IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.427 of 2011 1.The Union Of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy ( Ayush) IRCS Building 1 Red Cross Road, New Delhi. 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy( (Ayush) IRCS Building-1 Red Cross Road, New Delhi. 3. The Under Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department of AYUSH, New Delhi, IRCS Building-1, Red Cross Road, New Delhi-01.....................................................Appellants Versus Swami Raghvendracharya Tridand Ayurveda Mahavidyalaya college through the Secretary, Managing Committee, R/O Ramanuj Math, Dev Ghat ( Gaya ), P.S. Civil Line, Distt. Graya 2. The Secretary, Central Council of Indian Medicine, 61-65, Institutional Area, Opp-D, Block, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058. 3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Registrar, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur ( Bihar) .....................................................................................Respondents ----------- For the Appellants :- Mr. Raghib Ahsan, ASG For the State :- Mr. K.K. Jha, Advocate For Private Respondents :- Mr. Naresh Dixit, Advocate For the University :- Mr. Rajendra Kumar Giri, Advocate For CCIM :- Mr. Ray Saurabh Nath, Advocate -------------- 6 21-7-2011 Heard the parties. It transpires that this Letters Patent Appeal is directed against an interim order passed on 10-12- 2010 in C.W.J.C. No. 18251 of 2010. Learned counsel for the appellants submits, on the basis of annexure-4, that the usual cut off date for the Session 2010-11 was 31st October, 2010 but on account of 2 certain compelling circumstances, on the advice of Government of India vide letter dated 12-11-2010, the cut off date for admission for the Session 2010-11 in the institutions imparting education in Ayurved, Unani and Siddha Medicines has been extended up to 30th November, 2010 as one time measure. Learned counsel for the Union of India submits that the Central Council of Indian Medicines ( in short `CCIM’) is required to ensure that there are no mid- term admissions and the cut off dates are strictly followed by the colleges under the control of CCIM. He has also referred to two judgments of the Apex Court (1) in the case of Mridul Dhar Vrs. Union of India ( 2005) 2 SCC 65 and (2) in the case of Medical Council of India Vrs. Madhu Singh, (2002) 7 SCC 258 for highlighting that the Supreme Court in the context of colleges governed by Medical Council of India and Dental Council of India has reiterated that the High Court should not direct for mid- session 3 admission. Learned counsel for the respondent- writ petitioners has submitted that the interim direction has been issued by the writ court in view of peculiar facts and circumstances noticed in the order itself. According to him such peculiar facts and circumstances justify mid- session admission. Having heard the parties, we are of the view that the interim direction needs to be modified so as not to warrant mid-session admissions. With this modification in the order under appeal, the appeal is disposed of. It goes without saying that the matter shall be finally decided by the writ court on its own meris. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Shivaji Pandey, J)