Sikkim High Court
WRIT PETITION 24 of 2015 on 5 June 2017
I.A. No. 9 of 2016 (previously I.A. No.4 of 2016) in In WP(C) No. 24 of 2015
Sikkim Manipal University & Ano. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
BEFORE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
06. 05.06.2017 Present: Mr. Nikhil Nayyar and Mr. T.R. Barfungpa, Advocates for the Petitioners.
Mr. Karma Thinlay, Advocate for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. S.P. Bhutia, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
Ms. Pollin Rai, Asst. Govt. Advocate for the State-Respondent No. 3. -------------------------------------------------------------
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The Petitioner has filed an additional Affidavit placing on record subsequent events and documents.
2. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that during the pendency of the instant Petition, on 24.05.2017 the Petitioners have received a copy of a Notification dated 25.4.2017. It has been issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Department of Health and Family Welfare), Government of India, under Section 11(2) of the Indian Medical Council Act, after consulting the Medical Council of India, making further amendments in the First Schedule of the Act, recognizing the Degrees of MD (General Medicine), MD
(Paediatrics), MS (ENT) and MD (Psychiatry) for a maximum period of five years. Thereafter, it will have to be renewed. For the three courses i.e. MD (General Medicine), MD (Paediatrics) and MS (ENT), the recognition so granted is from 2014, while for MD (Psychiatry), recognition is from 2015.
3. In view of the said Notification, it is submitted that the recognition sought for in terms of the prayer in the I.A. No. 4 of 2016 (renumbered as I.A. No. 9 of 2016), has been granted and the I.A. be disposed of accordingly.
4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2, submits that he requires sometime to verify the claims of the Petitioners. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 admits that he has received the said Notification and has no reason to doubt its veracity.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and considering that an Affidavit has been filed in support thereof and the Notification specifies that the Respondent No. 2 has been consulted, I am not inclined to grant the prayer of the Respondent No. 2.
6. The prayers of the Petitioner in the I.A. have been duly complied with by the Notification. Thus, nothing further survives for adjudication.
7. As prayed for by the Petitioners, let the sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty-five lakhs) only, which was ordered to be deposited by the Petitioners with the Respondent No.2, vide the Judgment dated 25.5.2016 in WP(C) No. 24 of 2015, be refunded within eight weeks from today.
8. I.A. No.09 of 2016 stands disposed of.
Index : Yes/ No Internet : Yes / Nobp
Judge
05.06.2017