IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 RP.No. 382 of 2009(T) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.3527/2009 Dated 26/03/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/ PETITIONER IN WPC: ---------------------------------------- SREE ANJANEYA MEDICAL TRUST, KANCHAS COMPLEX, OPP.INDOOR STADIUM, CALICUT 673 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY DR.SUDHA ANIL. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANJAY SMT.A.PARVATHY MENON RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS & ADDL.3RD RESPONDENT IN WPC: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPT. OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION TRIVANDRUM. 3. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA (MCI) REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POCKER 14, SECTOR, DWARAKA, NEW DELHI 110 077. SRI.P.N. SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI ALEXANDER THOMAS-R3 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 8/04/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- R.P.No.382 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009. O R D E R Heard both sides. Petitioner is mainly aggrieved by paragraph 6 of the judgment, where the submission made by the Standing Counsel for the MCI that the essentiality certificate, even if issued pursuant to the inspection that was ordered in the judgment, can only relate to the academic year 2010-2011. The said submission was made by the Standing Counsel referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in Mridul Dhar & Anor. V. Union of India (2005(2)SCC 65. It is clarified that this court was only recording the submission made by the standing counsel and it is for the authorities to consider whether the essentiality certificate, if ultimately granted, can only relate to 2010-11 or any other academic year. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/