Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Medical College & Others v. Union of India & Another

# [2013) 9 S.C.R. 503 DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE & OTHERS A _v._ UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 580 of 2013 etc.) SEPTEMBER 18, 2013 B [K. S. **RADHAKRISHNAN AND A.** K. SIKRI, **JJ.]** _Enhancement of Annual Intake Capacity in Undergraduate Courses in Medical College for the Academic Session 2013-14 only Regulations 2013:_ c - _Medical admissions Enhancement of annual intake_ - _capacity in undergraduate medical courses Corrigendum Notification issued by Central Government confining benefits_ - _of Regulations, 2013 to Government Colleges only Held: The Corrigendum is not violative of Art. 14_ - _In_ a _given case,_ D _Central Government, in exercise of power confe"ed on it by virtue of Establishment of Medical College Regulations (Amendment), 2012, for reasons to be recorded in writing, can modify the time schedule in respect of any of five classes or categories of applicants mentioned in Regulation 1999_ - E _Central Government has power to modify the time schedule to Government Medical Colleges alone, out of the five categories -The corrigendum extending the last date was made applicable only to Government medical colleges recording the reason that the time would be very short so as_ F _to process the applications by MCI received from non-_ - _government medical colleges Therefore, it cannot be said that the decision taken by Central Government is perverse, arbitrary or unreasonable, so as to strike down the corrigendum, under the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of the Court_ G - _under Art. 32 of the Constitution Establishment of Medical_ - _College Regulations, 1999 Establishment of Medical_ - _College Regulations (Amendment), 2012 Constitution of India, 1950_ - _Art. 14 read with Art. 32_ H 503 • [2013] 9 S.C.R. ## 504 SUPREME COURT REPORTS A The petitioners-Private unaided Medical Colleges challenged the corrigendum Notification No. 37(1) 2013/ One Time Permission/Med./1935, in so far as it confined the benefits of the "Enhancement of Annual Intake Capacity in Undergraduate Courses in Medical College 8[for ][the ][Academic ][Session ][2013-14 ][only ][Regulations ] 2013" ( "Regulations 2013"), to the Government Medical C_olleges only, as _ultra vires_ Art. 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950. Dismissing the writ petition, the Court c HELD: 1.1 There is imperative need to follow the time limit fixed by this Court in the matter of admission to MBBS/BDS courses in _Mridul Dhar*_ which was done in the interest of student-community, for admission to the Post Graduate and Super Speciality courses. Timely D admission of students to these courses is of utmost importance so that the students would get quality and timely education. In _Mridul Dhar,_ this Court clearly indicated that the time schedule for establishment of new college or to increase intake in existing college shall be E adhered to strictly by all concerned, failing which defaulting party would be liable to be personally proceeded with. In _Priya Gupta,_ this Court while reiterating the necessity to follow the time limit fixed by this Court, went even to the extent that failure to conform F with the time limit fixed by this Court shall be liable for action under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Art. 129 of the Constitution of India. [para 7-8] [510-C-G] _*Mridul Dhar (Minor) and Another v. Union of India and_ G _Others_ 2005 (1) SCR 380 = (2005) 2 SCC 65; _Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others_ 2012 (5) SCR 768 = (2012) 7 sec 433 - relied on. > 1.2. The object of the Regulations 2013 was to H enhance the intake capacity in the existing medical DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 505 UNION OF INDIA colleges so as to augment human resources in medicine A for attaining optimum Doctor-Population ratio in the Nation, without compromising the prescribed minimum standards of medical education. Regulation 3 deals with the eligibility to make an application. Regulation 4 deals with the procedure to make application. The timeB schedule for receipt of application for enhancement of annual intake capacity in under-graduate courses, is provided in Schedule II appended to the Regulations. [para 9-1 O] [511-B-C; 512-C] > 2.1. MCI, in the counter affidavit, stated that the c notification dated 8. 7 .2013 containing the Regulations, 2013 was received by the Council Offi.ce only on 16.7.2013. By that time, the last date fixed for receipt of application by the Board of Governors was over, which was on 15.7.2013. MCI, therefore, requested the Government of India to modify the time schedule and D extend the last date of receipt of application to 24.7.2013, since they could not receive the applications from m~dical colleges prior to 15.7.2013. The Central Government considered the request and pointed out that it would not be possible for the Board of Governors of E MCI to process all the applications preferred by Nongovernment medical colleges within the time fixed; therefore, it decided to issue a corrigendum with the modification that the date of 24.7.2013 would apply only to Government medical colleges. [para 12-14] [514-E-F; F 516-C-F] E 2.2. There is no serious error in the view taken by the Central Government confining Regulations 2013 to Government medical colleges alone in view of strict time limit fixed in the Schedule for receipt of applications i.e. 15.7.2013 and the preremptory directions given by this Court in its judgments. It is made clear that the time limit fixed for starting a medical college as well as for additional intake are of extreme importance, or else it may collide with the time limit fixed for starting the G H 506 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 9 S.C.R. A academic session. [para 15] [516-F-G] 2.3. Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999, which was issued in exercise of powers conferred u/s 10A read with s.3 of the Indian Medial Council Act, has recognised five categories of organisations which are B eligible to apply for starting a Medical College as well as eligible to apply for further intake of seats. Amongst these, State Government/Union Territory can also set up a Medical College and take additional intake of seats, apart from the other categories. In a given case, the c Central Government, in exercise of power conferred on it by virtue of Establishment of Medical College Regulations (Amendment), 2012 for reasons to be recorded in writing, can modify the time schedule in respect of any of five classes or categories of applicants 0[mentioned in Regulation 1999. Resultantly, the Central ] Government has the power to modify the date from 15.7.2013 to 24.7.2013 in respect of any class or category of applications. So far as the instant case is concerned, it is in exercise of that statutory power, the Corrigendum has been issued by the Central Government modifying E the time schedule to the Government Medical College alone out of the five categories. Therefore, the step taken by the MCI cannot be said as violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution. [para 16,17 and 19] [517-C-D, H; 518-A-B; 519-A-D] F 2.4. Central Government is also empowered u/s 3(c) of Indian Medical Council Act, as amended in 2010, to issue various directions to the Board of Governors of the MCI, which is, therefore, bound by the Corrigendum issued by the Central Government. [para 20] [519-D-E; G 520-A] F 2.5. The corrigendur.1 extending the last date was made applicable only to the Government medical colleges recording the reason that the time would be very short so as to process the applications by the MCI received H from the non-government medical colleges. Therefore, it # DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 507 UNION OF INDIA cannot be said that the decision taken by the Central A Government is perverse, arbitrary or unreasonable, so as to strike down the corrigendum issued under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution. [para 21] [520-B-C] _Suraj Mall Mohta and_ Co. _Vs. A. V._ · _Vishvanath Sastrl_ B (1955) 1 SCR 448; _State of West Bengal vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar_ 1952 SCR 284 - cited. ## Case Law Reference: ||Case Law Reference:|Case Law Reference:||| |---|---|---|---|---| ||(1955) 1 SCR448|cited|para 4|c| ||1952 SCR 284|cited|para 4|| ||2005 (1) SCR 380|relied on|para 5|| ||2012 (5) SCR 768|relied on|para 5|| ||CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : WritPetition(Civil)No.|||D| |580 of 2013.|580 of 2013.|||| Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. ## WITH SLP (C) No. 24693 of 2013 E P. Vishwanatha Shetty, lndu Malhotra, Harish N. Salve, Amrendra Sharan, Madhu Naik, Shashi Kiran Shetty, Rohit Bhat, Kush Chaturvedi, Vijaykumar Paradesi, Vivek Jain, Bina Madhavan, Praseena E. Joseph, Shivendra Singh, for the F Petitioners. Sidharth Luthra, ASG, R.P. Bhatt, Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Amarendra Sharan, Amit Kumar, Ankit Rajgarhia, Avijit Mani Tripathi, Atul Kumar, Gaurav Sharma, Amarjeet Singh, Supriya Juneja, G. Umapathy, Rakesh K. Sharma, R. Nekuala, Sushma G Suri, Amit Anand Tiwari, Ashutosh Jha for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. 1. Petitioners have approached this Court invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of H [2013] 9 S.C.R. ## 508 SUPREME COURT REPORTS - A this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking a _Writ of Certiorari_ to quash the Corrigendum Notification No. 37(1)2013/0ne Time Permission/Med./19355, in so far as it confines the benefits of - the "Enhancement of Annual Intake Capacity in Undergraduate Courses in Medical College for the - B Academic Session 2013-14 only Regulations 2013" (in short "Regulations 2013"), issued vide notification dated 8.7.2013, to the Government Medical Colleges only, as unconstitutional, being ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 2. Petitioners in all these petitions submit that they are all C well established private unaided medical institutions in the country running for more than 10 years with an annual intake of 100 MBBS students, over and above, they are conducting PG Degree and Diploma courses as well. Regulations 2013 was issued on 8.7.2013 by the Medical Council of India (for short D "MCI") with the intention of granting one-time permission to all Government and Non-Government Medical Colleges with the objective of enhancing the intake capacity of all the medical colleges in the country, which was framed with the intention to augment the human resources in medicine for attaining E optimum Doctor-Population ratio in the nation, without compromising on the prescribed minimum standards of medical education. 