The Principal vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 12966 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                      W.P.(C)NO.25399 OF 2020
PETITIONERS:

    1        THE PRINCIPAL,
             MARKAZ UNANI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL,
             PUTHUPPADI P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 586
    2        THE ADMINISTRATION MANAGER,
             MARKAZ UNANI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL,
             PUTHUPPADI P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 586
             BY ADVS.
             GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
             SMT.NISHA GEORGE
             SRI.J.VISHNU
RESPONDENTS:

       1     UNION OF INDIA
             REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF AYUSH,
             DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, A
             WING, NIRMAN BHAVAN, MAULANA AZAD ROAD, NEW
             DELHI-110 011
       2     CENTRAL COUNCIL FOR INDIAN MEDICINE,
             JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU BHARTIYA CHIKITSA AVAM,
             HOMEOPATHY ANUSANDHAN BHAWAN, 61-65,
             INSTITUTIONAL AREA, JANAKPURI, D BLOCK, NEW
             DELHI-110 058.
       3     KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES,
             MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O,
             THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 596, REPRESENTED BY
             THE REGISTRAR.
             BY ADVS.
             SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
             SHRI.S.MANU
             SHRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF
             HEALTH SCIENCES

THIS       WRIT   PETITION   (CIVIL)    HAVING   COME     UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.25399 of 2020             2



                             JUDGMENT

The 1st petitioner is the Principal and the 2nd petitioner is

the Administrative Manager of Markaz Unani Medical College and

Hospital, Puthuppadi in Kozhikode District, which is stated to be

the only Unani Medical College in State of Kerala. By Ext.P1

order dated 31.08.2015, the Central Government granted

permission to start Bachelor of Unani Medicine and Surgery

(BUMS) Course in the petitioners' college, with an intake of 60

seats, for the academic session 2015-16, under Section 13A of

the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. For the academic

session 2016-17, the Central Government granted permission

vide Ext.P2 order dated 16.09.2016; and the academic session

2017-18 vide Ext.P3 order dated 04.08.2017.

2. Going by the averments in the writ petition,

inspection for grant of permission for the academic session

2018-19 was conducted in the petitioners' college, in the month

of February, 2018. However, those inspections were nullified and

thereafter, a further inspection was conducted in May, 2018. The

inspections in the petitioners' college were conducted on

24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018. The Inspectors found certain

deficiencies in their report, which were pointed out to the

petitioners by Ext.P4 communication dated 18.08.2018 of the 1 st

respondent. On receipt of Ext.P4, the petitioners submitted a

reply dated 18.08.2018. The 1st respondent conducted a

personal hearing, on 25.08.2018. The 1st petitioner submitted

Ext.P5 written submission dated 25.08.2018, in which it was

pointed out that 12 Higher Faculties were working in 12

Departments, against the requirement of 11 Higher Faculties in

14 Departments. The name, address and all other particulars of

faculty members were also given. With regard to other

deficiencies pointed out, details were provided and explanation

offered, by submitting the relevant documents. The document

marked as Ext.P6 is the hearing note dated 25.08.2018. In

Ext.P6, it is stated that the college will be submitting the details

of Functional Web Based Computerised Central Registration

System in OPD/IPD. That was submitted before the authority on

03.09.2018, as evidenced by Ext.P7. The Under Secretary to

Government of India, Ministry of Ayush conducted hearing and

thereafter, the petitioners were issued with Ext.P8 order dated

17.10.2018 of the 1st respondent, declining permission for

taking admission to BUMS course with 60 UG seats, for the

academic session 2018-19. According to the petitioners, though

details were provided on 04.09.2018, Ext.P8 order was issued

only on 17.10.2018.

2.1. The petitioners challenged Ext.P8 order of the 1st

respondent by filing W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018. In that writ

petition, this Court granted Ext.P9 interim order, on 24.10.2018,

as prayed for, i.e., an order directing the Kerala University of

Health Sciences to give intimation regarding continuation of

affiliation, for the academic year 2018-19, and directing the

Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, Kerala to include the

petitioners' college in the spot allotment scheduled for

admission for the said academic session. This Court made it

clear that the order will be subject to further orders to be

passed in that writ petition. Based on Ext.P9 interim order, the

University granted affiliation to the petitioners' college and

admissions were made.

2.2. In the year 2019, inspections were conducted by the

Inspectors deputed by the 2nd respondent Central Council for

Indian Medicine and the 3rd respondent Kerala University of

Health Sciences, for the academic year 2019-20. The

inspections were conducted on 02.05.2020 and 03.05.2020.

Based on the inspection report of the 2 nd respondent, the 1st

respondent issued Ext.P10 letter of permission dated

08.09.2020 for 60 seats and the 3 rd respondent University

granted affiliation for that intake, for the academic year 2019-

20. In the meanwhile, vide judgment dated 25.08.2020 in W.P.

(C)No.34445 of 2018, this Court set aside Ext.P8 order directing

the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter after affording the

petitioners an opportunity of hearing, in the light of the fact that

the 1st respondent has issued letter of permission for the

subsequent academic year and students were admitted to the

subsequent batch. The 1st respondent was directed to take an

appropriate decision within a period of three months. It was

made clear that, admission of students to BUMS course, during

the academic year 2018-19, will be subject to the outcome of

such decision taken by the 1st respondent.

2.3. Pursuant to the direction contained in Ext.P11

judgment, the 1st respondent issued Ext.P12 notice dated

04.09.2020, whereby the Principal of the college was required to

appear for a personal hearing scheduled on 10.09.2020. In the

personal hearing, the 1st petitioner submitted Ext.P13 written

submission. The 1st respondent, vide Ext.P14 order dated

10.11.2020 rejected letter of permission for the year 2018-19,

for the reasons stated therein.

2.4. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P14 order dated

10.11.2020, the petitioners have filed this writ petition under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of

certiorari to quash Ext.P14 order dated 10.11.2020 of the 1 st

respondent. The petitioners have also sought for a declaration

that the college is entitled to be issued with letter of permission

for the academic session 2018-19, on the basis of issuance of

letter of permission for the subsequent years, as directed by this

Court in Ext.P11 judgment; a writ of mandamus commanding

the 1st respondent to grant letter of permission to the

petitioners' college, for the academic session 2018-19; and an

appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd

respondent University not to withdraw the affiliation granted to

the petitioners' college, for the academic session 2018-19, on

the basis of Ext.P14 order.

2.5. Along with the writ petition, the petitioners have

placed on record Ext.P15 notice dated 30.06.2018 issued by the

1st petitioner to Dr.Wasia Naveed, Faculty in the Department of

Niswanwa Qabalat, and Ext.P16 reply submitted by her dated

03.07.2018, in order to point out that, explanation was sought

for from that faculty for not properly marking bio-metric

attendance. In the writ petition, it is stated that, the said faculty

had continued in the petitioners' college, after the inspection for

the academic year 2018-19, and she was counted as a higher

faculty by the 2nd respondent, for the academic session 2019-

20, while granting Ext.P10 letter of permission, by the 1 st

respondent. She continued in the petitioners' college until she

resigned on 31.08.2019, as her husband had passed away due

to cancer and she was also suffering from cancer.

2.6. The petitioners would point out that a similar

situation had occurred in Government Unani College, Chennai,

which was denied letter of permission for the academic session

2008-09 by the 1st respondent, on the ground of certain

deficiencies. However, after the inspection was conducted for

the academic session 2009-10, Ext.P17 letter of permission was

granted for that year. Later, taking note of the said fact, the 1 st

respondent granted Ext.P18 letter of permission dated

24.03.2010, for the academic session 2008-09.

3. On 19.11.2020, when this writ petition came up for

admission, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for

the 1st respondent Union of India, the learned Standing Counsel

for the 2nd respondent Central Council for Indian Medicine and

the learned Standing Counsel for the 3 rd respondent Kerala

University of Health Sciences sought time to get instructions.

4. On 04.12.2020, the learned Assistant Solicitor

General of India has filed a statement on behalf of the 1 st

respondent, wherein it is stated that the Inspectors of the 2 nd

respondent Central Council for Indian Medicine visited the

petitioners' college on 05.02.2018 and 25.05.2018 to reassess

the faculties and practical training. The visitation report and

recommendations were forwarded to the Central Government.

The Executive Committee of the Central Council, in its 265th

meeting considered the visitation report, in view of the enforced

Regulation and adopted policy, and decided to recommend to

the Central Government for not granting conditional permission,

due to shortcomings.

4.1. Pursuant to the directions contained in Ext.P11

judgment of this Court in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018, an online

hearing was conducted on 10.09.2020, and the Hearing

Committee examined the submissions made by the college

representatives. The Committee found that there are only 8

Higher Faculties in 8 departments against the requirement of 11

Higher Faculties in 11 departments. The representatives of the

college submitted a list of 12 Higher Faculties in 12

Departments, who were working in their college on the date of

inspection, i.e., 24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018. Before the Hearing

Committee, the college representatives submitted that

Dr.G.Fareeda applied for departmental transfer from Amraze Jild

wa Tazeeniyat to Mahiyatul Amraz on 05.05.2018, however the

same was rejected by the Central Council and they received the

intimation after 7 months. Hence, they claimed of having 11

Higher Faculties in 11 departments on the date of inspection,

out of which Dr.Ayesha Tahseen, Associate Professor,

Department of Tashreehul Badan and Dr.Wasia Naveed,

Professor, Department of Niswan wa Qabalat were on maternity

leave and medical leave respectively.

4.2. With respect to Dr.Rafiuddin Moinuddin Khan,

Associate Professor in the Department of Amraze Jild wa

Tazeeniyat, it was pointed out that, his designation was

inadvertently typed as Assistant Professor in Annexure-l online

form submitted to the Central Council on the day of inspection.

The college representatives submitted leave letters (16.04.2018

to 16.07.2018 and 17.07.2018 to 14.09.2018), birth certificate

(June 2018), duty resuming letter (15.09.2018) along with

other documents such as appointment and joining letter,

qualifications certificates, experience, attendance records, etc.

In respect of Dr.Ayesha Tahseen, Associate Professor,

Department of Tashreehul Badan, the Hearing Committee found

difference in the signature in the leave letters (maternity leave

and earned leave) and also the joining letter given to the college

on 21.02.2017. Further, the Hearning Committee noticed

abstruseness in attendance record of Dr.Ayesha Tahseen for the

month April, 2018. As per bio-metric records, she was absent

from 04.04.2018 to 06.04.2018, but her signatures are seen in

attendance register against those days. Further, she availed

maternity leave from 16.04.2018, but bio-metric records shows

her in/out timings on 23.04.2018, 24.04.2018 and 28.04.2018.

Hence, the Hearing Committee observed that the ambiguity in

signature and attendance records of Dr.Ayesha raises doubts

about authenticity of the documents.

4.3. With respect to Dr.Wasia Naveed, Professor,

Department of Niswan wa Qabalat, the college representatives

submitted leave letter (05.05.2018 to 25.05.2018), fitness

certificate from Haavi Unani Hospital, duty resuming letter dated

26.05.2018, along with other documents, such as appointment

and joining letters, qualification and experience certificates,

attendance records, etc. The Hearing Committee found

overwriting in leave application and also noticed difference in

signature in leave letter and other documents. Though the

Hearing Committee asked for hospital records and doctor

prescriptions of Dr.Wasia Naveed, the college representatives

could not produce any relevant documents. The Hearing

Committee noticed that the college representatives had earlier

submitted discharge summary to the Central Council from

Telangana State Government Employees Health Scheme, which

indicates the date of admission of Dr.Wasia Naveed in Bibi

Hospital Pvt Limited, Malakpet, Hyderabad as 02.05.2018 and

date of discharge as 03.05.2018. On examining attendance

register and bio-metric records for the month of May, 2018, the

Hearing Committee found the signatures of Dr.Wasia Naveed on

02.05.2018 and 03.05.2018. Though the bio-metric records of

Dr.Wasia Naveed indicate that she was absent in the entire

month of June 2018, her signatures are present in the

attendance register of the same month. Hence, the actual

presence of Dr.Wasia Naveed in the college could not be

ascertained by the Hearing Committee.

