1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2853/2007 Dr.Prakash s/o Madhavrao Dixit .. PETITIONER VERSUS The Union of India and others .. RESPONDENTS .... Shri Sachin Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner Shri Alok Sharma ,Asstt.Solicitor General for Respondent no.1 & 2. Shri K.B.Choudhari,A.G.P. for Respondents 3 & 4. Shri K.D.Bade Patil,Adv.for Respondent no.6. .... CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 30/3/2010 ORAL ORDER : [PER PATIL,J.] 1] Heard learned counsel for respective parties. 2] The petitioner filed this Petition challenging the letters dated 2 17/5/2006 and 15/6/2006, whereby the petitioner’s application seeking permission to open a Post Graduate Institute in Homoepathy was turned down by Government of India. 3] The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the provisions of The Homoeopathy Central Council Act 2002 its Amendment No.51/2002 and Central Council of Homoeopathy Regulations called as Homoeopathy (Post Graduate Degree Course) M.D. (Hom.) Regulations, 1989. 4] The Government of Maharashtra in its communication dated 17/5/2006 observed that there was no provision for opening a direct Post Graduate course under the Central Council Act, 1973 and by communication dated 15/6/2006, earlier stand was reiterated by Government and the application fees was returned to the petitioner. 5] Considering the provisions of law and the reply filed by contesting respondents, we find that certain mandatory requirements are to be complied with by applicant who propose 3 to start Post Graduate Homoeopathy college. Amongst other things, the applicant institution must possess a 25 bedded hospital, memorandum of understanding with a nearby undergraduate Homoeopathic college recognized by the Central Council in case the institution does not have undergraduate teaching facility. These infrastructure facilities should have a back up of qualified teachers, library, outpatient department etc. The petitioner placed heavy reliance on a communication made by Director, Ayurved, which is annexed at Exh.F to the petition. Reading the said communication, we find that nowhere it reflects that the petitioner satisfied the conditions stipulated in law for starting a Post Graduate Course in Homoeopathy. By way of affidavit in reply filed by the department of Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Department of Ayurveda, Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy (AYUSH), [Education Policy Section]. It is contended by the deponent that the proposal of the petitioner was not backed with the N.O.C. of State Government. The said application was filed on 27/4/2006. It was further contended that there was a fundamental problem about the absence of proper hospital for the training of the Post Graduate students. Petitioner had entered into memorandum of 4 understanding with one P.D.Jain Homoeopathic Medical College, Parbhani which was more than 100 K.M. away from the site of the institution. The department further averred that P.D.Jain Homoeopathic college with whom petitioner entered into memorandum of understanding does not have the necessary infrastructure and teaching and non-teaching staff as per norms. According to the deponent, it was found that petitioner’s hospital has 7 out of the 8 resident doctors who are Ayurvedic Graduate doctors. The competent authorities found that there was no evidence with petitioner to demonstrate that they have 25 bedded hospital. 6] The Maharashtra University of Health Sciences filed affidavit in reply through Officiating Registrar. The University placed reliance on report submitted by Deputy Director, Homoeopathy dated 25/5/2006. The report is contrary to the petitioner’s claim. It is a fact finding report, which narrates that the claim of the petitioner is highly exaggerated. The petitioner lacks infrastructure facilities and on the day of inspection, not a single outpatient was found or registered in the record. 5 7] These startling revelation demonstrating serious infirmities and deficiencies in the claim of the petitioner is a pointer to the manner in which the applications are filed, seeking permission to start course in Medicine. It is high time that appropriate authorities take serious and stringent views in respect of such applications. Taking liberal views and unmindful of compliance of mandatory norms as reflected in law would largely affect the medical education, which needs to be imparted by competent institutions alone. 8] For these reasons as stated above, we find that the petitioner’s application was rightly turned down. The petitioner’s application does not deserve consideration by the authorities. The petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand only), which shall be deposited with Legal Services Authority, High Court, Aurangabad. [N.D.DESHPANDE] [NARESH H.PATIL] JUDGE JUDGE umg/wp2853-07