3. Petitioners have satisfied all the eligibility criteria laid down in the above mentioned Regulations 2013, and after F having satisfied the eligibility criteria laid down, few of them submitted an application to the MCI for enhancement of annual intake of students, reference was made to one of such applications dated 15.7.2013. While so, they came across a Corrigendum issued by the Board of Governors of the MCI, on G the direction given by the Central Government, stating that Regulations 2013 would be confined only to Government medical colleges for the academic year 2013-14. 4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioners submitted that such corrigendum cannot override the statutory H Regulations 2013. Learned senior counsel submitted that the DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 509 UNION OF INDIA [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] object of the Regulations would be achieved only if the same is made applicable uniformly to the Government,as well as NonGovernment medical colleges in the country arid that confining the Regulations only to the Government medical colleges is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In support of this contention, reference was made to the judgments of this Court in _Suraj Mall Mohta and_ Co. _v. A. V. -Vishvanath Sastri_ (1955) 1 SCR 448 and _State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar_ 1952 SCR 284. 5. Shri Amit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for MCI defended the issue of corrigendum stating that the same was issued in public interest and also in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case since the time limit fixed in the Schedule to 2013 Regulations got expired. Learned counsel also submitted that corrigendum was issued by the MCI on the direction given by the Central Government under Section 3(c) of the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 2010, which enables the Central Government to give proper directions to the MCI and the MCI is bound to give effect to those directions. Learned counsel also explained the circumstances which led the Central Government in issuing the letter dated 18.7.2013 to the MCI. Learned counsel also submitted that, due to the extreme necessity of completing the admission process, the Board of Governors of the MCI could not have received applications from the private medical colleges for enhancing the intake capacity during the academic year 2013-14. It is under such circumstances, the Central Government had directed the MCI to apply the modified time schedule for the receipt of application and grant permission only to the Government medical colleges for the academic year 2013-14. Learned counsel also pointed out that MCI and the Central Government have to comply with the time schedule fixed by this Court in various judgments for admission of students as well. Reference was made to the judgments of this Court in _Mridul Dhar (Minor) and Another v. Union of India and Others_ (2005) 2 SCC 65 and _Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others_ (2012) 7 sec 433. A B C D E F G H 510 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 9 S.C.R. A 6. Shri Sidharth Luthra, Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the Union of India, made available the original files leading to the issue of the letter dated 18.7.2013 by the Central Government to the MCI and explaining the circumstances under which it was decided to confine the B Regulations 2013 only to the Government medical colleges, that too, taking into consideration the larger public interest. Shri Luthra also submitted that the direction given by the Central Government vide letter dated 18.7.2013 is in consonance with the Regulations and issued in exercise of the powers conferred c on it under Section 3(c) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. A 7. We have heard learned senior counsel on either side at length. We need not reiterate the imperative need to follow the time limit fixed by this Court in the matter of admission to MBBS/BDS courses in _Mridul Dhar_ case (supra) which was D done in the interest of students' community, for admission to the Post Graduate and Super Speciality courses. Timely admission of the students to these courses is of utmost importance so that the students would get quality and timely education. In _Mridul Dhar_ case (supra), this Court clearly E indicated that the time schedule for establishment of new college or to increase intake in existing college shall be adhered to strictly by all concerned, failing which defaulting party would be liable to be personally proceeded with. 8. In _Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others_ F (2012) 7 sec 433, this Court has reiterated the necessity to follow the time limit fixed by this Court. This Court went even to the extent of indicating that failure to conform with the time limit fixed by this Court shall be liable for action under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 129 of G the Constitution of India. 