4.4. With respect to Dr.Rafiuddin Moinuddin Khan,

Associate Professor in the Department of Amraze Jild wa

Tazeeniyat, the Hearing Committee found that, as per the

documents like appointment letter, qualification and experience

certificates, relieving letter, etc., submitted by the college

representatives, he seems to be eligible as Associate Professor

in that department. When the Hearing Committee enquired

about bank statements for the salary paid to the faculties, by

the college authorities, for the year 2018, the college

representaives submitted that the college did not maintain bank

statements as they paid salary to their staff through cheque and

cash, during the said year. Before the Hearing Committee, the

college representatives agreed of not having Higher Faculties in

the departments of Kulliyat, Mahiyatul Amraz, and Jarahat. On

the basis of the documents submitted by the college

representatives, the Hearing Committee found that the college

had 9 eligible Higher Faculties in 9 departments on the day of

inspection, i.e., 24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018, and that, there is

no Higher Faculty in each of the department of Kulliyat,

Tashreehul Badan, Mahiyatul Amraz, Niswan wa Qabaiat, Jarahat

and Amraz-E-Jild wa Tazineeyat. Based on the above findings,

the Hearing Committee concluded that Dr.Rafiuddin Moinuddin

Khan, the Higher faculty, appears to be present in the

Department of Amraze Jild wa Tazeeniyat; however, the

presence of Dr.Ayesha Tahseen, Higher Faculty in the

Department of Tashreehul Badan and Dr.Wasia Naveed, Higher

Faculty in the Department of Niswan wa Qabaiat could not be

ascertained due to ambiguity in the records.

4.5. In the statement filed on behalf of the 1st respondent

it is stated that, Functional Web Based Computerised Central

Registration System was not available in OPD/IPD as per the

Indian Medicine Central Council (Requirements of Minimum

Standard for Under Graduate Unani Colleges and Attached

Hospitals) Regulations, 2016; X-Ray, ECG and USG are not

available as per the said Regulations; there was no specialist

doctor or one clinical teacher in Jarahat, Amraze Jild wa

Tazeeniyat and Niswan wa Qabalat, against the requirement of

the said Regulations; and Aadhaar based Geo location enabled

attendance system is not functional for teaching staff, non-

teaching staff, hospital staff and PG student as per decision

dated 31.01.2018 and the policy decision dated 15.06.2018, in

place of bio-metric attendance, as per sub-regulation (3) of

Regulation 9 of the said Regulations. The stand taken in the

statement filed on behalf of the 1st respondent is that, in view of

the deficiencies by the Hearing Committee, the petitioners are

not entitled for the reliefs sought for in this writ petition.

5. The learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent

Central Council for Indian Medicine has filed a statement dated

22.12.2020, where in it is stated that, under Sections 13A and

13C of the Indian Medicine Central Councils Act, 1970, the

Central Council is empowered to conduct an inspection on a new

and existing Medical Colleges, prepare inspection reports and

thereafter, forward the same to the Central Government, under

sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act. As such, the Central

Council is a fact finding expert body, whose function is limited to

the conduct of inspection of the colleges and thereafter, forward

the report of the inspection to the Ministry of Ayush, which is

empowered to pass a final order regarding permission, either

approving or disapproving the scheme submitted by the

respective colleges.

5.1. In the statement, it is stated that, the Central Council

suo motu conducted inspection in the petitioners' college on

05.02.2018 and revisited on 24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018. The

college was inspected by the expert appointed by the Central

Council. The inspection report and recommendation were

carefully examined in terms of the Establishment of New Medical

College, Opening of New or Higher Courses Study or Training

and Increase of Admission Capacity by a Medical College

Regulation, 2003, read with the amended Regulations of 2013,

the provisions of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act and the

relevant Regulations and policies issued from time to time, for

issuing letter of permission. On examining the case, it was

observed that the petitioners' college has not fulfilled the basic

eligibility criteria for BUMS course, for the academic session

2018-19, under Sections 13A/13C of the Act. In view of the

above position, the Central Council recommended to the Central

Government for not granting permission to the said course, for

the academic session 2018-19. Thereafter, the Central

Government, after conducting a personal hearing, denied

permission to the petitioners' college for making admission to

BUMS course, for the academic session 2018-19, vide Ext.P14

order dated 10.11.2020.

5.2. In the statement, various decisions of the Apex Court

dealing with similar issues with regard to the role of the Indian

Medical Council under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956,

which is analogous to the Indian Medicine Central Council Act,

1970 are relied on. The findings of the Central Council are on

the basis of factual verification, properly done during the

inspection. The Central Government analysed the explanation

offered by the college in detail and found that the college has

not complied with the requirements of the relevant Regulations.

The decision of the Central Government in Ext.P14 has been

taken on proper application of mind, after considering all

relevant materials and facts. The requirements of the principles

of natural justice have also been complied with, with procedural

fairness. The decision so taken is well within the powers of the

Central Government. There are no reasons for an interference

on Ext.P14, in exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226

of the Constitution of India, when the factual findings arrived at

are not perverse.

6. On 18.01.2021, the petitioners have filed a reply

affidavit to the statement filed by respondents 1 and 2,

reiterating the contentions raised in the writ petition. Along with

the reply affidavit, the petitioners have placed on record Ext.P19

order dated 29.12.2020 of the 1st respondent, whereby

permission was granted to the petitioners' college for conducting

BUMS course, for the academic session 2020-21. Relying on

Ext.P19, the petitioner would contend that the same authority,

which has denied permission to the petitioners' college for the

academic session 2018-19, has verified the facilities and

faculties and issued letter of permission for all subsequent

years. In view of Ext.P14 order, the future of students, who

were admitted on the basis of the orders of this Court and are

presently continuing, are put on suspended animation.

7. On 29.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for

consideration, it was pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel

for the petitioners that, while granting Ext.P9 interim order

dated 24.10.2018 in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018, this Court has

noticed the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel

for the Kerala University of Health Sciences that the University

had not found out any serious deficiencies in the petitioners'

college. The said submission was with reference to the

application for continuation of affiliation of BUMS course, for the

academic session 2018-2019. The learned Senior Counsel for

the petitioners submitted that, the faculties in respect of whom

deficiencies are pointed out in Exts.P8 and P14 orders of the

Central Government were present at the time of the inspection

conducted by the 3rd respondent University. The learned

Standing Counsel for the University sought time to get

instructions and to place on record a copy of the inspection

report, along with a memo.

8. In terms of the order of this Court dated 29.01.2021,

the learned Standing Counsel for the 3 rd respondent University

has placed on record, along with a memo dated 12.02.2021, the

inspection report of the Inspectors dated 06.03.2018, for the

academic year 2018-19.

9. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners,

the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the 1 st

respondent Union of India, the learned Standing Counsel for the

2nd respondent Central Council for Indian Medicines and also the

learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent Kerala

University for Health Sciences.

9.1. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would

contend that the finding in Ext.P14 order of the 1 st respondent

that the petitioners' college is not fulfilling the basic minimum

requirements as specified in the provisions of the Indian

Medicine Central Council Act and the Regulations made

thereunder is per se arbitrary and patently illegal. Further,

Ext.P14 order of the 1st respondent is not one issued in terms of

the directions contained in Ext.P11 judgment of this Court dated

25.08.2020 in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018, whereby this Court set

aside Ext.P8 order dated 17.10.2018 and directed

reconsideration of the matter, in the light of the fact that the

petitioners' college has been granted letter of permission for the

subsequent academic session, i.e., 2019-20, and students have

been admitted to BUMS course, based on the affiliation granted

by the 3rd respondent University. Moreover, the students

admitted to BUMS course during the academic session 2018-19,

on the strength of Ext.P9 interim order of this Court in W.P.

(C)No.34445 of 2018, are pursuing their studies. Considering

the above aspects, the 1st respondent ought to have granted

permission to the petitioners' college to admit students to BUMS

course for the academic session 2018-19 as well. In such

circumstances, the stand taken by the 1 st respondent in Ext.P14

order cannot be sustained. The learned Senior Counsel would

point out that, as evident from the inspection report of the

Inspectors of the 3rd respondent University, placed on record

along with the memo filed by the learned Standing Counsel for

the University, the faculties found absent in the inspection

conducted by the 2nd respondent Central Council for the

academic session 2018-19 were physically present in the

petitioners' college, at the time of inspection conducted by the

University for the academic session 2019-20, for grant of

affiliation.

9.2. The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for

the 1st respondent Union of India and also the learned Standing

Counsel for the 2nd respondent Central Council for Indian

Medicine would contend that, no interference is warranted on

Ext.P14 order of the Central Government, whereby permission

was declined to the petitioners' college for admission to BUMS

course, for the academic session 2018-19. The factual findings

in Ext.P14 that there are shortcomings and deficiencies in the

petitioners' college and that, the college has not fulfilled the

minimum requirements, as specified in the provisions of the

Indian Medicine Central Council Act and the Regulations made

thereunder, are neither perverse or patently illegal, warranting

an interference by this Court, in exercise of the writ jurisdiction

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The deficiencies

pointed out in Ext.P14 order are serious and fundamental in

nature, which will adversely affect the ability of the petitioners'

college to provide quality medical education in terms of the

relevant statutory provisions. At any rate, in the absence of any

vitiating circumstances pointed out by the petitioners, no

interference is warranted on Ext.P14 order. In the said order, the

Central Government noticed that, the deficiencies pointed out in

respect of Higher Faculties stands admitted in the written

submission made on behalf of the petitioners' college. The

petitioners have not made out a case for interference on the

factual findings in Ext.P14 order, which are based on the

findings in the inspection conducted by the Central Council, in

their college, on 24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018. The inspection

report of the Inspectors of the 3rd respondent University, which

is placed on record along with the memo filed by the learned

Standing Counsel for the University, is one dated 06.03.2018.

In view of the provisions under the Regulations of 2016, the

grant of permission by the Central Government or grant of

affiliation by the University for the subsequent academic

session, is not a valid reason to interfere with Ext.P14 order of

the Central Government declining permission to the petitioners'

college for the previous academic session. The findings in

Ext.P14 order are based on the findings in the report of the

Inspectors deputed by the Central Council and also the

recommendations of the Central Council.

9.3. The learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent

University would submit that grant of affiliation to the

petitioners' college for BUMS course, for the academic session

2018-19, was based on Ext.P4 interim order of this Court dated

24.10.2018 in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018. For the academic

session, the Inspectors deputed by the University conducted

inspection in the petitioners' college on 06.03.2018. Thereafter,

the Inspectors deputed by the 2nd respondent Central Council

conducted inspection in the petitioners' college on 24.05.2018

and 25.05.2018, in which certain deficiencies were noticed. The

learned Standing Counsel would submit that, as found in

Ext.P14 order, the lack of faculties noticed in Ext.P14 order is a

deficiency serious and fundamental in nature, which will

adversely affect the ability of the petitioners' college to provide

quality medical education, in terms of the relevant Regulations.

10. The Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 was

enacted by the Central Government to provide for the

constitution of a Central Council of Indian Medicine and the

maintenance of a Central Register of Indian Medicine and for

matters connected therewith. Section 2(1)(e) of the Act defines

'Indian medicine' to mean the system of Indian medicine

commonly known as Ashtang Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani Tibb or

Sowa-Rigpa, whether supplemented or not by such modern

advances, as the Central Council may declare by notification

from time to time. Section 2(ea) of the Act defines 'medical

college' to mean a college of Indian Medicine, whether known as

such or by any other name, in which a person may undergo a

course of study or training including any post-graduate course of

study or training which will qualify him for the award of a

recognised medical qualification.

10.1. Section 13A of the Act deals with permission for

establishment of new medical college, new course of study, etc.

As per sub-section (1) of Section 13A, notwithstanding anything

contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in

force,-(a) no person shall establish a medical college; or (b) no

medical college shall- (i) open a new or higher course of study

or training, including a postgraduate course of study or training,

which would enable a student of such course or training to

qualify himself for the award of any recognised medical

qualification; or (ii) increase its admission capacity in any course

of study or training including a postgraduate course of study or

training, except with the previous permission of the Central

Government obtained in accordance with the provisions of this

section. As per Explanation 1, for the purposes of this Section,

'person' includes any University or a trust, but does not include

the Central Government. As per Explanation 2, for the purposes

of this section, 'admission capacity', in relation to any course of

study or training, including postgraduate course of study or

training, in a medical college, means the maximum number of

students as may be fixed by the Central Government from time

to time for being admitted to such course or training.

10.2. As per sub-section (2) of Section 13A of the Act,

every person or medical college shall, for the purpose of

obtaining permission under sub-section (1), submit to the

Central Government a scheme in accordance with the provisions

of sub-section (3) and the Central Government shall refer the

scheme to the Central Council for its recommendations. As per

sub-section (3) of Section 13A, the scheme referred to in sub-

section (2), shall be in such form and contain such particulars

and be preferred in such manner and accompanied with such

fee, as may be prescribed. As per sub-section (4) of Section

13A, on receipt of a scheme from the Central Government under

sub-section (2), the Central Council may obtain such other

particulars as may be considered necessary by it from the

person or the medical college concerned, and thereafter, it may-

(a) if the scheme is defective and does not contain necessary

particulars, give a reasonable opportunity to the person or

medical college concerned for making a written representation

and it shall be open to such person or medical college to rectify

the defects, if any, specified by the Central Council; (b) consider

the scheme, having regard to the factors referred to in sub-

section (8) and submit it to the Central Government together

with its recommendations thereon within a period not exceeding

six months from the date of receipt of the reference from the

Central Government.

10.3. As per sub-section (5) of Section 13A of the Act, the

Central Government may, after considering the scheme and

recommendations of the Central Council under sub-section (4)

and after obtaining, where necessary, such other particulars as

may be considered necessary by it from the person or medical

college concerned and having regard to the factors referred to in

sub-section (8), either approve the scheme with such

conditions, if any, as it may consider necessary or disapprove

the scheme and any such approval shall constitute as a

permission under sub-section (1). As per the first proviso to

sub-section (5), no scheme shall be disapproved by the Central

Government except after giving the person or medical college

concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard. As per the

second proviso to sub-section (5), nothing in this sub-section

shall prevent any person or medical college whose scheme has

not been approved by the Central Government to submit a fresh

scheme and the provisions of this section shall apply to such

scheme as if such scheme had been submitted for the first time

under sub-section (2).

10.4. As per sub-section (6) of Section 13A of the Act,

where, within a period of one year from the date of submission

of the scheme to the Central Government under sub-section (2),

no order is communicated by the Central Government to the

person or medical college submitting the scheme, such scheme

shall be deemed to have been approved by the Central

Government in the form in which it was submitted, and,

accordingly, the permission of the Central Government required

under sub-section (1) shall also be deemed to have been

granted. As per sub-section (7) of Section 13A, in computing

the time-limit specified in sub-section (6), the time taken by the

person or medical college concerned submitting the scheme, in

furnishing any particulars called for by the Central Council, or by

the Central Government, shall be excluded.

10.5. As per sub-section (8) of Section 13A of the Act, the

Central Council while making its recommendations under clause

(b) of sub-section (4) and the Central Government while passing

an order, either approving or disapproving the scheme under

subsection (5), shall have due regard to the following factors,

namely-(a) whether the proposed medical college or the existing

medical college seeking to open a new or higher course of study

or training, would be in a position to offer the minimum

standards of medical education as prescribed by the Central

Council under Section 22; (b) whether the person seeking to

establish a medical college or the existing medical college

seeking to open a new or higher course of study or training or to

increase its admission capacity has adequate financial

resources; (c) whether necessary facilities in respect of staff,

equipment, accommodation, training, hospital or other facilities

to ensure proper functioning of the medical college or

conducting the new course of study or training or

accommodating the increased admission capacity have been

provided or would be provided within the time-limit specified in

the scheme; (d) whether adequate hospital facilities, having

regard to the number of students likely to attend such medical

college or course of study or training or the increased admission

capacity have been provided or would be provided within the

time-limit specified in the scheme; (e) whether any

arrangement has been made or programme drawn to impart

proper training to students likely to attend such medical college

or the course of study or training by persons having recognised

medical qualifications; (f) the requirement of manpower in the

field of practice of Indian medicine in the college; (g) any other

factors as may be prescribed. As per sub-section (9) of Section

13A of the Act, where the Central Government passes an order

either approving or disapproving a scheme under this section, a

copy of the order shall be communicated to the person or

medical college concerned.

10.6. Section 13B of the Act deals with non-recognition of

medical qualifications in certain cases. As per sub-section (1) of

Section 13B, where any medical college is established without

the previous permission of the Central Government in

accordance with the provisions of Section 13A, medical

qualification granted to any student of such medical college shall

not be deemed to be a recognised medical qualification for the

purposes of this Act. As per sub-section (2) of Section 13B,

where any medical college opens a new or higher course of

study or training including a postgraduate course of study or

training without the previous permission of the Central

Government in accordance with the provisions of Section 13A,

medical qualification granted to any student of such medical

college on the basis of such study or training shall not be

deemed to be a recognised medical qualification for the

purposes of this Act. As per sub-section (3) of Section 13B,

where any medical college increases its admission capacity in

any course of study or training without the previous permission

of the Central Government in accordance with the provisions of

Section 13A, medical qualification granted to any student of

such medical college on the basis of the increase in its

admission capacity shall not be deemed to be a recognised

medical qualification for the purposes of this Act.

10.7. Section 14 of the Act deals with recognition of

medical qualifications granted by certain medical institutions in

India. As per sub-section (1) of Section 14, the medical

qualifications granted by any University, Board, or other medical

institution in India which are included in the Second Schedule

shall be recognised medical qualifications or the purposes of this

Act. As per sub-section (1) of Section 14, any University, Board

or other medical institution in India which grants a medical

qualification not included in the Second Schedule may apply to

the Central Government to have any such qualification

recognised, and the Central Government, after consulting the

Central Council, may, by notification in the Official Gazette,

amend the Second Schedule so as to include such qualification

therein, and any such notification may also direct that an entry

shall be made in the last column of the Second Schedule against

such medical qualification declaring that it shall be a recognised

medical qualification only when granted after a specified date.

10.8. Section 19 of the Act deals with Inspectors at

examinations. As per sub-section (1) of Section 19, the Central

Council shall appoint such number of medical inspectors as it

may deem requisite to inspect any medical college, hospital or

other institution where education in Indian medicine is given, or

to attend any examination held by any University, Board or

medical institution for the purpose of recommending to the

Central Government recognition of medical qualifications

granted by that University, Board or medical institution. As per

sub-section (2) of Section 19, the medical inspectors shall not

interfere with the conduct of any training or examination, but

shall report to the Central Council on the adequacy of the

standards of education including staff, equipment,

accommodation, training and other facilities prescribed for

giving education in Indian medicine or on the sufficiency of

every examination which they attend. As per sub-section (3) of

Section 19, the Central Council shall forward a copy of any such

report to the University, Board or medical institution concerned,

and shall also forward a copy with the remarks of the University,

Board or medical institution thereon, to the Central

Government.

10.9. Section 21 of the Act deals with withdrawal of

recognition. As per sub-section (1) of Section 21, when upon

report by the inspector or the visitor, it appears to the Central

Council- (a) that the courses of study and examination to be

undergone in, or the proficiency required from candidates at any

examination held by, any University, Board or medical

institution, or (b) that the staff, equipment, accommodation,

training and other facilities for instruction and training provided

in such University, Board or medical institution or in any college

or other institution affiliated to the University, do not conform to

the standard prescribed by the Central Council, the Central

Council shall make a representation to that effect to the Central

Government. As per sub-section (2) of Section 21, after

considering such representation, the Central Government may

send it to the Government of the State in which the University,

Board or medical institution is situated and the State

Government shall forward it along with such remarks as it may

choose to make to the University, Board or medical institution,

with an intimation of the period within which the University,

Board or medical institution may submit its explanation to the

State Government.

10.10. As per sub-section (3) of Section 21 of the Act, on

the receipt of the explanation or, where no explanation is

submitted within the period fixed, then, on the expiry of that

period, the State Government shall make its recommendations

to the Central Government. As per sub-section (4) of Section

21, the Central Government, after making such further inquiry,

if any, as it may think fit, may, by notification in the Official

Gazette, direct that an entry shall be made in the appropriate

Schedule against the said medical qualification declaring that it

shall be a recognised medical qualification only when granted

before a specified date, or that the said medical qualification if

granted to students of a specified college or institution affiliated

to any University shall be recognised medical qualification only

when granted before a specified date or, as the case may be,

that the said medical qualification shall be recognised medical

qualification in relation to a specified college or institution

affiliated to any University only when granted after a specified

date.

10.11. Section 22 of the Act deals with minimum

standards of education in Indian medicine. As per sub-section

(1) of Section 22, the Central Council may prescribe the

minimum standards of education in Indian medicine, required

for granting recognised medical qualifications by Universities,

Boards or medical institutions in India. As per sub-section (2) of

Section 22, copies of the draft regulations and of all subsequent

amendments thereof shall be furnished by the Central Council to

all State Governments and the Central Council shall, before

submitting the regulations or any amendment thereof, as the

case may be, to the Central Government for sanction, take into

consideration the comments of any State Government received

within three months from the furnishing of the copies as

aforesaid. As per sub-section (3) of Section 22, each of the

Committees referred to in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-section

(1) of Section 9 shall, from time to time, report to the Central

Council on the efficacy of the regulations and may recommend

to the Central Council such amendments thereof as it may think

fit.

10.12. Section 36 of the Act deals with power to make

regulations. As per sub-section (1) of Section 36, the Central

Council may, with the previous sanction of the Central

Government by notification in the official Gazette, make

regulations generally to carry out the purposes of this Act,

without prejudice to the generality of this power, such

regulations may provide for the matters enumerated in clauses

(a) to (p). Clauses (i), (j), (k) and (p) of sub-section (1) of

Section 36 of the Act read as follows:

"36(1) xxx xxx xxx

(i) the courses and period of study and of practical training to be undertaken, the subjects of examination and the standards of proficiency therein to be obtained, in any university, Board or

medical institutions for grant of recognised medical qualifications;

(j) the standards of staff, equipment, accommodation, training and other facilities for education in Indian medicine;

(k) the conduct of professional examinations, qualifications of examiners and the conditions of admission to such examinations;

***

(p) any matter for which under this Act provision may be made by regulations."

11. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (j) of

section 36 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 and

in supersession of the Indian Medicine Central Council (Minimum

Standard Requirements of Unani Colleges and Attached

Hospitals) Regulations, 2013, except as respects things done or

omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central

Council of Indian Medicine, with the previous sanction of the

Central Government, made the Indian Medicine Central Council

(Requirements of Minimum Standard for under-graduate Unani

Colleges and attached Hospitals) Regulations, 2016.

