SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:-Dr. A.S. Anand, C.J.I, G.T. Nanavati and Doraiswamy Raju, JJ.

Civil Appeals Nos. 5045-46 of 1998. D/d. 16.2.2000.

Medical Council of India, New Delhi - Appellant

Versus

State of H.P. And Another - Respondent

Setting up of Medical colleges - Refusal to set up medical colleges on the ground of deficiencies during pendency of appeal before SC - High Court granting mandamus permitting establishment of medical college - Since the refusal was based on running medical colleges, high court should have referred the matter of medical council of India or union of Indian for reconsideration rather than have issued a writ, directing grant of writ.

[Paras 2 and 4]

JUDGMENT

This order will dispose of Civil Appeal No. 5045 of 1998 (filed by the Medical Council of India) and Civil Appeal No. 5046 of 1998 (filed by the Union of India). Both the appeals are directed against the common order of the High Court dated 9-1-1998.

2. Mr Mukul Rohtagi, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Medical Council of India submits that during the pendency of the appeal in this Court the deficiencies for running a medical college, which had been pointed out by the Medical Council of India, having been removed, the Medical Council of India has since recommended the setting up of a medical college in the State and has granted permission for starting the first year MBBS classes, pursuant to which the State of Himachal Pradesh has already set up the Medical College and the classes have commenced. It is submitted that though in view of this development, nothing survives for consideration but the directions of the High Court were not merited. Mr Rohtagi, learned Additional Solicitor General submits that in this case there were admittedly deficiencies on account of which permission had not been granted by the Medical Council of India to start the College and in view of this admitted position, the High Court ought not to have granted mandamus directing the grant of permission to the respondent State for establishing a medical college.

3. We find force in the submission of the learned Additional Solicitor General. Since the refusal was based on deficiencies for running a medical college, it would have been appropriate for the High Court to have remitted the matter to the Medical Council of India or the Union of India for reconsideration, even if it was of the opinion that the order of the Medical Council of India deserved to be set aside, rather than to have issued a writ of mandamus directing grant of permission.

4. We need not, however, detain ourselves to deal with this aspect any further because of the subsequent developments which have virtually rendered these appeals infructuous. The appeals are, therefore, disposed of as requiring no further consideration with no order as to costs.

.