Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Babita Kashyap vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
1 WP-28261-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
WRIT PETITION No. 28261 of 2024
SMT. BABITA KASHYAP
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Mahesh Goyal - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vijay Sundaram - Govt. Advocate for respondent No.1/State.
Shri Chetan Kanungo - Advocate for respondent No.2.
Shri Shashank Indapurkar - Advocate for respondent No.3.
Reserved on : 10/10/2025
Delivered on : 16/10/2025
ORDER
With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally.
The instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India challenges the order dated 02.09.2024 passed by
respondent No.3, whereby the application submitted by the petitioner
seeking transfer of her nursing registration from the State of Rajasthan
to the State of M.P. has been rejected. The said rejection is based on the
ground that the institute wherefrom, the petitioner obtained her diploma
in General Nursing Midwifery (GNM) was not recognized by the Indian
Nursing Council (INC), as prior to the year 2018, the recognition of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
2 WP-28261-2024
institutions was granted by the INC.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of the instant writ petition are that
the petitioner herein completed her GNM diploma from the General
Nursing Training Center, Jalore, Rajasthan, which was recognized by
the Rajasthan Nursing Council in the academic year 2011-12.
Thereafter, upon her marriage and subsequent relocation to District
Shivpuri, M.P., she applied for migration/transfer of her nursing
registration to the State of Madhya Pradesh. Her application was
rejected by respondent No.3 vide order dated 02.09.2024.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
High Court of Karnataka at Bangaluru in W.P. No.25355/2017 and other
connected bunch of petitions has held that the Indian Nursing Council
does not provide any registration or recognition to the institute
imparting nursing courses. It is the State authority constituted under the
relevant State enactment which is competent to grant recognition to the
institution. The Indian Nursing Council, in terms of the Indian Nursing
Council Act, 1947, is empowered to grant recognition to "recognized
qualification" and not recognition to the institution in view whereof, the
application for migration of registration of the petitioner could not have
been rejected by the respondents. Accordingly, learned counsel prays for
interference in the matter.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2 (Indian
Nursing Council), by referring to the return filed, submits that in view of
the judgments rendered by the High Court of Karnataka and Rajasthan,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
3 WP-28261-2024
though the Indian Nursing Council has been held to be not competent to
grant recognition to the institution, as the said Courts have interpreted
that the scheme of the Act of 1947 as contained in Sections 11, 12, 13
and 14 does not deal with recognition of the institution but deals with
the recognition of qualification, yet in terms of other provisions of the
Act of 1947, the Indian Nursing Council is competent to inspect the
suitability of the institution imparting nursing courses. In the instant
case, the institute wherefrom the petitioner obtained her diploma from
the State of Rajasthan does not find mention in the list of suitable
institutions during the year 2007 to 2011 (Annexure-P/9), therefore, the
claim of the petitioner has been rightly rejected by respondent No.3. He
further submits that it is for the State authority to consider the transfer of
the nursing registration from one State to another, in view of the inter se
reciprocal arrangement/registration by the respective State Nursing
Councils.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No.3 submits that prior to the year 2018, the recognition to the
institution was being granted by the Indian Nursing Council. The
petitioner had completed the diploma from the institution in question at
Rajasthan in the year 2011-2012. At the relevant time, the said
institution did not possess the recognition from the Indian Nursing
Council. That apart, the name of the institution wherefrom the petitioner
obtained the diploma course also does not find mention in the list of
suitable institute, as informed by the Indian Nursing Council.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
4 WP-28261-2024
Accordingly, the claim of the petitioner seeking migration of her
nursing registration has been considered by the executive committee of
respondent No.3 in its meeting dated 22.08.2024 and for the reasons
stated in the impugned order, the application of the petitioner has been
rejected. The rejection order does not suffer from any illegality. That
apart, by placing reliance on the averments made in his return, learned
counsel for respondent No.3 submits that in view of the communication
(Annexure-P/9) issued by respondent No.2, the registration can be done
if otherwise, reciprocal agreement is available. However, there is no
reciprocal agreement with the State of Rajasthan and the State of M.P.
in this regard. Accordingly, learned counsel prays for dismissal of the
writ petition.
6. In rejoinder arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the requirement of reciprocal agreement between the States
for the purpose of transfer/migration of nursing registration is not
stipulated under any enactment, and therefore, the respondent No.3
cannot be permitted to press the said ground against the petitioner. He
further submits that even otherwise, the said ground does not find
mention in the rejection order dated 02.09.2024, and therefore, the
respondent No.3 cannot be permitted to supplement the said ground by
way of return affidavit.
7. No other point has been pressed by the learned counsel for the
parties.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
5 WP-28261-2024
9. From the pleadings available on record, it is not in dispute that
the petitioner herein obtained her GNM diploma from the General
Nursing Training Center, Jalore, Rajasthan, which was recognized by
the Rajasthan Nursing Council. The issue arising for consideration is as
to whether, the respondent No.3 was justified in rejecting the
application of the petitioner for migration of the nursing registration
from the State of Rajasthan to the State of M.P. on the ground that the
institution was not recognized by the INC.