11.1. Regulation 3 deals with requirements of minimum

standard to grant of permission. As per clause (a) of sub-

regulation (1) of Regulation 3, the Unani Colleges established

under Section 13A and existing under Section 13C of the Act

and their attached hospitals shall fulfill the requirements of

minimum standard for infrastructure and teaching and training

facilities referred to in the Regulations 4 to 11 up to the 31st

December of every year for consideration of grant of

permissions for undertaking admissions in the coming academic

session. As per clause (b), the Central Council shall visit the

college suo moto three months before the expiry of permission;

as per clause (c), the proforma of visit as prescribed by the

Central Council on its website shall be filled online by the

colleges and visitors respectively followed by submission of a

hard copy of the same as per visitors guidelines issued by

Central Council from time to time; as per clause (d), the

videography and photography of staff and infrastructure during

the visit shall be made by the visitors and submitted along with

detailed report and observations to the Central Council; as per

clause (e), after submission of online detailed report and

observations by the visitors to the Central Council, the Central

Council shall submit its recommendation along with detailed

report to the Central Government within a period of one month

from the submission of report by the visitors; as per clause (f),

the Central Council shall certify that teaching faculty present in

the college is not working at any other place; as per clause (g),

the position prevailed on the date of visit to assess the

fulfilment of requirements as specified in these regulations

except sub-regulation (2) of regulation 7 shall be taken into

consideration for grant of conditional permission or permission

for a period of five years to the colleges.

11.2. Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 3 deals with

requirements of minimum standard to grant of permission for a

period of five years. As per clause (a) of sub-regulation (2) of

Regulation 3, after fulfilment of the requirement as per these

Regulations by the college, the permission shall be granted to

undertake admissions for a period of five years. The college

shall be randomly inspected within the said period on receipt of

any complaint; or if from online Bio-metric attendance it is

found that teaching, non-teaching staff, hospital staff not

present regularly, or hospital is not properly functional, or

otherwise as required by the Central Government or by the

Central Council. As per clause (b), any deficiencies arising within

said period shall be fulfilled by the college within hundred-fifty

days under intimation to the Central Council otherwise the

permission for a period of five years deemed to be withdrawn.

As per clause (c), colleges which were granted permission for a

period not exceeding five years from the academic session

2014-15 to 2018-19 and 2015-16 to 2019-2020 shall maintain

the requirements as specified under Regulations 4 to 11

otherwise the permission for a period of five years shall be

withdrawn.

11.3. Sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 3 deals with

requirements of minimum standard to grant of conditional

permission of one year. As per clause (a) of sub-regulation (3)

of Regulation 3, the conditional permission of one year for

particular academic session shall be granted only to those

colleges which are fulfilling following requirements on the basis

of inspection by the Central Council between the 31st December

to the 31st March for the succeeding academic session; (i) the

requirement of teachers as specified in Schedule-V; (ii) the

requirement of teaching hospital as specified under sub-

regulation (2) of regulation 7; (iii) availability of minimum

seventy-five percent of required equipment as specified in

Schedule-VII; (iv) availability of herbal garden as specified in

Schedule-III; (v) availability of hospital staff as specified in

Schedule-IV; (vi) availability of technical and other staff as

specified in Schedule-VI; (vii) availability of college council as

specified in sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 9; (viii) availability

of college website as specified in sub-regulation (2) of

Regulation 9; (ix) availability of bio-metric attendance as

specified in sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 9; and (x)

availability of minimum constructed area of college and hospital

as specified in Regulation 5. As per clause (b) of sub-regulation

(3) of Regulation 3, the colleges, which have been granted

conditional permission or which have been denied permission for

the academic session 2015-16 shall be required to fulfill the

requirements as specified above in clause (a) to obtain the

conditional permission of one year for particular academic

session or for a period of five years as specified in these

regulations 4 to 11.

11.4. Regulation 4 deals with requirement of land; and

Regulation 5 deals with requirement of minimum constructed

area. Regulation 6 deals with admission capacity. As per

Regulation 6, the annual intake capacity of the colleges shall be

in the slabs of sixty and hundred and the colleges having intake

capacity of less than sixty or sixty-one to hundred seats, shall

comply the requirements for sixty or hundred seats respectively,

as specified in Schedules-I to VII.

11.5. Regulation 7 deals with requirement of teaching

hospital. As per sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 7, the teaching

hospital shall fulfill all the statutory requirements of the

concerned State or Union territory or local authority to establish

and run the hospital and shall submit the updated certified

copies of such permission(s) or clearance(s) to the Central

Government and the Central Council. The concerned State

Government or Union territory shall issue the No Objection

Certificate to such applicant colleges after verifying the

availability of such permission(s) or clearance(s). Sub-regulation

(2) of Regulation 7 deals with requirement of beds, bed

occupancy and out-patient department attendance; sub-

regulation (3) deals with maintenance of record of attendance of

out-patient department and in-patient department patients;

sub-regulation (4) deals with space requirement; sub-regulation

(5) deals with out-patient department; sub-regulation (6) deals

with in-patient department; sub-regulation (7) deals with

Tashkhees Amraz (Clinical Laboratory for clinical diagnosis and

investigations); and sub-regulation (8) deals with hospital staff.

11.6. Regulation 8 deals with requirements of college.

Clause (a) of sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 8 deals with

teaching staff. As per clause (a) of sub-regulation (1) of

Regulation 8, there shall be minimum thirty full time teachers

and forty-five full time teachers appointed on regular basis for

admissions of up to sixty students and sixty-one to hundred

students respectively with the addition of ten part-time teachers

[eight teachers of Modern Medicine, one teacher of Arabic (to

teach Arabic language as well as Mantiq-o-Falsafa) and one

teacher to teach Communication Skills] for each slab as

specified in Schedule-V, the teacher fulfilling the eligibility norms

of the related teaching post or subject teacher shall be

appointed on deputation or contractual basis. Clause (b) of sub-

regulation (1) of Regulation 8 deals with age of superannuation

of teachers. As per clause (b) of sub-regulation (1), the age of

superannuation of teachers shall be as per the order of the

Central Government or State Government or University Grant

Commission. The retired teachers, fulfilling the eligibility norms

of teachers may be re-employed up to the age of sixty-five

years as full-time teacher. As per clause (c) of sub-regulation

(1), the details of every teacher such as academic qualification,

total teaching experience along with name of previous

institutions, date of joining shall be displayed on the website of

colleges. As per clause (d) of sub-regulation (1), the list of all

the teachers with complete details such as code allotted by the

Central Council, academic qualification, total teaching

experience along with name of previous institutions and present

institute, shall be displayed on the website of the Central

Council. Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 8 deals with

requirement of technical and other staff. As per sub-regulation

(2), technical and other staff in various units and departments

of the college shall be as specified in Schedule-VI.

11.7. Regulation 9 deals with miscellaneous requirements.

Sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 9 deals with college council;

and sub-regulation (2) deals with college web site. As per sub-

regulation (2) of Regulation 9, each and every college or

institute shall have its own website, wherein the following

details, updated in the first week of every month, shall be

provided- (a) details of Director or Dean or Principal and Medical

Superintendent including their name, age, registration number,

qualification, date of joining, complete address with telephone

or mobile numbers and State Trunk Dialing code, fax and E-mail

etc; (b) details of teaching staff along with their photograph,

registration number, date of birth, qualification, experience,

department etc.; (c) details of the non-teaching staff of college

and hospital staff along with their department; (d) details of the

sanctioned intake capacity of various courses under graduate as

well as post graduate; (e) list of students admitted, merit-wise,

course-wise for the current and previous year; (f) any research

publications during the last one year; (g) details of any

Continuous Medical Education (CME) programmes, conferences

and/or any academic activities conducted by the institution; (h)

details of any awards and achievement received by the students

or faculty; (i) details of the affiliated University and its Vice-

Chancellor and Registrars; (j) result of all the examinations of

last one year; (k) detailed status of recognition of all the

courses; (l) details of clinical material in the hospital; (m) the

college website shall be linked with the CCIM website, which

shall be linked to the Ministry's website as well; and (n) the

month-wise analysis of attendance of teaching, non-teaching

college staff, hospital staff, students and patients in out-patient

department and in-patient department shall be displayed on

college website.

11.8. Sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 9 deals with bio-

metric attendance. As per clause (i) of sub-regulation (3) of

Regulation 9, it is mandatory to have web based and CRC

(Central Registration Certificate issued by the Central Council)

linked computerised bio-metric attendance system for teaching

staff and web based computerised bio-metric attendance system

for non-teaching college staff and hospital staff. As per clause

(ii) of sub-regulation (3), for conditional permission bio-metric

attendance shall be web based and CRC linked from the 1st

December, 2016. As per clause (iii) of sub-regulation (3), the

colleges which were granted permission for a period not

exceeding five years from the academic session 2014-15 and

2015-16 shall maintain web based and CRC linked bio-metric

attendance from the 1st December, 2016.

11.9. Regulation 10 deals with phase-wise specific

requirements of new colleges for starting BUMS course, under

Section 13A of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act.

Regulation 10 reads thus;

"10. Phase-wise specific requirements of new colleges.- (1) An Unani College seeking permission for starting Kamiletib O Jarahat (Bachelor of Unani Medicine and Surgery) Course under the provisions of Section 13A of the Act, shall establish infrastructure and manpower as given below:

(a) Before admission of the first batch of students, the college shall have-

(i) at the time of submission of application, there shall be a fully developed hospital building as specified in Regulations 4 and 5 with functional Unani hospital prior two years from the date of application, having number of beds, bed occupancy and Out-Patient Department attendance corresponding to the annual students intake capacity as specified in the sub-regulation (2) of regulation 7;

(ii) all the teachers with the requisite qualifications as specified in regulation 8 and non-teaching staff as specified in Schedule-VI, which are required for first professional year of teaching and training shall be appointed, and wherever there is shortfall of Professors, equal number of Readers shall be appointed;

(iii) minimum one specialist doctor or clinical teacher, each of Moalajat, Ilaj Bid Tadbeer, Jarahat, Ain, Uzn, Anaf wa Halaq, Amraze Niswan wa Ilmul Qabalat and Amraze Atfal appointed for operating the teaching hospital and the experience of specialist doctor or clinical teacher shall be considered as a teacher from the date of appointment of the specialist doctor or two year prior to submission of application by the applicant to the Central Government to establish a college whichever is lesser;

(iv) a library with two thousand and five hundred books, seating capacity of fifty persons for up to sixty admissions and eighty persons seating capacity for sixty-one to hundred admissions and staff as specified in Schedule-VI;

(v) well-equipped and furnished two lecture halls and teaching departments and laboratories and museums essential for the first professional year teaching as specified in Schedules - I to VII;

(vi) a medicinal plants garden covering over two thousand and five hundred square meter of land and four thousand square meter of land for up to sixty seats and sixty-one to one hundred seats respectively with plantation of minimum one hundred species of medicinal plants;

(vii) all the hospital staff shall be as specified in Schedule- IV; and

(viii) it is mandatory to have web based and CRC (Central Registration Certificate issued by the Central Council) linked computerised bio-metric attendance system for teaching staff and web based computerised bio-metric attendance system for non-teaching college staff and hospital staff.

(b) Before the admission of the second batch of students, the college shall have-

(i) there shall be functional Unani hospital having appropriate number of beds, bed occupancy and Out- Patient Department attendance corresponding to the annual students intake capacity as specified in the sub- regulation (2) of regulation 7;

(ii) all the teachers with the requisite qualification as specified in regulation 8 and non-teaching staff as specified in Schedule-VI, which are required for the first and the second professional years teaching and training shall be appointed, and wherever there is shortfall of Professors, equal number of Readers shall be appointed;

(iii) minimum one specialist doctor or one clinical teacher in each of Moalajat, Ilaj Bid Tadbeer, Jarahat, Ain, Uzn, Anaf wa Halaq, Amraze Niswan wa Ilmul Qabalat and Amraze Atfal departments for working in the college hospital;

(iv) a library with five thousand books, seating capacity of fifty persons for up to sixty admissions and eighty persons

seating capacity for sixty-one to hundred admissions and staff as specified in Schedule-VI;

(v) well-equipped and furnished three lecture halls and teaching departments, laboratories and museums, essential for first and second professional years of teaching as specified in Schedules - I to VII;

(vi) minimum one hundred and fifty species of medicinal plants and herbarium-cum-demonstration hall in the medicinal plant garden;

(vii) all the hospital staff shall be as specified in Schedule- IV; and

(viii) it is mandatory to have web based and CRC (Central Registration Certificate issued by the Central Council) linked computerised bio-metric attendance system for teaching staff and web based computerised bio-metric attendance system for non-teaching college staff and hospital staff.