9. In the light of the above mentioned judgments and the various directions issued by this Court, we have to judge whether the decision taken by the Central Government as well as the MCI confining the Regulations 2013 only to the H DR B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 511 UNION OF INDIA [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] Government medical colleges is arbitrary, illegal or A discriminatory in the peculiar circumstances of this case. Regulations 2013 was issued by the MCI in exercise of its powers conferred under Section 33(fa) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 with the previous sanction of the Central Government. The object of the notification was to enhance the B intake capacity in the existing medical colleges so as to augment human resources in medicine for attaining optimum Doctor-Population ratio in the Nation, without compromising the prescribed minimum standards of medical education. Regulation 3 deals with the eligibility to make an application, c which reads as under: **"3. Eligibility to make application.-** (1) The application for enhancement of annual intake capacity in the existing Medical Colleges may be made by the organizations that have established the Medical College to the Board of D Governors in Supersession of the Medical Council of India. The format of application for Government and nongovernmental owned Medical College is prescribed in Schedule I appended to these Regulations. (2) Only such existing Medical Colleges shall be eligible to apply under these Regulations that enjoy minimum ten years of standing from the date of grant of initial letter of permission by the Central Government and the MBBS qualification awarded by them stands included in the First Schedule of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 [Act No. 1 02 of 1956]. > (3) The Medical Colleges with an annual intake of 50 or more but below 100 MBBS seats shall be eligible to apply for enhancement for annual intake capacity to 100, as onetime measure. E · F G (4) The Medical Colleges with an annual intake of 100 or more but below 150 MBBS seats shall be eligible to apply for enhancement for annual intake capacity to 150, as onetime measure. H 512 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 9 S.C.R. A (5) Such Medical Colleges that have not been granted letter of permission by the Board of Governors in Supersession of the Medical Council of India in accordance with clause 8(1 )(3)(d) of the Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999 [notified in the Official Gazette on B 16.04.201 O] and/or the person who has established the Medical College has been convicted by a Court of Competent jurisdiction in a criminal investigation initiated by the Central Bureau of Investigation or Police." 10. Regulation 4 deals with the procedure to make C application. The time-schedule for receipt of application for enhancement of annual intake capacity in under-graduate courses, is provided in Schedule II appended to the Regulations, which reads as follows: ## "SCHEDULE II ## D TIME-SCHEDULE FOR RECEIPT OF APPLICATION FOR ENHANCEMENT OF ANNUAL INTAKE CAPACITY IN UNDERGRADUATE COURSES ||\|| |---|---|---| |S.No.|· Stage of Processing|Last date| |1.|Receipt of applications by the Board<br>ofGovernorsinSuper-sessionofthe<br>Medical Council of India|15.07.2013| |2.|Return of Incomplete application|20.07.2013| |3.|Grant of Letter of Permission by<br>the Board of Governorsin<br>Supersessionofthe Medical<br>CouncilofIndia|31.07.2013| 11. Schedule I of Regulations 2013 deals with the format of application for Government and Non-government medical colleges for making an application for enhancement of annual H intake capacity. Para 4 of the Form (Schedule I) as well a$ the ,DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 513 UNION OF INDIA [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] note attached to the said format also has relevance and the A same is as follows: "SCHEDULE I FORM (Suggested format for Applicants) PROPOSED FORMAT OF UNDERTAKING TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT FOR ENHANCEMENT OF MBBS SEATS FROM ---(Please specify existing intake capacity} to ___ _ (Please specify enhanced intake capacity) B c xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 4. The applicant assures that the compliance with the relevant Minimum Standard Requirement Regulations is D mandatory for continuation of the batch of students and is in the interest of students. In case of any failure to meet the requirements of the Regulations the Central Government _I_ Board of Governors in super-session of the Medical Council of India would be entitled in law to E withdraw/revoke/cancel such permission. D Yours faithfully, [Applicant] F ## Note: (i) Kindly enclose : (a) duly attested copy of initial Letter of Permission and of subsequent renewals granted by the Centrai G Government u/s 1 QA of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956; and (b) duly attested copy of the Gazette notification/ Order of the Central Government including the H 514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2013] 9 S.C.R. > A MBBS qualification awarded by the applicant's Medical College in the First Schedule of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. (ii) The Undertaking in case of Government of State/Union B Territory should be signed by the Chief Secretary. > (iii) The Undertaking in case of non-Governmental application should be on non-judicial stamp paper of Rs. 100 and should be made by President _I_ Chairman Nice Chancellor/ Managing Trustee of the Society/Trust and c Managing Director of the Company. The Undertaking should inter alia state that: (a) the College has not been subject to clause 8 (3) (1) (d) of the Establishment of Medical College Regulations, D 1999; and (b) the person establishing the Medical College has not been convicted by a Court of competent jurisdiction in a criminal investigation initiated by the Central Bureau of Investigation or Police. The Undertaking should be duly E attested by a First Class Magistrate." 