Medical Council Act, 1956 — Minority Medical College — Admission on Diocese

August 23rd, 2013

Medical Council Act, 1956 — Minority Medical College — Admission on Diocese — Whether against recognition of merits? — Held, (As per CJI for himself and Sen J.), no — The definite object of Article 30 that the framers of the Constitution had in mind that religious and linguistic minorities should have the fundamental right to preserve their traditions and religious beliefs by establishing and administering educational institutions of their choice — No material on record to even suggest that the petitioner colleges have indulged in any malpractice in matters of admission of students or that they had failed the triple test referred to in P.A. Inamdar’s case (supra) — (As per Dave J.), fear that the minority institutions or the educational institutions belonging to special classes would be adversely affected because of the introduction of the NEET is not well founded — It shall not affect any how the reservation policies — Constitution of India — Articles 25, 26, 29(1) and 30 — Dentists Act, 1948 — Section 20.

HELD: (As per CJI for himself and Sen J.): A feeble attempt has been made by Mr. Gupta to suggest that admission into institutions run by the Christian Church depended on selection of students by the Diocese. This procedure, according to Mr. Gupta, was against the concept of recognition of merit.

(Para 147)

In our judgment, such a stand is contrary to the very essence of Articles 25, 26, 29(1) and 30 of the Constitution. In view of the rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, the provisions of Article 30 should have been redundant, but for the definite object that the framers of the Constitution had in mind that religious and linguistic minorities should have the fundamental right to preserve their traditions and religious beliefs by establishing and administering educational institutions of their choice. There is no material on record to even suggest that the Christian Medical College, Vellore, or its counter-part in Ludhiana, St. John’s College, Bangalore, or the linguistic minority institutions and other privately-run institutions, aided and unaided, have indulged in any malpractice in matters of admission of students or that they had failed the triple test referred to in P.A. Inamdar’s case (supra). On the other hand, according to surveys held by independent entities, CMC, Vellore and St. John’s Medical College, Bangalore, have been placed among the top Medical Colleges in the country and have produced some of the most brilliant and dedicated doctors in the country believing in the philosophy of the institutions based on Christ’s ministry of healing and caring for the sick and maimed.

(Para 148)

(As per Dave J.): An apprehension has been voiced by the counsel for the petitioners that the minority institutions or the educational institutions belonging to special classes would be adversely affected because of the introduction of the NEET. In fact, the said apprehension is not well founded. The policy with regard to the reservation can be very well implemented if the NEET is introduced because the NEET would determine standard or eligibility of a student who is to be imparted education in the field of medicine.

(Para 176)

In the circumstances, it cannot be said that introduction of the NEET would adversely affect the policy with regard to the reservation or the policy of the States pertaining to upliftment of downtrodden persons belonging to certain classes.

(Para 178)

Christian Medical College Vellore v. Union of India[Bench Strength 3], T.C. (C) No. 98/2012(18/07/2013), 2013(9) SCALE 226 [Altamas Kabir, C.J.: Vikramajit Sen, J.: Anil R. Dave, J.]

Entry Filed under: Legal Updates