(c) Before the admission of third batch of students, the college shall have-

(i) there shall be functional Unani hospital having appropriate number of beds, bed occupancy and Out- Patient Department attendance corresponding to the annual students intake capacity as specified in the sub- regulation (2) of regulation 7;

(ii) all teachers with the requisite qualification as specified in regulation 8 and non-teaching staff as specified in Schedule-VI, which are required for the first, second and third professional years of teaching and training shall be

appointed, and wherever there is shortfall of Professors, equal number of Readers shall be appointed;

(iii) minimum one specialist doctor or one clinical teacher in each of Moalajat, Ilaj Bid Tadbeer, Jarahat, Ain, Uzn, Anaf wa Halaq, Amraze Niswan wa Ilmul Qabalat and Amraze Atfal departments for working in the college hospital;

(iv) a library with five thousand books, seating capacity of fifty persons for up to sixty admissions and eighty persons seating capacity for sixty-one to hundred admissions and staffas specified in Schedule-VI;

(v) well-equipped and furnished three lecture halls and teaching departments, laboratories and museums, essential for first, second and third professional years of teaching as specified in Schedules - I to VII;

(vi) minimum one hundred and fifty species of medicinal plants and herbarium-cum-demonstration hall in the medicinal plant garden;

(vii) all the hospital staff shall be as specified in Schedule- IV;

(viii) there shall be a Teaching Pharmacy (Saidla) and Quality Testing Laboratory attached to Department of Pharmacy with minimum area as specified in Schedule -II and equipment as per Schedule-VII for preparation of medicine as per syllabus; and

(ix) it is mandatory to have web based and CRC (Central Registration Certificate issued by the Central Council) linked computerised bio-metric attendance system for teaching staff and web based computerised bio-metric

attendance system for non-teaching college staff and hospital staff.

(d) Before the admission of the fourth batch of students, the college shall have-

(i) there shall be functional Unani hospital having appropriate number of beds, bed occupancy and Out- Patient Department attendance corresponding to the annual students intake capacity as specified in the sub- regulation (2) of regulation 7;

(ii) all teachers with the requisite qualification as mentioned in regulation 8 and non-teaching staff as specified in Schedule-VI, which are required for the first, second, third and fourth i.e. final professional years of teaching and training shall be appointed;

(iii) all infrastructure and manpower requirements of college, hospital and other units in accordance with as specified in these regulations 4 to 11;

(iv) a library with seven thousand and five hundred books, seating capacity of fifty persons for up to sixty admissions and eighty persons seating capacity for sixty-one to hundred admissions and staff as specified in Schedule-VI;

(v) a fully developed medicinal plants garden as specified in Schedule-III;

(vi) fully functional laboratories and pharmacy with drug testing facilities as specified in Schedules I to VII;

(vii) assured round the clock availability of medical services including medicines, paramedical staff, doctors and casualty management in the hospital; and

(viii) it is mandatory to have web based and CRC (Central Registration Certificate issued by the Central Council) linked computerised bio-metric attendance system for teaching staff and web based computerised bio-metric attendance system for non-teaching college staff and hospital staff.

(2) (a)The permission to establish a new medical college and admission to the students shall be granted initially for a period of one year and shall be renewed on yearly basis subject to verification of achievement of annual targets as specified above in sub-regulation (1).

(b) it shall be the responsibility of the college to apply to the Central Council for purpose of renewal six months prior to the expiry of the initial permission.

(c) This process of renewal of permission shall continue till such time the establishment of the new medical college is completed for passing-out of the first batch. (3) The person or Medical College who applies under section 13A of the Act for establishment of new medical college, opening of new or higher course of study or training and increase of admission capacity, shall be required to maintain web based and CRC (Central Registration Certificate issued by the Central Council) linked bio-metric attendance system for teaching staff and web based bio-metric attendance system for non-teaching college staff, hospital staff and web linked computerised central registration system for maintaining the records of patients in Out-patient department and In-patient department of the hospital. These requirements for those

applicants who applied in the year 2015 shall not be taken into consideration for issuance of the Letter of Intent but they shall be fulfilled these requirements before issuance of the Letter of Permission for the academic session 2016-

17." (underline supplied)

11.10. Regulation 11 deals with list of equipments,

machineries, etc. As per Regulation 11, to ensure proper

provision of teaching and training material to the students, the

colleges shall possess the minimum ninety percent of required

equipment, machineries, etc. in the teaching departments,

hospital, laboratories and dissection hall, library, pharmacy and

other units of the college in sufficient numbers, as specified

under Schedules-I to VII. Regulation 12 deals with date of

completion of permission process and cut-off-date for admission

in Unani Colleges. As per sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 12,

the process of grant or denial of permission to the Unani

colleges for taking admissions in the Unani colleges shall be

completed by the 31st July of each academic session. As per sub-

regulation (2) of Regulation 12, the cut-off-date for admission in

Unani colleges shall be the 30 th September of each academic

session.

11.11. Schedule V of the Indian Medicine Central Council

(Requirements of Minimum Standard for under-graduate Unani

Colleges and attached Hospitals) Regulations, 2016, which deals

with details of teaching staff in an Unani College is extracted

hereunder;

SCHEDULE-V [See regulation 3, regulation 6, regulation 7,regulation 8, regulation 10 and regulation 11] DETAILS OF TEACHING STAFF IN AN UNANI COLLEGE S. Teaching Requirement of teaching staff No Departme Up to 60 students From 61 to 100 nt students (1) (2) (3) (4) Prof Associate Assistant Prof Associate Assistant Prof. Prof. Prof. Prof.

1. Kulliyat 1 or 1 1 1 1 1

2. Tashreehul 1 or 1 1 1 1 1 badan

3. Munafeul 1 or 1 1 1 1 1 Aza

4. Ilmul Advia 1 or 1 1 1 1 1

5. Ilmul Saidla 1 or 1 1 1 1 1

6. Mahiyatul 1 or 1 1 1 1 1 Amraz

7. Tahaffuzi 1 or 1 2 1 1 2 wa Samaji Tib

8. Moalajat 1 or 1 2 1 1 2

9. Niswan wa 1 or 1 1 1 1 2 Qabalat

10. Ilmul Atfal 1 or 1 1 1 1 1

11. Jarahat 1 or 1 1 1 1 1

12. Ain, uzn. 1 or 1 1 1 1 1 Halaq wa asnan

13. Amraze Jild 1 or 1 1 1 1 1 wa Tazeeniyat

14. Ilaj bit 1 or 1 1 1 1 1 Tadbeer 14 16 14 14 17

Note:

(i) Apart from above, one teacher of Arabic (to teach Arabic language as well as Mantiq-o-Falsafa), one teacher to teach Communication Skills and eight Consultants of Modern Medicine as specified at Schedule-IV (SL. No.13 to 21) shall be engaged for teaching on part time basis. For Pre-tib additional teachers to teach science and English shall be engaged on contract or Part time basis.

(ii) The requirement of part time teachers shall be minimum any five as mentioned above in point i. for conditional permission to undertake admission for particular academic session.

(iii) The deficiency of teachers for up to sixty intake capacity shall not exceed more than ten percent of total requirement with availability of minimum one teacher in each of fourteen Departments. The total number of Higher Faculty shall not be less than eleven Professors or Readers distributed in minimum eleven Departments. This relaxation is for seeking conditional permission to undertake admission for particular academic session. For example - the college having up to sixty seats intake capacity shall have minimum

twenty-seven total faculties, out of which minimum eleven Professors or Readers covering not less than eleven Departments.

(iv) The deficiency of total teachers for sixty-one to hundred intake capacity shall not exceed more than ten percent of total requirement and deficiency of higher faculty shall not exceed more than twenty percent of total teachers with availability of minimum one Higher faculty and one Lecturer in each of fourteen Departments. The total number of Higher Faculty shall not be less than nineteen. This relaxation is for seeking conditional permission to undertake admission for particular academic session. For example- the college having sixty-one to hundred seats intake capacity shall have minimum forty total faculties, out of which minimum nineteen Professors or Readers covering all fourteen Departments.

(v) Wherever additional Professors or Readers are available in the department, the additional Professor shall be considered against the requirement of Reader or Lecturer and additional Reader shall be considered against the requirement of Lecturer. For example- in a college with intake capacity from sixty-one to hundred under graduate seats, if there are three Professors or one Professor and two Readers or one Professor, one Reader and one Lecturer against the requirement of one Professor, one Reader and one Lecturer in the Department of Kulliyat, the college is fulfilling the

requirement of faculty in this department and there is no shortcoming of faculty in this department.

(vi) The Department of Tibbe Qanooni Wa Ilmul Samoom has been merged in Tahafuzi Wa Samaji Tib Department. (underline supplied)

12. As already noticed, Regulation 3 of the Regulations of

2016 deals with requirements of minimum standard to grant of

permission. As per clause (a) of sub-regulation (1) of Regulation

3, the Unani Colleges established under Section 13A and

existing under Section 13C of the Act and their attached

hospitals shall fulfill the requirements of minimum standard for

infrastructure and teaching and training facilities referred to in

the Regulations 4 to 11 up to the 31st December of every year

for consideration of grant of permissions for undertaking

admissions in the coming academic session. As per clause (d) of

sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 3, the videography and

photography of staff and infrastructure during the visit shall be

made by the visitors and submitted along with detailed report

and observations to the Central Council. As per clause (g) of

sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 3, the position prevailed on the

date of visit to assess the fulfilment of requirements as specified

in these regulations except sub-regulation (2) of regulation 7

shall be taken into consideration for grant of conditional

permission or permission for a period of five years to the

colleges. Sub-regulation (2) of regulation 7 deals with

requirement of beds, bed occupancy and out-patient department

attendance.

12.1. Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 3 deals with

requirements of minimum standard to grant of permission for a

period of five years. As per clause (a) of sub-regulation (2) of

Regulation 3, the college which is granted permission to

undertake admissions for a period of five years shall be

randomly inspected within the said period on receipt of any

complaint; or if from online bio-metric attendance it is found

that teaching, non-teaching staff, hospital staff not present

regularly, or hospital is not properly functional, or otherwise as

required by the Central Government or by the Central Council.

As per clause (c) of sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 3, colleges

which were granted permission for a period not exceeding five

years from the academic session 2014-15 to 2018-19 and 2015-

16 to 2019-2020 shall maintain the requirements as specified

under Regulations 4 to 11 otherwise the permission for a period

of five years shall be withdrawn.

12.2. Sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 3 deals with

requirements of minimum standard to grant of conditional

permission of one year. As per clause (a) of sub-regulation (3)

of Regulation 3, the conditional permission of one year for

particular academic session shall be granted only to those

colleges which are fulfilling the requirements of sub-clauses (i)

to (x) of clause (a), on the basis of inspection by the Central

Council between the 31st December to the 31st March for the

succeeding academic session. Sub-clause (i) of clause (a) deals

with the requirement of teachers as specified in Schedule-V;

sub-clause (ii) deals with the requirement of teaching hospital

as specified under sub-regulation (2) of regulation 7; sub-clause

(iii) deals with availability of minimum seventy-five percent of

required equipment as specified in Schedule-VII; and sub-clause

(ix) deals with availability of bio-metric attendance as specified

in sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 9. As per clause (b) of sub-

regulation (3) of Regulation 3, the colleges, which have been

granted conditional permission or which have been denied

permission for the academic session 2015-16 shall be required

to fulfill the requirements as specified in clause (a) of sub-

regulation (3) to obtain the conditional permission of one year

for particular academic session or for a period of five years as

specified in Regulations 4 to 11.

12.3. As per Regulation 6, which deals with admission

capacity, the annual intake capacity of the colleges shall be in

the slabs of sixty and hundred and the colleges having intake

capacity of less than sixty or sixty-one to hundred seats, shall

comply the requirements for sixty or hundred seats respectively,

as specified in Schedules-I to VII. As per clause (a) of sub-

regulation (1) of Regulation 8, which deals with teaching staff,

there shall be minimum thirty full time teachers and forty-five

full time teachers appointed on regular basis for admissions of

up to sixty students and sixty-one to hundred students

respectively with the addition of ten part-time teachers [eight

teachers of Modern Medicine, one teacher of Arabic (to teach

Arabic language as well as Mantiq-o-Falsafa) and one teacher to

teach Communication Skills] for each slab as specified in

Schedule-V. As per clause (c) of sub-regulation (1) of Regulation

8, the details of every teacher such as academic qualification,

total teaching experience along with name of previous

institutions, date of joining, etc. shall be displayed on the

website of the colleges. As per clause (d) of sub-regulation (1),

the list of all the teachers with such details and the code allotted

by the Central Council shall be displayed on the website of the

Central Council.

12.4. As per sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 9, each and

every college or institute shall have its own website, wherein the

details enumerated in clauses (a) to (n), updated in the first

week of every month, shall be provided. As per clause (b) of

sub-regulation (2), the details of teaching staff along with their

photograph, registration number, date of birth, qualification,

experience, department, etc. shall be displayed on college

website. As per clause (m), the college website shall be linked

with the CCIM website, which shall be linked to the Ministry's

website as well. As per clause (n), the month-wise analysis of

attendance of teaching, non-teaching college staff, hospital staff,

students and patients in out-patient department and in-patient

department shall be displayed on college website. As per clause

(i) of sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 9, it is mandatory to have

web based and CRC linked computerised bio-metric attendance

system for teaching staff and web based computerised bio-

metric attendance system for non-teaching college staff and

hospital staff. As per clause (ii) of sub-regulation (3), for

conditional permission bio-metric attendance shall be web based

and CRC linked from the 1st December, 2016. As per clause (iii)

of sub-regulation (3), the colleges which were granted

permission for a period not exceeding five years from the

academic session 2014-15 and 2015-16 shall maintain web

based and CRC linked bio-metric attendance from the 1st

December, 2016.

12.5. Regulation 10 deals with phase-wise specific

requirements of new colleges. As per sub-regulation (1) of

Regulation 10, an Unani College seeking permission for starting

Kamiletib O Jarahat (BUMS) course under the provisions of

Section 13A of the Act, shall establish infrastructure and

manpower as given in clause (a) before admission of the first

batch of students; as given in clause (b) before the admission of

the second batch of students; as given in clause (c) before the

admission of third batch of students; and as given in clause (d)

before the admission of the fourth batch of students. As per

clause (a) of sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 10, the permission

to establish a new medical college and admission to the

students shall be granted initially for a period of one year and

shall be renewed on yearly basis subject to verification of

achievement of annual targets as specified in sub-regulation (1).

12.6. The requirement of teaching staff in an Unani

College is as specified in Schedule-V of the Regulations, which is

extracted hereinbefore at paragraph 10.11. As per Note (iii) of

Schedule-V, the deficiency of teachers for up to sixty intake

capacity shall not exceed more than ten percent of total

requirement with availability of minimum one teacher in each of

fourteen departments. The total number of Higher Faculty shall

not be less than eleven Professors or Readers distributed in

minimum eleven departments. This relaxation is for seeking

conditional permission to undertake admission for particular

academic session. The college having up to sixty seats intake

capacity shall have minimum twenty-seven total faculties, out of

which minimum eleven Professors or Readers covering not less

than eleven departments.

13. In view of the provisions under clause (a) of sub-

regulation (3) of Regulation 3, for grant of conditional

permission for the academic session 2018-19, the petitioners'

college has to fulfill the requirements of sub-clauses (i) to (x) of

clause (a), in the inspection conducted for that purpose, by the

Inspectors deputed by the Central Council. The requirements

under sub-clauses (i) to (x) of clause (a) includes, the

requirement of teachers as specified in Schedule-V; the

requirement of teaching hospital as specified under sub-

regulation (2) of regulation 7; availability of minimum seventy-

five percent of required equipment as specified in Schedule-VII;

availability of bio-metric attendance as specified in sub-

regulation (3) of Regulation 9; etc. In view of the provisions

under clause (b) of sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 3, the

petitioners' college, which has been granted conditional

permission for the academic session 2015-16, vide Ext.P1 order

of the 1st respondent dated 31.08.2016, has to fulfill the

requirements as specified in clause (a) of sub-regulation (3), in

the subsequent inspections conducted by the Inspectors

deputed by the Central Council, for renewal of conditional

permission for the succeeding academic sessions, for grant of

permission by the 1st respondent for undertaking admission in

those academic sessions.

14. The Inspectors deputed by the Central Council, for

renewal of conditional permission for the academic session

2018-19, conducted inspection in the petitioners' college on

24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018. In the inspection report, they

pointed out that there are only 8 Higher Faculties in 8

departments against the requirement of 11 Higher Faculties in

11 departments; there are no Higher Faculties in each of the

departments of Kukkiyat, Tashreehul Badan, Mahiyatul Amraz,

Niswan wa Qubalat, Jarahat and Amraz e Jild wa Tazineeyat;

web based computerised central registration system was not

available in OPD/IPD as per the Regulations of 2016; X-Ray,

ECG and USG are not available as per the said Regulations;

there is no specialist doctor or one clinical teacher in Jarahat,

Amraze Jild wa Tazeeniyat and Niswan wa Qabalat, against the

requirements of the said Regulations; and Aadhaar based Geo

location enabled attendance system is not functional for

teaching staff, non-teaching staff, hospital staff and PG student,

in place of bio-metric attendance.

15. The 1st petitioner, on receipt of Ext.P4 letter of the 1 st

respondent submitted a reply dated 18.08.2018. The 1 st

respondent, after conducting a personal hearing on 25.08.2018,

issued Ext.P8 order dated 17.10.2018, declining permission for

taking admission to BUMS course, for the academic session

2018-19. By Ext.P11 judgment dated 25.08.2020 in W.P.

(C)No.34445 of 2018, this Court set aside Ext.P8 order,

directing the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter after

affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing, in the light

of the fact that the 1st respondent has issued letter of

permission for the subsequent academic year and students were

admitted to the subsequent batch. The 1st respondent, after

conducting personal hearing on 10.09.2020, issued Ext.P14

order dated 10.11.2020, rejecting letter of permission for the

academic session 2018-19, for the reasons stated therein.

16. In Ext.P14 order it is found that there are only 8

Higher Faculties in 8 departments, against the requirement of

11 Higher Faculties in 11 departments. The reason stated by the

1st respondent in Ext.P14 order has already been stated

hereinbefore at paragraphs 4.1. to 4.4. In the case of Dr.Ayesha

Tahseen, Associate Professor, Department of Tashreehul Badan,

there is difference in the signature in the leave letters

(maternity leave and earned leave) and also the joining letter

given to the college. As per bio-metric records, she was absent

from 04.04.2018 to 06.04.2018, but her signatures are seen in

attendance register against those days. Further, she availed

maternity leave from 16.04.2018, but bio-metric records shows

her in/out timings on 23.04.2018, 24.04.2018 and 28.04.2018.

Hence, there is ambiguity in signature and attendance records

of Dr.Ayesha, which raises doubts about authenticity of the

documents. With respect to Dr.Wasia Naveed, Professor,

Department of Niswan wa Qabalat, it was noticed that as per

her discharge summary submitted to the Central Council from

Telangana State Government Employees Health Scheme, the

date of admission of Dr.Wasia Naveed in Bibi Hospital Pvt.

Limited, Malakpet, Hyderabad was 02.05.2018 and date of

discharge was 03.05.2018. On examining attendance register

and bio-metric records for the month of May, 2018, signatures

of Dr.Wasia Naveed were found on 02.05.2018 and 03.05.2018.

Though the bio-metric records of Dr.Wasia Naveed indicate that

she was absent in the entire month of June 2018, her signatures

are present in the attendance register of the same month.

Hence, the actual presence of Dr.Wasia Naveed in the college

could not be ascertained. In Ext.P14 order, it is noticed that,

when the Hearing Committee enquired about bank statements

for the salary paid to the faculties, by the college authorities, for

the year 2018, the college representatives submitted that the

college did not maintain bank statements as they paid salary to

their staff through cheque and cash, during the said year.

Moreover, before the Hearing Committee, the college

representatives agreed of not having Higher Faculties in the

departments of Kulliyat, Mahiyatul Amraz, and Jarahat.

Therefore, the 1st respondent in Ext.P14 order concluded that

the petitioners' college had 9 eligible Higher Faculties in 9

departments on the day of inspection, i.e., 24.05.2018 and

25.05.2018, against the requirement of 11 Higher Faculties in

11 departments. The findings in Ext.P14 order would also show

that, on the day of inspection, the petitioners' college was not

having web based and CRC linked computerised bio-metric

attendance system for teaching staff, as per the mandate of

clause (i) of sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 9.

17. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal v. Union of

India [(2013) 16 SCC 696] the Apex Court was dealing with

Special Leave Petitions filed against the orders passed by the

Aurangabad Bench and the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High

Court in regard to admissions to the various institutions

teaching indigenous medicine such as Ayurvedic, Unani, Siddha,

etc. The common issue involved in all the Special Leave Petitions

was in regard to the refusal by the Government of India,

Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha

and Homeopathy (Department of AYUSH), to grant permission

to the colleges to admit students for the academic year 2011-

2012, for the BAMS/PG courses. Such permissions have been

refused on account of various deficiencies relating to the

infrastructure and teaching staff, which had not been rectified

and brought into line with the minimum standard norms.

17.1. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal the Apex Court

noticed that, in Shri Morvi Sarvajanik Kelavni Mandal

Sanchalit MSKM Bed. College v. NCTE [(2012) 2 SCC 16],

while rejecting the prayer of the institutions to permit students

to continue in unrecognised institutions, it was observed that

mushroom growth of ill-equipped, understaffed and

unrecognised educational institutions has caused serious

problems with the students who joined various courses.

17.2. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal the Apex Court

noticed further that, as far as medical institutions teaching

indigenous medicine are concerned, the procedure relating to

the recognition of medical colleges as well as admission therein

was governed by the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970,

which was amended in 2003, to incorporate Sections 13A, 13B

and 13C, which provided the procedure for establishing new

colleges and making provision for seeking prior permission of

the Central Government in respect of the same. The amendment

also attempted to bring in reforms in the existing colleges by

making it mandatory for them to seek permission from the

Central Government within a period of three years from their

establishment. The Central Council of Indian Medicine framed

the Establishment of New Medical College, Opening of New or

Higher Course of Study or Training and Increase of Admission

Capacity by a Medical College Regulations, 2003. The Central

Council of Indian Medicine further framed the Indian Medicine

Central Council (Permission to Existing Medical Colleges)

Regulations, 2006.

17.3. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal the Apex Court

noticed that, when the 2003 Amendment was effected to the

1970 Act, three years' time was given to the existing colleges to

remove the deficiencies. The 2006 Regulations provided a

further period of two years to remove the deficiencies and even

relaxed the minimum standards in that regard. Even after the

expiry of two years, the colleges were given further

opportunities to remove the shortcomings by granting them

conditional permission for their students for the academic years

2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. It is only obvious that

the minimum standards were insisted upon by the Council to

ensure that the colleges achieved the minimum standards

gradually. There was little or no response from the institutions

concerned in regard to removal of the deficiencies in their

respective institutions and it is only when the notices were given

to shut down the institutions that they woke up from their

slumber and approached the courts for relief.