10.In this context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nutan
Kumari and another Vs. State of Bihar, SLP (C) No.9 of 2014 , vide
order dated 02.05.2014, has held as under:
"3. Once it is the accepted position that it is the
State Government that has the power to grant
recognition and that Indian Nursing Council has no
authority to grant such recognition insofar as
Auxiliary Nurse and Midwife Course (ANM
Course) is concerned, the view taken by the Single
Judge in quashing the letter dated 9.1.2012 was
proper and there was no justification for the
Division Bench to interfere with that part of the
order. As a matter of fact, the above position is
established by the judgment of Patna High Court in
Raj A.N.M. School, Muzaffarpur vs. The State of
Bihar and others 1993(2) P.L.J.R. 479.
4. Consequently, civil appeal is allowed. The
part of the order of the Division Bench, as
indicated above, is set-aside. The order dated
8.1.2013 passed by the Single Judge is restored
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
6 WP-28261-2024
as it is. No costs."
11.Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Private
Nursing Schools and Colleges Management Association Vs. Indian
Nursing Council and Others, SLP (C) No.32603 of 2017, vide order
dated 22.01.2019, while considering the correctness of the order passed
by the High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad and considering the
Sections 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Indian Nursing Council Act 1947, has
held as under:
"2) The appellants before us has raised a limited
grievance against the judgment dated 09.10.2017
passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the High Court
of Bombay. According to them, once they have
secured recognition/permission for their Diploma
or Degree courses from the State Authorities, as
outlined in the impugned judgment, the candidates
securing such Diplomas or Degrees shall be
entitled to practice only within the aforesaid State
and not outside.
3) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
4) Learned counsel appearing for Respondent
No. 1 as well as Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned
senior counsel for the added respondent, have
pointed out Section 10 of the Indian Nursing
Council Act, 1947 and, in particular, sub-Section 4
thereof, which reads as follows:-
"10. Recognition of qualifications.
(1) x x x
(2) x x x
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
7 WP-28261-2024
(3) x x x
(4) The provisions of sub-sections (2)
and (3) and of Sections 14 and 15 shall
apply mutatis mutandis to the declaration
by the Council of a qualification granted
in respect of post-certificate nursing
training as a recognised higher
qualification."
5) After referring to Sections 11, 12 and 13, they
then referred to Section 14 which deals with
withdrawal of recognition and, in particular, sub-
Sections 1 and 4 which reads as follows:-
"14. Withdrawal of recognition.
(1) When upon report by the
Executive Committee, it appears to the
Council-
(a) that the courses of study
and training and the
examinations to be gone
through in order to obtain a
recognized qualification from
any authority in any State, or
the conditions for admission
to such courses or the
standards of proficiency
required from the candidates
at such examinations are not
in conformity with the
regulations made under this
Act or fall short of the
standards required thereby, or
(b) that an institution
recognized by a State Council
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
8 WP-28261-2024
for the training of nurses,
midwives, auxiliary nurse-
midwives or health visitors
does not satisfy the
requirements of the Council,
the Council may send to the
Government of the State in
which the authority or
institution, as the case may be,
is situated a statement to such
effect, and the State
Government shall forward it,
along with such remarks as it
may think fit to the authority
or institution concerned and,
in case referred to in clause
(b) to the State Council also,
with an intimation of the
period within which the
authority or institution may
submit its explanation to the
State Government.
(2) x x x
(3) x x x
(4) The Council may declare that any
recognized qualification granted outside
the States shall be a recognised
qualification only if granted before a
specified date."
6) We may indicate that Section 14 deals with
withdrawal of recognition which is a stage which
has not yet been reached on the facts of this case.
We, therefore, declare that consistent with their
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
9 WP-28261-2024
fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the
Constitution of India, to practice their occupation
throughout the territory of India, legislation in the
form of the Nursing Council Act of 1947 has not
restricted nor does it purport to restrict their
practice of nursing once a Degree or Diploma is
granted by the State Authority to that State only.
[Emphasis supplied]
7) We are, therefore, of the view that this portion
of the impugned judgment cannot stand and is
accordingly set aside.
8) The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent
only.
9) Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of
accordingly."
12.Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court, once it has been
held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that power to grant recognition vests
with the State Govt. and the Indian Nursing Council has not authority to
grant recognition to institution, the application seeking migration of the
nursing registration of the petitioner from Rajasthan to the State of M.P.
could not have been rejected by respondent No.3 on the ground that the
institution wherefrom the petitioner had obtained the diploma course
was not recognized by the INC. The rejection of the application filed by
the petitioner seeking migration of her nursing registration also runs
contrary to the proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in the
case of Private Nursing Schools and Colleges Management Association
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
10 WP-28261-2024
(supra). Accordingly, the impugned order dated 02.09.2024 passed by
respondent No.3 is hereby quashed.
13.The objection raised by respondent No.3 in their return as
regards non-existence of any reciprocal arrangement between the State
of Rajasthan and the State of M.P. and the name of institute wherefrom
the petitioner has obtained her diploma at Rajasthan was not in the list of
suitable institutions issued by the Indian Nursing Council at the relevant
time, since was not the reason to reject the application submitted by the
petitioner, the same is not being adverted to by this Court at this stage.
14.The matter is remitted to respondent No.3 for reconsideration
of the application filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of her nursing
registration from State of Rajasthan to the State of M.P. by the
Executive Committee of respondent No.3.
15.Let the matter be placed before the Executive Committee of
respondent No.3 within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of
certified copy of the order passed today and the decision taken by the
said committee be communicated to the petitioner within a further
period of 15 days thereafter.
16.With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands allowed
and disposed of.
17.Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(AMIT SETH)
JUDGE
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:26521
11 WP-28261-2024
Adnan