12. MCI, in their counter affidavit, stated that the above mentioned notification dated 8.7.2013 was received by the Council Office only on 16.7.2013. By that time, the last date F fixed for receipt of application by the Board of Governors was over, which was on 15.7.2013. Under such circumstances, the MCI wrote a letter dated 17.7.2013 to the Government of India, iting as follows: G "xxx xxx xxx In light of Gazette notification received on 16.07.2013 the time of receipt of application has already lapsed. Therefore, as per provisions as under [in the ·Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999]: H DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 515 UNION OF INDIA [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) _"The time schedule indicated above may be_ A _modified by the Central Government, for reasons to be recorded in writing, in respect of any class or category of applications._ Keeping in light the above statutory provisions, B whereby the Central Government is empowered to modify the time schedule, it is proposed in order to achieve the objective of enhancing the intake capacity in existing Medical Colleges, so as to augment the human resources in medicine for attaining optimum Doctor=population ratio C in the nation, the above schedule may be modified to the following: |the nation, the above schedule may be modified to the<br>following:|the nation, the above schedule may be modified to the<br>following:|the nation, the above schedule may be modified to the|the nation, the above schedule may be modified to the| |---|---|---|---| |S.<br>StageofProcessing<br>No.<br>1.<br>Receiptofapplications<br>by the Boardof<br>GovernorsinSuper-<br>sessionofthe Medical<br>CouncilofIndia||Last Date|Modified Dates| |||15.07.2013 24.07.2013|15.07.2013 24.07.2013| |2.|ReturnofIncomplete<br>application|20.07.2013 31.07.2013|20.07.2013 31.07.2013| |3.|GrantofLetterof<br>Permission by the Board<br>ofGovernorsin<br>Supersessionofthe<br>Medical Council of India|31.07.2013 31.07.2013<br>Permission by the Board|31.07.2013 31.07.2013| It is requested that permission of Central Government to modify the Schedule as proposed above be granted, so as to enable the Council to further expedite the process. This modification, with the approval of Central Government can be carried out by public notice and need H [2013] 9 S.C.R. 516 SUPREME COURT REPORTS A not be notified in the Official Gazette. It is also brought to your kind attention that as the time-schedule for grant of letter of permission for establishment of new Medical Colleges and renewal of permission for increase of seats in existing Medical B Colleges was extended to 15 July 2013, by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for he academic year 2013-14 pursuant to an application moved by the Council in Priya Gupta's case, an appropriate application is also required to be filed by the Council seeking permission of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Necessary steps are being taken by the c Council _!n_ this regard. Kindly grant permission at the earliest which will enable the Council to do the needful at the earliest." 13. The MCI, therefore, requested the Government of India 0[to modify the time schedule and extend the last date ][of ][receipt ] of application to 24.7.2013, since they could not receive the applications by the various medical colleges prior to 15.7.2013, as the very Regulations 2013 dated 8.7.2013 was received by the MCI only on 16.7.2013. E 14. The Central Government considered the request and pointed out that it would not be possible for the Board of Governors of MCI to process all the applications preferred by the Non-government medical colleges within the time fixed, therefore, it decided to issued a corrigendum which modified that the date of 24.7.2013 would apply only to Government F medical colleges. E 15. We find no serious error in the view taken by the Central Government confining Regulations 2013 to Government medical colleges alone in view of strict time limit fixed in the Schedule for receipt of applications i.e. 15. 7.2013 and the G preremptory directions given by this Court in judgments referred to above. We may make it clear that the time limit fixed for starting a medical college as well as for additional intake are of extreme importance, or else it may collide with the time limit fixed for starting the academic sessi0n. If the time limit fixed in H the notification dated 8.7.2013 was to be adhered to strictly, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR M6DICAL COLLEGE _v._ 517 UNION OF INDIA [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] the majority of the Non-government medical colleges could not A have applied, since the Regulations 2013 was received by the MCI only on 16.7.2013 beyond the last date fixed for the receipt of application by the Board of Governors of MCI. 16. We indicate that the main argument raised by the learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners was that B 2013 Regulations should have been made applicable equally to the Government Medical Colleges as well as nonGovernment Medical Colleges and there