rights of religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice, as guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution
(iv) Whether subordinate legislation, such as the right to frame Regulations, flowing from a power given under a statute, can have an overriding effect over the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25, 26, 29(1) and 30 of the Constitution
(v) Whether the exclusion of Entry 11 from the State List and the introduction of Entry 25 in the Concurrent List by the Constitution Forty Second (Amendment) Act, 1976, makes any difference as far as the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India under Section 33 of the 1956 Act and those framed by the Dental Council of India under Section 20 of the Dentists Act, 1948, are concerned, and whether such Regulations would have primacy over State legislation on the same subject
(vi) Whether the aforesaid questions have been adequately answered in T.M.A. Pai Foundation Vs. State of Karnataka, 2002 8 SCC 481, and in the subsequent decisions in Islamic Academy of Education Vs. State of Karnataka, 2003 6 SCC 697, P.A. Inamdar Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2005 6 SCC 537 and Indian Medical Association Vs. Union of India, 2011 7 SCC 179 and
(vii) Whether the views expressed by the Constitution Bench comprised of Five Judges in Dr. Preeti Srivastava Vs. State of M.P., 1999 7 SCC 120 have any impact on the issues raised in this batch of matters
(3.) In order to appreciate the challenge thrown to the four notifications, it is necessary to understand the functions and duties of the Medical Council of India under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, and the Dental Council of India constituted under the Dentists Act, 1948. The submissions advanced in regard to the MBBS and Post-graduate courses will apply to the BDS and MDS courses also.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.