IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 23432 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.P.SREENIVASAN, S/O.S.R.PERUMAL GOUNDER AGED 68 YEARS, HOUSE NO.10, CHINNA SEMUR, ERODE-4, TAMIL NADU STATE. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.P.G.BABITHA SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, POCKET-14, SECTOR-8, DWARAKA-1, NEW DELHI-110 077. 2. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DR.P.NANGAGOPAL, DOOR NO.902, NETHAJI STREET, MARAPPALAM, ERODE-2. 5. DR.O.KANNAPPAN, S/O.O.R.M.ODAIYAPPA CHETTIYAR, DOOR NO.376, MADURAI ROAD, THENI-625 531, TAMIL NADU. BY SC SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS SC SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN GP SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ....................... W.P.(C).23432/2009 ....................... Dated this the 24th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be the Managing Trustee and Secretary of one V.N.Public Health and Educational Trust registered as per Ext.P1. There is a dispute as to who is in control of the said Trust, between the petitioner and his associates on one hand and respondents 4 and 5 on the other. 2. Trust had purchased the said properties at Walayar for the purpose of establishing a Medical institution. There is a Civil dispute pending before the Munsiff Court, Palakkad, arising from the purchase of the said properties as evidenced by Ext.P5. Some of the parties had approached this Court earlier in W.P.(C).37571/08 challenging the notice issued by the Pudussery grama Panchayat. It seems that the petitioner in turn, has sent Exts.P6 and P7 to the Chairman of the Medical Council of India and to the University of Calicut requesting them not to proceed with any application submitted by respondents W.P.(C).23432/09 2 4 and 5 on behalf of the Trust, for a letter of permission on a letter of intent in terms of the Medical Council Act for establishing a Medical institution. 3. On instructions, Mr.Alexander Thomas, learned counsel for the MCI, submits that an application was earlier received, on behalf of the Trust through the Central Government and the facilities available in the institution were verified. They were found to be grossly inadequate and Medical Council has forwarded a recommendation to the Central Government to disapprove the Scheme, submitted by the Trust. The application submitted on behalf of the Trust was also returned. At any rate, an objection in the nature of Ext.P6 will have to be considered by the competent authority of the Central Government and not by the MCI. Submission is recorded. 4. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent W.P.(C).23432/09 3 authority, if so advised, pursuing any objection as regards the proposal of any person, to obtain permission from the competent authority under the Medical council Act, 1956, for establishing a Medical institution on behalf of the V.N.Public Health and Educational Trust stated to have been registered under Ext.P1. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs