Telangana High Court Kmr Educational Society vs The Union Of India on 26 October, 2022 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.32959 OF 2022 ORDER: Heard Mr. D. Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri P. Pandu Ranga Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs. B. Kavitha Yadav learned Central Government Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Ms. Sriranga Pujitha Gorantla, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. This writ petition is filed to declare the proceedings No.NMC/UG/202223/000195/015776, dated 11.04.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent and the consequential proceedings No.V.11013/ 91/ 2022ME01 (FTS No.8176391), dated 05.08.2022 issued by the 1st respondent, as illegal and set aside the same, and for a consequential direction to the 1st and 3rd respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioners for grant of permission for establishment of respondent No.2 Institution for the academic year 202223. 3. FACTS: i) The 1st petitioner is a society registered under the Telangana Societies Act, 2001, established for promoting 2 KL,J W.P. No.32959 of 2022 education by establishing educational institutions in the State. The petitioners with an intention to establish a Medical College at Dundigal, Medchal Malkajgiri District, with an intake capacity of 150 Seats, obtained essentiality certificate and consent of affiliation. In terms of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 (for short ' NMC Act') and the Regulations framed thereunder, they have submitted an application dated 26.09.2021, to the 3rd respondent with all necessary enclosures seeking permission to establish a medical college with an intake capacity of 150 students from the Academic Year 202223. ii) Pursuant to the said application, vide letter dated 22.12.2021, the 3rd respondent had instructed the petitioners to submit sworn affidavit stating the details of infrastructural and instructional facilities of the petitioner institution and the attached hospital. They have submitted an affidavit dated 31.12.2021 mentioning information, as sought by the 3rd respondent, along with the supporting material. iii) The 3rd respondent had constituted a team for carrying out an assessment of the teaching and infrastructural facilities of 3 KL,J W.P. No.32959 of 2022 the petitioners Institution. The Inspection team had visited the petitioner institution on 02.02.2002 and 03.02.2002 and had carried out an assessment of the Infrastructural and Instructional facilities. They have also submitted report. A surprise assessment was conducted on 30.03.2022, which is mandatory in terms of the NMC Act. iv) During the said surprise visit, according to the 3rd respondent, the Members of the Committee have found major deficiencies and the petitioners herein have not rectified the same. The 3rd respondent has also called for certain information from the petitioners on 07.04.2022 and they have submitted the said information on the said date itself. Therefore, according to the 3rd respondent, there are serious deficiencies, the petitioner institution is not having eligibility criteria and it is lacking both infrastructural and instructional facilities, as required under the NMC Act. Therefore, vide proceedings dated 11.04.2022, the 3rd respondent had informed the petitioners that the application submitted by it is disapproved and the reasons are specifically mentioned therein for the said disapproval. 4 KL,J W.P. No.32959 of 2022 v) Feeling aggrieved by the said proceedings dated 11.04.2022, the petitioners herein have filed first appeal with the 2nd respondent on 24.06.2022. Vide proceedings dated 11.07.2022, the 2nd respondent had rejected the said appeal on the ground that it is barred by limitation, it cannot be admitted in NMC and the petitioners may like to prefer second appeal, it can prefer before the 1st respondent under Section 28 (6) of the NMC Act. The petitioners have filed second appeal and the 1st respondent, vide proceedings dated 05.08.2022 dismissed the said second appeal on the grounds specifically mentioned therein. Feeling aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioners herein filed the present writ petition. 4. CONTENTIONS OF THE PETITIONERS: i) Mr. D. Prakash Reddy, learned senior counsel represe