Kerala High Court
M.M. Asharaf vs Rajiv Sadanandan on 19 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 30TH MAGHA,1942
Con.Case(C).No.508 OF 2017(S) IN WP(C). 33774/2016
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.12.2016 IN WPC 33774/2016 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
PETITIONERS:
1 M.M. ASHARAF
AGED 53, S/O. LATE MOHAMMED M.K., PRESIDENT, PARENT
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, MANJERI GOVERNMENT MEDICAL
COLLEGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2 MUBASHIR MUHYUDHEEN K.
AGED 23, S/O. ABDUL LATHEEF, KOTTEKATT HOUSE, S.S.ROAD,
VENGARA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PRESENT CHAIRMAN,
STUDENTS UNION, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, MANJERI,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 3 & 4:
1 RAJIV SADANANDAN
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
(FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITINER)
SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, STATE
OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 RAMLA BEEVI,
(FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION,
MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 011.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
C.O.(C) No. 508/2017
in W.P.(C) No. 33774/2016 :2:
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2021.
JUDGMENT
This Contempt Case is filed complaining that the directives
contained in the judgment dated 17.12.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 33774 of
2016 is not complied with. The directions issued in the judgment are
as follows:
"4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that defects
noted in Ext.P4 are vital aspects affecting the future of the students,
because the Medial Council of India is vested with powers to initiate
action by which the student community passing the MBBS course
may not get registration unless and until they are satisfied that the
college was functioning in accordance with the terms and regulations
contained under the Medical Council of India Act and attendant
regulations.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the Medical Council of India
has produced before me a time schedule for receipt of application by
which the State Government has time up to 31.1.2017 to rectify any
defect and submit a report before the Medical Council of India,
enabling the Medical Council of India to proceed further and complete
the inspection before 31.5.2017.
6. Taking note of the said schedule pointed out by the learned
Standing Counsel I am of the considered opinion that the writ petition
can be disposed of by issuing appropriate directions. The State
Government shall forward a report after rectifying all defects, if any
C.O.(C) No. 508/2017
remaining, as pointed out by the petitioner in Ext.P4 in this writ
petition, on or before 31.1.2017 to the Medical Council of India.
Thereafter Medical Council in accordance with the schedule fixed
may carry out the inspection and finalise the proceedings before
31.5.2017."
2. However, today, when the matter is taken up for
consideration, learned counsel for the erstwhile Medical Council of
India, now the National Medical Commission, has produced a copy of
the Notification dated 09.05.2019 of the Government of India, Ministry
of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, from where I am satisfied
that already the Medical Commission of India has granted recognition
to the MBBS course conducted by the Government Medical College,
Manjeri.
In that view of the matter, I do not think, anything survives to
be considered in this Contempt Case, since the directions are
substantially and materially complied with. Accordingly, this Contempt
Case is closed.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY,
JUDGE.
Rv