cannot be any discrimination between them, otherwise the object sought to be achieved by the Regulations would have been defeated. In our C view, in a given case power is vested with the Central Government to modify the time schedule, in respect of Cilt least one class or category of applicants. We may in this connection refer to Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999, which was issued in exercise of powers conferred under D Section 1 OA read with Section 3 of the Indian Medial Council Act, which has recognised five categories of organisations which are eligible to apply for starting a Medical College as well as eligible to apply for further intake of seats. Following are the categories :- E E 1. A State GovernmenVUnion Territory; 2. A University; 3. An autonomous body promoted by Central and State Government by or under a Statute for the F purpose of medical education; 4. A society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860) or corresponding Acts in States; or G 5. A public religious or charitable trust registered under the Trust Act, 1882 (2 of 1882) or the Wakfs Act, 1954 (29 of 1954). 17. State GovernmenVUnion Territory can also set up a Medical College and take additional intake of seats, apart from H [2013) 9 S.C.R. ## 518 SUPREME COURT REPORTS - A the other categories mentioned above. In a given case, the Central Government, for reasons to be recorded in writing, can modify the time schedule in respect of any class or category of applicants mentioned hereinbefore. Such a power has been conferred on Central Government by virtue of Establishment of - B Medical College Regulations (Amendment), 2012. > 18. The Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999, as amended by Establishment of Medical College Regulations (Amendment), 2012, provides for time schedule for grant of letter of permission by the Medical Council of India for C establishment of a Medical College as well as increase in admission capacity in MBBS course. Schedule to the above mentioned Regulations reads as follows :- ## SCHEDULE ||COUNCILOFINDIA.|COUNCILOFINDIA.| |---|---|---| |S.<br>No.|Stageofprocessing<br>Last Date|| |1.|Receiptofapplications by the From 1st August to 30th<br>Council|applications by the From 1st August to 30th<br>September (both days<br>inclusive)ofthe year.| |2.|IssueofLetterofIntent by the<br>Council|Upto 30th April| |3.|Receiptofreply from the<br>applicant by the Council for<br>consideration for issueof<br>LetterofPermission|Upto 31st May| |4.<br>IssueofLetterofPermission<br>by the Council||15th June| DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE _v._ 519 UNION OF INDIA [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] > Note : The time schedule indicated above may be A modified by the Central Government, for reasons to be recorded in writing, in respect of any class or category of applications. 19. The note specifically indicates that the time schedule could be modified by Central Government for reasons to be recorded in writing in respect of any category, class of applicants which, in our view, could also be invoked in the case of increase of annual intake as well. Resultantly, the Central Government has the power to modify the date from 15. 7 .2013 to 24.7.2013 in respect of any class or category of applications. So far as the present case is concerned, it is in exercise of that statutory power, the Corrigendum has been issued by the Central Government modifying the time schedule to the Government Medical College alone out· of the five categories· mentioned hereinbefore. We are not prepared to say favouring the Government Medical College alone in such circumstances is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. B C D 20. Central Government is also empowered under Section 3(c) of Indian Medical Council Act, as amended in 2010, to issue various directions to the Board of Governor of the the MCI, which reads as follows:- E "3C. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of this Act, the Board of Governors or the Council after its reconstitution shall, in exercise of its powers and in the performance of F its functions under this Act, be bound by such directions on questions of policy, other than those relating to technical and administrative matters, as the Central Government may give in writing to it from time to time; G Provided that the Board of Governors or the Council after its reconstitution shall, as far as practicable, be given an opportunity to express its views before any direction is given under this subsection. H 520 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 9 S.C.R. A (2) The decision of the Central Government whether a question is a matter of policy or not shall be final." Board of Governors of the MCI is, therefore, bound by the Corrigendum issued by the Central Government. B B 21. We notice that the above corrigendum extending the last date was made applicable only to the Government medical colleges recording the reason that the time would be very short so as to process the applications by the MCI received from the non-government medical colleges. We cannot say that the c decision taken by the Central Government is perverse, arbitrary or unreasonable, so as to strike down the corrigendum issued under the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. 22. The petitions, therefore, lack in merits and are D ·accordingly dismissed. R.P. Writ Petition dismissed. <