17.4. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal, before the Apex

Court, it was pointed out by Mr. Sidharth Luthra, the learned

Additional Solicitor General, that despite a moratorium of five

years since the amendment of the 1970 Act in 2003 and the

framing of the 2006 Regulations in 2006, the institutions had

failed to remove the deficiencies, as pointed out by the Central

Council. The practice of medicine, in whatever form, recognised

by the Central Government and regulated by the 1970 Act and

the Regulations framed thereunder, could not be compromised

by lowering the standards required to maintain the excellence of

the profession. The learned Additional Solicitor General

submitted that once the deficiencies had been removed,

permission was once again granted to admit students for the

academic year 2012-2013. Sympathy towards the students,

who had been allowed to file their application forms, could not

be a ground to grant permission where more than half the

period of study was already over. Therefore, in the interest of

the medical profession and those who are the beneficiaries of

the system, the Special Leave Petitions are liable to be

dismissed.

17.5. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal, after

considering the rival contentions, the Apex Court held that, it is

no doubt true, that applications have been filed by a large

number of students for admission in the institutions imparting

education in indigenous medicine, with the leave of the Court,

but it is equally true that such leave was granted without

creating any equity in favour of the applicants. Those who chose

to file their applications did so at their own risk and it cannot

now be contended that since they have been allowed to file their

applications pursuant to orders passed by the Court, they had

acquired a right to be admitted in the different institutions to

which they had applied. The privilege granted to the candidates

cannot now be transformed into a right to be admitted in the

course for which they had applied. Apart from anything else,

one has to take a practical view of the matter since more than

half the term of the first year is over. It is not for the Court to

judge as to whether a particular institution fulfilled the

necessary criteria for being eligible to conduct classes in the

discipline concerned or not. That is for the experts to judge and

according to the experts the institutions were not geared to

conduct classes in respect of the year 2011-2012. It is also

impractical to consider the proposal of the colleges of providing

extra classes to the new entrants to bring them up to the level

of those who have completed the major part of the course for

the first year. Therefore, the Apex Court dismissed the Special

Leave Petitions, declining interfere with the impugned orders of

the High Court.

18. In Medical Council of India v. The Principal,

KMCT Medical College [(2018) 9 SCC 766] it was contended

before the Apex Court that the inspection was not properly

conducted. Repelling the said contention, the Apex Court held as

follows;

"15. We do not deem it necessary to deal with the submission made on behalf of the College regarding the inspection not being properly conducted. This Court has repeatedly said that a decision taken by the Union of India on the basis of a recommendation of an expert body regarding the inadequacy of facilities in medical colleges

cannot be interfered with lightly. Interference is permissible only when the colleges demonstrate jurisdictional errors, ex facie perversity or mala fide. [See: Manohar Lal Sharma v. Medical Council of India (2013) 10 SCC 60 and Medical Council of India v.

Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (2016) 11 SCC 530]. As no case is made out by the College for interference with the inspection report, we decline the request of Mr. Sibal for remand of the matter to the High Court." (underline supplied)

19. In V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust,

Kozhikode v. Kerala University of Health Sciences and

others [2021 (2) KHC SN 2 : 2020 SCC OnLine Ker 8406]

this Court held that, any interference on the findings of the

State/University regarding inadequacy in infrastructure,

equipment, clinical materials and faculties in the proposed

medical college, which are based on the inspection report of the

experts in the field, is legally permissible under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, only when the petitioner demonstrates

jurisdictional errors, ex facie perversity or mala fide. Paras.18 to

20 of the said decision read thus;

"18. The remarks submitted by the petitioner to the deficiencies pointed out in Ext.P7 communication dated 20.11.2020 in W.P(C) No. 26397 of 2020 is extracted

hereinbefore at paragraph 2.3 The clarifications/ compliance furnished in Ext.P8 remarks would show that the petitioner's institution, which proposes to establish a medical college, with an annual intake of 150 seats for MBBS, is lacking necessary infrastructure, equipment, clinical materials and faculties. As noticed in Ext.P9 order dated 23.11.2020 in W.P.(C)No.26397 of 2020, in Ext.P8 remarks submitted to the deficiencies pointed out in Ext.P7, the petitioner has not raised any objection regarding the inspection conducted by the University. The deficiencies in the number of practical laboratories, mobile X-ray unit, available beds in ICU, etc., are not disputed in Ext.P8 remarks. Admittedly the petitioner is yet to purchase any journal for the proposed medical college. The bed occupancy was only 30% on the day of inspection and the number of out patients was less than 200, as against the requirement of 600. The total faculty deficiency noted in Ext.P9 is 32% and Tutor/Demonstrator/SR deficiency is 78%. Such deficiencies in clinical materials, faculties, etc., are also noted in Annexure I inspection report prepared by the inspection team deputed by the Director of Medical Education, on the request made by the petitioner for essentiality certificate.

19. As per Annexure I inspection report prepared by the inspection team deputed by the Director of Medical Education, bed occupancy in the hospital was only 30%, out of which patients with genuine problems seems to be only 20% in Surgery, Pediatrics and Obstetrics and Gynaecology (OBG). Bed occupancy in ICU was only 3 and

that in casualty was only 1. The average number of cases operated is 2 major and 2 minor surgeries per month, as per the records submitted by the Dean. As per hospital records there are 34 child births from 12.03.2020 to 06.11.2020, out of which birth certificate issued by the Panchayat is available only for 9 child births. The hospital is having no blood bank and it is outsourced from external blood bank. On account of various deficiencies noted in Annexure I, the respondent State by Ext.P10 order dated 21.11.2020 in W.P.(C)No.26777 of 2020 rejected the request made by the petitioner for essentiality certificate for starting a new medical college.

20. The deficiencies noted in Annexure I report of the inspection team constituted by the Director of Medical Education, on the request made by the petitioner for essentiality certificate, and that noted by the Scrutiny Committee of the University (based on the report of the inspection commission), on the request made by the petitioner for consent of affiliation, cannot be interfered with lightly. Any interference on the findings of the respondent State/University regarding inadequacy in infrastructure, equipment, clinical materials and faculties in the proposed medical college, which are based on the inspection report of the experts in the field, is legally permissible under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, only when the petitioner demonstrates jurisdictional errors, ex facie perversity or mala fide. In the instant case, in the absence of any vitiating circumstances, no interference is warranted on the findings in the orders impugned in the

respective writ petitions as to inadequacy in infrastructure, equipment, clinical materials and faculties in the proposed medical college."

20. In the instant case, any interference on the findings

of the 1st respondent in Ext.P14 order regarding deficiencies in

faculty, etc., in the petitioners' college, which are based on the

inspection report of the experts in the field, is legally

permissible under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, only

when the petitioners demonstrate jurisdictional errors, ex facie

perverse or mala fide. In the absence of any vitiating

circumstances, no interference is warranted on the findings in

Ext.P14 as to deficiency in faculty, etc. in the petitioners'

college.

21. During the course of arguments, relying on the

inspection report dated 06.03.2018 of the Inspectors deputed

by the 3rd respondent University, the learned Senior Counsel for

the petitioners would contend that, in the inspection conducted

by the University for grant of affiliation for BUMS course, for the

academic session 2018-19, it was found that the petitioners'

college is having the required faculties. Therefore, the findings

in Ext.P14 order that the petitioners' college is not having the

required faculties as per the relevant regulations is without any

factual basis. The learned Senior Counsel would also point out

the permission granted by the 1st respondent to the petitioners'

college for admitting BUMS students for the subsequent

academic sessions, i.e., 2019-20, etc., and also the affiliation

granted by the 3rd respondent University for those academic

years, based on the permission granted by the 1 st respondent.

The learned Senior Counsel would also point out that, in the

case of Government Unani Medical College, Chennai, after

declining permission for the academic session 2008-09 pointing

out deficiencies, the 1st respondent granted permission vide

Ext.P17 order dated 16.05.2009 for the academic session 2009-

10. Thereafter, for the aforesaid reason, the 1st respondent

granted permission to that college for the academic session

2008-09 as well, by Ext.P18 order dated 23.04.2010. Therefore,

a similar procedure should have been adopted in the case of the

petitioners' institution as well.

22. As already noticed hereinbefore, in view of the

provisions under clause (b) of sub-regulation (3) of Regulation

3, the petitioners' college, which has been granted conditional

permission for the academic session 2015-16, vide Ext.P1 order

of the 1st respondent dated 31.08.2016, has to fulfill the

requirements as specified in clause (a) of sub-regulation (3), in

the subsequent inspections conducted by the Inspectors

deputed by the Central Council, for renewal of conditional

permission for each of the succeeding academic sessions, for

grant of permission by the 1st respondent for undertaking

admission in those academic sessions. Therefore, merely for the

reason that the petitioners' college has been granted conditional

permission for the academic session 2019-20, it cannot be

contended the college has to be granted conditional permission

for the academic session 2018-19 as well, despite the

deficiencies noted in the report of the Inspectors of the Central

Council, who had inspected the college on 24.05.2018 and

25.05.2018. The inspection report of the Inspectors deputed by

the 3rd respondent University, who conducted inspection in the

petitioners' college for grant of affiliation for BUMS course, for

the academic session 2018-19, is one dated 06.03.2018. When,

as per the mandate of clause (a) of sub-regulation (3) of

Regulation 3 of the Regulations of 2016, for grant of conditional

permission, for the academic session 2018-19, the petitioners'

college has to fulfil the requirements of sub-clauses (i) to (x) of

clause (a), in the inspection conducted for that purpose by the

Inspectors deputed by the Central Council, i.e., in the inspection

conducted on 24.05.2018 and 25.05.2018, no reliance can be

placed on the inspection report dated 06.03.2018 of the

Inspectors deputed by the 3rd respondent University. The

contention raised by the petitioners in this regard is contrary to

the provisions under the Regulations of 2016.

23. In Mukhtiar Chand v. State of Punjab (1998) 7

SCC 579] the Apex Court noticed that, the systems of

medicines generally prevalent in India are Ayurveda, Siddha,

Unani, Allopathic and Homoeopathic. In the Ayurveda, Siddha

and Unani systems, the treatment is based on the harmony of

the four humours, whereas in the Allopathic system of medicine,

treatment of disease is given by the use of a drug which

produces a reaction that itself neutralises the disease. In

Homoeopathy, treatment is provided by the like. Of the medical

systems that are in vogue in India, Ayurveda had its origin in

5000 BC and is being practised throughout India, but Siddha is

practised in the Tamil-speaking areas of South India. These

systems differ very little both in theory and practice. The Unani

system dates back to 460-370 BC but that had come to be

practised in India in the 10th century AD.

24. In Bihar State Council of Ayurvedic and Unani

Medicine v. State of Bihar [(2007) 12 SCC 728] the Apex

Court noticed that the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970

provides for constitution of a Central Council of Indian Medicine

(CCIM) and the maintenance of a Central Register of Indian

Medicine and for matters connected therewith. This Act was

enacted by Parliament and came into force on 21.12.1970.

Introduction to this Act reads as under:

"To consider problems relating to the Indian systems of Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani medicine and Homoeopathic system of medicine a number of Committees were appointed by the Government of India, which had recommended that a statutory Central Council on the lines of the Medical Council of India for modern system of medicine should be established for the proper development of these systems of medicine. In June 1966 the Central Council of Health at its 13th meeting, while discussing the policy on Ayurvedic education, recommended the setting up of a Central Council for Indian System of Medicine to

lay down and regulate standards of education and examinations, qualifications and practice in these systems. On the basis of the above recommendations the Indian Medicine Central Council Bill was introduced in Parliament."

Sections 13A, 13B and 13C of the Act with their sub-sections

have been substituted by the Indian Medicine Central Council

(Amendment) Act, 2003 (Act 58 of 2003) with effect from

07.11.2003, which prescribe for the permission for

establishment of new medical colleges, new courses of study,

etc.; non-recognition of medical qualifications in certain cases;

and time for seeking permission of the Central Government for

certain existing or new medical colleges. Section 14 falling in

Chapter III of the Act provides for recognition of the medical

qualifications granted by any university, board or other medical

institution in India which are included in the Second Schedule.

Under the 1970 Act, Central Council of Indian Medicine is

competent to prescribe the minimum standard of education

including curriculum and syllabi as well as other requirements

like hospital, library, students' hostel, staff for college, staff for

hospital, library, herbal garden, requirements of various

departments of colleges, etc. Sub-section (1) of Section 13A of

the Act prohibits any person to establish a medical college; and

a medical college to open a new or higher course of study or

training including a postgraduate course of study or training,

which would enable the students of that medical college for the

award of any recognised medical qualification or to increase its

admission capacity, except with the previous permission of the

Central Government obtained in accordance with the provisions

of Section 13A. Sub-sections (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) and

(9) of Section 13A lay down the manner in which the Central

Government is to be approached for establishment of a new

medical college or for opening of a new higher course of study

or increasing admission capacity and how it would be dealt with.

25. In Kerala Ayurveda Paramparya Vaidya Forum

v. State of Kerala [(2018) 6 SCC 648] the Apex Court

noticed that traditional or indigenous systems of medicine like

Ayurveda/ Sidhha/Unani-Tibbi have largely evolved out of

sporadic and random processes of research and discovery

attributable to various self-styled practitioners of these systems

of medicines. With a view to bring about an organised

development of these systems and standardise the mode of

treatment by the practitioners of these systems, legislations

have been framed by both the State Governments as well as the

Central Government. As per the Statement of Objects and

Reasons of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, the

Central Council has to evolve uniform standards of education

and registration of practitioners of the indigenous systems of

medicine and for that purpose a Register has to be maintained

under the said Act, in order to ensure that medicine is not to be

practised by those who are not qualified. Section 23 of the Act

provides for eligibility conditions for registration of medical

practitioners. The capacity to diagnose the disease would

depend upon the fact as to whether the practitioner had the

necessary professional skill to do so. Acquisition of professional

skill is again a regulated subject and the measure thereof is the

possession of a prescribed diploma or degree awarded by a

recognised institution. Even a person who has acquired the

prescribed diploma or degree from a recognised institution

would not be entitled to practise medicine unless he is so

registered under the provisions of the Indian Medicine Central

Council Act.

26. In Kerala Ayurveda Paramparya Vaidya Forum,

the conclusion of the Apex Court in paragraph 26, is extracted

hereunder;

"26. In our country, the numbers of qualified medical practitioners have been much less than the required number of such persons. The scarcity of qualified medical practitioner was previously quite large since there were very few institutions imparting teaching and training to doctors, vaidyas, hakims, etc. The position has now changed and there are quite a good number of medical colleges imparting education in various streams of medicine. No doubt, now there are a good numbers of such institutions training qualified medical practitioners at number of places. The persons having no recognised and approved qualifications, having little knowledge about the indigenous medicines, are becoming medical practitioners and playing with the lives of thousands and millions of people. Sometimes such quacks commit blunders and precious lives are lost." (underline supplied)

27. In Medical Council of India v. State of Karnataka

[(1998) 6 SCC 131], while dealing with the admission made in

excess of intake capacity fixed by the Council, the Apex Court

held that, a medical student requires gruelling study and that

can be done only if proper facilities are available in a medical

college and the hospital attached to it has to be well equipped

and the teaching faculty and doctors have to be competent

enough that when a medical student comes out, he is perfect in

the science of treatment of human beings and is not found

wanting in any way. The country does not want half-baked

medical professionals coming out of medical colleges when they

do not have full facilities of teaching and were not exposed to

patients and their ailments during the course of their study.

28. In K.S Bhoir v. State of Maharashtra [(2001) 10

SCC 264] the Apex Court held that sub-section (1) of Section

10A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 is a substantive

provision in itself and begins with non obstante clause

'notwithstanding anything contained in the Act', it means there

is a prohibition in the matter of an increase in the admission

capacity in a medical college unless previous permission of the

Central Government is obtained in accordance with the

recommendation of the Medical Council of India. The entire

scheme of Section 10A of the Act has to be read in consonance

with other sub-sections to further the object behind the

amending Act. The object being to achieve the highest standard

of medical education. The said objective can be achieved only by

ensuring that a medical college has the requisite infrastructure

to impart medical education. The object of amending Sections

10A, 10B and 10C was for a specific purpose of controlling and

restricting unchecked and unregulated mushroom growth of

medical colleges without requisite infrastructure resulting in

decline in the maintenance of highest standard of education.

The highest standard of medical education is only possible when

the requirement of provisions of Section 10A and the

Regulations are complied with. It has been experienced that,

unless there is required infrastructure available in the medical

college, the standard of medical education has declined. Unless

an institution can provide complete and full facilities for training

to each student who is admitted in various disciplines, the

medical education would remain incomplete and the medical

college would be turning out half-baked doctors which, in turn,

would adversely affect the health of the public in general.

29. In Medical Council of India v. Chairman, S.R

Educational and Charitable Trust [2018 SCC OnLune SC

2276 : (2018) 4 KLT (SN) 70] the Apex Court held that,

considering the deficiencies [i.e., lack of patients, teaching

faculty, sufficient number of surgical procedures, etc.],

permitting an unequipped medical college to impart medical

education without proper infrastructure and faculty would be

against the efficacious medical education. Patients serve as the

object of teaching. By such an approach ultimately the interest

of the society would suffer. Half-baked doctors cannot be left

loose on society like drones and parasites to deal with the life of

patients in the absence of proper educational training. It would

be dangerous and against the right to life itself, in case

unequipped medical colleges are permitted to impart

substandard medical education without proper facilities and

infrastructure. In the said decision, the Apex Court noticed that,

as per clause (a) of the proviso to Regulation 8(1) of the Medical

Council of India Establishment of Medical College Regulations,

1999, as amended by the Medical Council of India Establishment

of Medical College (Amendment) Regulations, 2010, in respect

of colleges in the stage up to II renewal (i.e, admission of third

batch) if it is observed during any regular inspection of the

institute that the deficiency of teaching faculty and/or Residents

is more than 30% and/or bed occupancy is less than 60%, such

an institute will not be considered for renewal of permission in

that academic year.

30. In view of the law laid down in the decisions referred

to supra, while granting conditional permission to the

petitioners' college for the academic session 2018-19, the 1 st

respondent has to ensure that the college has fulfilled the

minimum requirements specified in the Regulations of 2016,

which are highly essential to maintain quality of education in

such institutions imparting education in indigenous medicine. A

medical student requires gruelling study and that can be done

only if proper facilities are available in a medical college and the

hospital attached to it has to be well equipped, with competent

teaching faculties and doctors. In Kerala Ayurveda

Paramparya Vaidya Forum [(2018) 6 SCC 648] the Apex

Court noticed that, as per the Statement of Objects and

Reasons of the Indian Medicines Central Council Act, the Central

Council has to evolve uniform standards of education and

registration of practitioners of the indigenous system of

medicines, in order to ensure that, indigenous medicine is not to

be practised by those, who are not qualified. In that view of the

matter, when the petitioners' college failed to fulfil the minimum

requirements as per the provisions of the Regulations of 2016,

for conducting BUMS course, adversely affecting the ability of

the college to provide quality medical education, the 1 st

respondent cannot be found fault with in denying permission to

the college, for the academic session 2018-19, for the reasons

stated in Ext.P14 order.

31. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would

submit that, in terms of Ext.P9 interim order of this Court dated

21.10.2018 in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018, the 3rd respondent

University granted affiliation for the academic session 2018-19

and accordingly, the petitioners' college admitted students to

BUMS course, who are now pursuing their studies. In Ext.P11

judgment dated 25.08.2020 in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018, this

Court has made it clear that the admission of students to BUMS

course during the academic session 2018-19 will be subject to

the outcome of the decision taken by the 1 st respondent in

terms of the directions contained in that judgment.

32. In Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal [(2013) 16

SCC 696] the Apex Court noticed that, in Shri Morvi

Sarvajanik Kelavni Mandal Sanchalit MSKM Bed. College

v. NCTE [(2012) 2 SCC 16], while rejecting the prayer of the

institutions to permit students to continue in unrecognised

institutions, the Apex Court observed that mushroom growth of

ill-equipped, understaffed and unrecognised educational

institutions has caused serious problems with the students who

joined various courses.

33. When no interference is warranted on Ext.P14 order

dated 10.11.2020 of the 1st respondent denying permission to

the petitioners' college for taking admission to BUMS course, for

the academic session 2018-19, any students admitted during

that academic session, on the strength of Ext.P9 interim order

dated 24.10.2018 in W.P.(C)No.34445 of 2018, are not entitled

to claim any benefit on the strength of that interim order,

especially when in Ext.P11 judgment it was made clear that

their admission will be subject to the outcome of the decision

that has to be taken by the 1st respondent in terms of the

directions contained in that judgment.

34. For the aforesaid reasons, the challenge made in this

writ petition against Ext.P14 order fails. The petitioners are not

entitled for any of the reliefs prayed for and the writ petition is

accordingly dismissed.

No order as to cost.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

bkn/yd

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1                TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO. R
                          12012/04/2014-EP(IM-1) DATED 31.08.2015
                          PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2                TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO. R
                          12012/04/2014-EP(IM-1) FOR 2016-17
                          DATED 16.09.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST
                          RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3                TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO. R
                          12012/04/2014-EP(IM-1) DATED 04.08.2017
                          PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4                TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION F.NO.
                          R12012/04/2014 EP (IM-1) FOR 2018-19
                          DATED 18.08.2018 PASSED BY 1ST
                          RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5                TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION
                          REF. NO. 0457/AYUSH HEARING
                          COMMITTEE/AYUSH/18 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
                          PETITIONER DATED 25.08.2018.
EXHIBIT P6                TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMARY OF THE HEARING
                          NOTE BEARING F. NO. R12012/04/2014-
                          EP(IM-1) DATED 25.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE
                          1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7                TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER
                          BEARING REF. NO. 0479/AYUSH HEARING
                          COMMITTEE/AYUSH/18 DATED 03.09.2018,
                          SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8                TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.
                          R.12012/04/2014-EP(M-1) FOR 2018-19
                          DATED 17.10.2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST
                          RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9                TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THIS
                          HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO. 34445/2018
                          DATED 24.10.2018.
EXHIBIT P10               TRUE COPY OF THE LOP BEARING NO. 0-
                          14014/17/2019-EP-1 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
                          RESPONDENT FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2019-
                          20 DATED 08.06.2019.
EXHIBIT P11               TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
                          HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.C NO. 34445/2018




                          DATED 25.08.2020
EXHIBIT P12               TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE F.NO.
                          12012/04/2014-EP-1 FOR 2018-19 DATED
                          04.09.2020 ISSUED BY THE AYUSH.
EXHIBIT P13               TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION
                          BEARING REF.NO. 310/AYUSH HEARING
                          COMMITTEE/AYUSH/20 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
                          PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT OF
                          INDIA.
EXHIBIT P14               TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER REF. NO.
                          R12012/04/2014-EP91) FOR 2018-19 DATED
                          10.11.2020 ISSUED BY AYUSH.
EXHIBIT P15               TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE REF. NO.
                          0272/SHOW CAUSE/DR. WASIA/2018 ISSUED
                          BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO DR. WASIA
                          NAVEED DATED 30.06.2018.
EXHIBIT P16               TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY DR.
                          WASIA NAVEED DATED 03.07.2018.
EXHIBIT P17               TRUE COPY OF THE LOP NO. R,
                          17012/27/2009-EP DATED 16.05.2009
                          ISSUED BY THE AYUSH FOR 2009-10
                          ACADEMIC YEAR IN GOVERNMENT UNANI
                          COLLEGE, CHENNAI
EXHIBIT P18               TRUE COPY OF THE LOP F.NO. R
                          17012/27/2009 EP DATED 23.04.2010
                          ISSUED BY THE AYUSH FOR 2008-09
                          ACADEMIC YEAR IN GOVERNMENT UNANI
                          COLLEGE, CHENNAI.
EXHIBIT P19               TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO 0-
                          14014/47/2020-RP (1)DATED 29.12.2020
                          ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF AYUSH



RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL