JUDGMENT Ashok Kumar Mathur, J. This is an appeal directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 24th November, 1993 whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and held that it is not open to the Medical Council of India to refuse to recognise the condensed licentiate course sponsored by the State Government of West Bengal in 1981 as per resolution of the State Government dated 25th November, 1980. Aggrieved against this order the Medical Council of India has preferred the present appeal. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter it may be necessary to dilate some of the relevant facts. The writ petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were admitted in the course of Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (for short BAMS) in the year 1971. The writ petitioner Nos. 3 to 31 were admitted in BAMS in 1972. The writ petitioner Nos. 32 to 39 were admitted in the BAMS course in 1973. The petitioner Nos. 40 to 52 were admitted in the said course in 1974. They qualified and they were granted BAMS degrees. Thereafter, they were admitted in Licentiate in Condensed Medical Course (for short LCMC) in 1981 and they succeeded and in August, 1994 and they were granted certificates. By Notification dated 12th November, 1980 an amendment was made in the State Medical Faculty for enabling the students passing BAMS examination to undergo training so that they can undergo a condensed licentiate course for two years' duration during the period 1981-1984 in RG. Kar Medical College in accordance with the regulations framed by the respondent No.6, West Bengal State Medical Faculty. On completion of such course trained persons could practice in medicine, surgery and obstetrics and gynecology. Accordingly the petitioners obtained certificate in LCMC, though by the order dated 22nd January, 1980 the Medical Council of India has already resolved that there will be no admission to such courses henceforth. Relevant extract of the order of the Medical Council of India (approved by the Government of India) reads as under: "Condensed licentiate course: The condensed licentiate course, is allowed by the Medical Council of India to the holders of qualification in Integrated Medicine - (modern medicine, combined with Unani, Ayurved Sidha, etc.) e.g. BAMS, BIMS, CHM, AFMS, DM, F AM, etc. will be available in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down by the Council from time to time upto the date of the issue of these orders and there shall be no admission to the aforesaid condensed licentiate course on or after the said date." 3. Notwithstanding this resolution passed by the Medical Council of India, being approved by the Central Government, the State of West Bengal on 25th November, 1980 resolved that the State Medical Faculty, West Bengal shall introduce a condensed course which will be conducted by the State Medical Faculty of West Bengal. The petitioners were admitted in pursuance of the said resolution dated 25th November, 1980 to this condensed licentiate course, but the same was not recognised by the Medical Council of India. As a result of the non-recognition of the certificate issued by the said LCMC the petitioners cannot practice outside the State of West Bengal and the qualification of LCMC granted by the State of West Bengal does not become recognised qualification within the meaning of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Therefore the petitioners resorted to file the present writ petition. Therefore what we have to see whether the certificate granted by the State of West Bengal which is rightly not recognised by the Indian Medical Councilor not. 4. The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) was enacted by the Parliament to provide for re-constitution of Medical Council of India and maintenance of a Medical Register for India and for matters connected therewith. This was with the purpose to regulate the Medical Institutions in the whole of the country. 4. The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) was enacted by the Parliament to provide for re-constitution of Medical Council of India and maintenance of a Medical Register for India and for matters connected therewith. This was with the purpose to regulate the Medical Institutions in the whole of the country. Section 2 deals with the definitions and the definitions which are relevant for our purpose are set out hereunder: "(a) 'approved institution' means a hospital, health centre or other such institution recognised by a University as an institution in which person may undergo the training, if any, required by his course of study before the award of any medical qualification to him; (b) 'Council' means Medical Council of India constituted under this Act; (c) 'Indian Medical Register' means the medical register maintained by the council; (d) 'Medicine' means modern scientific medicine in all its branches and includes surgery and obstertics, but does not include veterinary medicine and surgery; (e) 'prescribed' means prescribed by regulations; (D 'recognised medical institution' means any of the medical qualification included in the Schedules; (g) 'regulation' means a regulation made under section 33; (h) 'State Medical Council' means a medical council constituted under any law for the time being in force in any State regulating the registration of practice of medicine; (i) 'State Medical Register' means a register maintained under any law for the time being in force in any State regulating the registration of practitioners of medicine;" 5. Section 19A of the said Act which is relevant for our purpose lays down that the Council may prescribe the minimum standard of Medical Education which reads: "19A.(1) The Council may prescribe the minimum standard of medical education required for granting recognised medical qualifications (other than post-graduate medical qualifications) by Universities or medical institutions in India. (2) Copies of the draft regulations and all subsequent amendments thereof shall be furnished by the Council to all the State Governments and the Council shall, before submitting the regulations or any amendment thereof, as the case may be, to the Central Government for sanction, take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from the furnishing of the copies as aforesaid. (3) the Committee shall from time to time report to the Council on the efficacy of the regulations and may recommend to the Council such amendments thereof as it may think fit." 6. As per section 19A Council may prescribe the minimum standard of medical education for granting recognised medical qualification by the Universities or medical institutions in India. It further lays down that a draft of such minimum standard of medical institution shall be prepared by the Council and the same shall be sent to all State Councils before submitting the regulations or any amendment thereof to the Central Government for its sanction which will take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from the furnishing of the copies as aforesaid communication. Section 33 of the said Act lays down how Council can frame these regulations. Section 33 provides as under: "33. Section 33 of the said Act lays down how Council can frame these regulations. Section 33 provides as under: "33. The Council may, with the previous sanction of the Central Government, make regulations generally to carry out the purposes of this Act, and, without prejudice to the generality of this power, such regulations may provide for --(a) the management of the property of the Council and the maintenance and audit of its accounts; (b) the summoning and holding of meetings of the Council the times and places where such meeting are to be held, the conduct of business thereat and the number of members necessary to constitute a quorum; (c) the resignation of members of the Council; (d) the powers and duties of the President and Vice-President; (e) the mode of appointment of the Executive Committee and other Committees, the summoning and holding of meetings, and the conduct of business of such Committees; (f) the tenure of office, and the powers and duites of the Registrar and other officers and servants of the Council; (g) the particulars to be stated, and the proof of the qualifications to be given in applications for registration under this Act; (h) the fees to be paid on applications and appeals under this Act; (i) the appointment, powers, duites and procedure of medical inspectors and visitors; (j) the courses and period of study and of practical training to be undertaken, the subjects of examination and the standards of proficiency therein to be obtained, in Universities or medical institutions for grant of recognised medical qualification; (k) the standard of staff, equipment, accommodation, training and other facilities for medical education; (l) the conduct of profession examinations, qualifications of examiners and the conditions of admission to such examinations; (m) the standards of profession conduct and etiquette and code of ethics to be observed by medical practitioners; and (n) any matter for which under this act provision may be made by regulation." 7. Therefore reading of the section 19A read with section 33, the Council shall frame the regulations and the same shall be approved by the Central Government and thereafter these regulations will become effective. Therefore reading of the section 19A read with section 33, the Council shall frame the regulations and the same shall be approved by the Central Government and thereafter these regulations will become effective. In the present case certain regulations were framed by the Council and draft thereof was sent by the Secretary, Medical Council of India to the Secretaries of the Health and Family Welfare Department of all State Governments vide its communication dated 24th August, 1978, which reads as under: "From: The Secretary, Medical Council of India, Temple Lane, Kotla Road. To: The Secretaries, Health & Family Welfare Department, All the State Governments. New Delhi - 2, dated 24/8/78 Subject: Medical Council of India - Stopping of Condensed MBBS Courses and Condensed Licentiate Courses -draft regulations. Sir, I am directed to invite your attention to section 19A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, reproduced below: '19A.(1) The Council may prescribe the minimum standard of medical education required for granting recognised medical qualifications (other than post-graduate medical qualifications) by Universities or medical institutions in India. (2) Copies of the draft regulations and all subsequent amendments thereof shall be furnished by the Council to all the State Governments and the Council shall, before submitting the regulations or any amendment thereof, as the case may be, to the Central Government for sanction, take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from the furnishing of the copies as aforesaid. (3) the Committee shall from time to time report to the Council on the efficacy of the regulations and may recommend to the Council such amendments thereof as it may think fit.' As provided under the above section, I am directed to forward a copy of the draft regulations regarding stopping of condensed MBBS course and Condensed Licentiate course and to request that the State Governments may please forward their comments to this within 3 months from the date of issue of this letter, failing which, it will be presumed that the State Governments have no comments to offer. Kindly acknowledge receipt. Yours faithfully, Sd/- V.B. Krishnan, Secretary". Medical Council of India Draft Regulations of the Medical Council of India - Stopping of Condensed MBBS Courses and Condensed Licentiate Courses. Kindly acknowledge receipt. Yours faithfully, Sd/- V.B. Krishnan, Secretary". Medical Council of India Draft Regulations of the Medical Council of India - Stopping of Condensed MBBS Courses and Condensed Licentiate Courses. Condensed MBBS Course The Condensed MBBS Course, as allowed by the Medical Council of India to the holders of medical licentiate qualifications from time to time shall cease to be available from 31st March, 1979 and there shall be no admission to the condensed MBBS course in any Medical College/Institution in India on or after 1st April, 1979. Condensed Licentiate Course The Condensed Licentiate Course, as allowed by the Medical Council of India to the holders of qualifications in Integrated Medicine (modern medicine, combined with Unani, Ayurved Sidha, etc.) e.g. BAMS, BIMS, CHM, AFMS, DM, FAM, etc. will be available in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down by the Council from time to time upto 31st December, 1979 and there shall be no admission to the aforesaid condensed licentiate course on or after 1st January, 1980." (Emphasis mine) 8. It was very clearly mentioned in the above communication that this was with regard to stopping of Condensed MBBS course and Condensed Licentiate course and the State Governments were required to send their comments within 3 months from the date of issue of the said letter failing which it will be presumed that the State Government has no comment to offer. A communication was sent by the State Government on 19th January, 1979 informing that there is no such Condensed MBBS course or Condensed Licentiate course in West Bengal. The communication dated 19th January, 1979 reads as under: "From: Shri S. Anwar, IAS, Dy. Secretary to the Government of West Bengal. To: The Secretary, Medical Council of India, Temple Lane, Kotla Road. Dated 19th January, 1979. Subject : Medical Council of India - Stopping of Condensed MBBS courses and Condensed Licentiate courses -draft regulations. Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter No. MCI-28(1)/78-Med/17467 dt. 4.10.78 on the above subject and to say that there is no Condensed MBBS course or Condensed Licentiate course in this State. Yours faithfully, Sd/- Deputy Secretary". 9. Thereafter the matter was taken up with the Central Government. Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter No. MCI-28(1)/78-Med/17467 dt. 4.10.78 on the above subject and to say that there is no Condensed MBBS course or Condensed Licentiate course in this State. Yours faithfully, Sd/- Deputy Secretary". 9. Thereafter the matter was taken up with the Central Government. After approval of the Central Government regulation was passed on 22nd January, 1980 which reads as under: "Copy of letter No. V.11025/47/78-M.E. (Policy), dated 18.1.1980 from the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (Department of Health), New Delhi addressed to the Secretary, Medical Council of India, New Delhi. Sub: Medical Council of India - Stopping of Condensed MBBS courses and Condensed Licentiate courses -Regulations regarding. I am directed to refer to your letter Nos. MCI-28(1)/78-A/Med.l1644, dated the 12th April, 1979 and MCI-28(1)/79-Med.l16721, dated the 12th October, 1979 on the subject noted above and to convey the approval of the Central Government under section 33 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) to the following recommendations of the Medical Council of India as regulations :- Condensed MBBS Course The Condensed MBBS course, as allowed by the Medical Council of India to the holders of medical licentiate qualifications from time to time shall cease to be available from the date of issue of these orders and there shall be no admission to the Condensed MBBS course in any Medical College/ Institution in India on or after the said date. Condensed Licentiate Course The Condensed Licentiate course, as allowed by the Medical Council of India to the holders of qualifications in Integrated Medicine (modern medicine, combined with Unani, Ayurved Sidha, etc.) e.g. BAMS, BIMS, CHM, AFMS, DM, FAM, etc. will be available in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down by the Council from time to time upto the date of the issue of these orders and there shall be no admission to the aforesaid condensed licentiate course on or after the said date." Medical Council of India, Temple Lane, Kotla Road, New Delhi 110002." 10. As a result of the above regulation licentiate course was not permissible in the States. As a result of the above regulation licentiate course was not permissible in the States. Meanwhile when this matter was already receiving consideration of the Government of India, the State of West Bengal after having sent a communication on 19th January, 1979 that they don't have such Condensed Licentiate course again took up the issue with the Medical Council of India for starting this course, but the Secretary to the Medical Council of India vide its letter dated 16th June, 1979 informed the Secretary to the Govt. of West Bengal, Health and Family Welfare Department that the Executive Committee of the Council has considered their proposal and they are against starting of such course. The communication from the Secretary, Medical Council of India dated 16th June, 1979 reads as under: "The Secretary, Medical Council of India, Temple Lane, Kotla Road, New Delhi 110002. The Secretary to the Govt. of West Bengal, Health & F.W. Dept., Writers' Building, Calcutta. No. MCI-28(1)/79-Med/8489 dated: 16.6.1979 Subject: Permission for admission to Condensed Licentiate course for holders of qualifications in integrated course- BAMS (Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine & Surgery) in West Bengal. Sir, I am directed to state that the Executive Committee of this Council at its meeting held on 5th June, 1979, considered your letter No. Medl./ 4552/JB/Con/MBBS, dated the 21st May, 1979, regarding the starting of the Condensed Licentiate course in West Bengal for the holders of BAMS qualification as recommended by a Committee of the State Government and it was decided as under :- “The Executive Committee noted the West Bengal was one of the States which was considering the question of starting short-term courses for the delivery of health care which had not been approved by the Council. The Executive Committee was of the opinion that in lieu of the short-term courses to create a new class of medical persons it would be more advantageous to use the existing qualified BAMS personnel. As such the Executive Committee was against starting of any Condensed Licentiate course for the holders of the BAMS qualification in West Bengal. Kindly acknowledge receipt. Yours faithfully, (D.B. Krishnan) Secretary." 11. Thereafter the matter remained in correspondences with the Government of India and the State but ultimately no order was passed by the Government of India and therefore the petitioner resorted to file the present writ petition. Kindly acknowledge receipt. Yours faithfully, (D.B. Krishnan) Secretary." 11. Thereafter the matter remained in correspondences with the Government of India and the State but ultimately no order was passed by the Government of India and therefore the petitioner resorted to file the present writ petition. Notwithstanding that the Government of West Bengal passed a resolution on 25th February, 1980 to introduce this condensed liceritiate course which reads as under: "Resolution WHEREAS it has been decided to introduce the Condensed Licentiate course in Medicine for the Ayurveda Students who have been admitted between 1971-74 and undergone Pre-Clinical, Para-Clinical and Clinical studies in medical subjects at different State Medical Colleges in Calcutta after passing the Higher Secondary Examination with Science. AND WHEREAS it has again been decided that the aforesaid course will be for a period of two academic years from the date of commencement of the course to the date of completion. AND WHEREAS it has also been decided that the said course shall contain such a study course as may be prescribed by the State Medical Faculty of West Bengal. AND WHEREAS it has further been decided that the said course shall be conducted by the State Medical Faculty of West Bengal in such manner as may be prescribed by the premises of RG. Kar Medical College, Calcutta. AND WHEREAS it has again been decided that there will be no admission in the aforesaid courses after 1983 and the courses will end after 1980. Order Ordered that the resolution be published in the Calcutta Gazette and copies may be sent to the Secretary, State Medical Faculty of West Bengal and Principal, RG. Kar Medical College, Calcutta. By order of the Governor, Sd/- B.R Chakraborty, Secretary to the Govt. of West Bengal". 12. Thereafter a Notification was issued on 12th December, 1980 which reads as under: "The Governor is pleased hereby to make the following amendment in the Statute of the State Medical Faculty, West Bengal published with resolution No. 2545-Medl., dated 11th August, 1914, at pages 1553-1562 of Part I of Calcutta Gazette, dated 12th August, 1914, as subsequently amended (hereinafter referred to as the said Statutes) Amendment In the said Statute, after article 6F under Part IB insert the following article :- 6G. Students who will undergo and complete the requisite course of studies in Medicine/Medical Science (as defined and detailed in the Schedule to this article and hereinafter called as the said Regulations for the Condensed Licentiate courses in Medicine for Ayurvedic Students who have been admitted between 1971-74 and have undergone training under the Integrated System of Medicine) in Medical Institutions, duly recognised by the State Medical Faculty of West Bengal, shall be admitted into the examinations in the subject laid down in the said Regulations and students passing the examinations shall be granted licence by the Governing Body of the aforesaid Faculty to practice Medicine, Surgery and Obstetrics and Gynecology. By order of the Governor, Sd/- B.R Chakraborty, Secretary to the Govt. of West Bengal". 13. As per this resolution and the notification thereafter the State of West Bengal started the course and the persons who successfully completed this course was granted licence by the Governing Body to practice Medicine, Surgery and Obstetrics and Gynecology in the State. Therefore, the course was recognised only in the State but the Medical Council of India categorically did not agree. Despite that they initiated the course, therefore, in this background the question is whether a writ of Mandamus can be issued to the Medical Council of India to register the persons possessing Condensed Licentiate course in the register of Medical Council of India or not. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition on 6th September, 1991 without Medical Council of India being a party. Thereafter an• application was made on behalf of Medical Council of India that the aforesaid order dated 6th September, 1991 should be recalled as the whole case has been decided on merit without Medical Council of India being a party in the writ petition. The question of maintainability of such application was contested. Thereafter an• application was made on behalf of Medical Council of India that the aforesaid order dated 6th September, 1991 should be recalled as the whole case has been decided on merit without Medical Council of India being a party in the writ petition. The question of maintainability of such application was contested. However, the learned Single Judge decided to rehear the whole petition, All the arguments of the counsel for the Medical Council of India was heard at length and that of the petitioners and ultimately the learned Single Judge found a defect in the draft regulation dated 24th August, 1978 circulated to all States including the State of West Bengal, that the cut off date was indicated as 1st January, 1980 that no admission to the Condensed Licentiate course shall be made after 1st January, 1980 but in the regulation which were ultimately approved the cut off date was indicated as the date of the order that is 22nd January, 1980. Therefore, the learned Single Judge held that the draft regulation which were approved by the Central Government were not circulated, keeping in view of the provisions of section 19A(2) of the said Act and suffers from the same defect, which led to the striking down of the earlier draft regulations by the Bombay High Court. In this way the learned Single Judge observed that the resolution of the State Government introducing the condensed licentiate course by 25th November, 1980 and the persons who got the degrees cannot be refused to be recognised by the Medical Council of India. Hence the present appeal. 14. We have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused the records. From the narration of the facts as disclosed above it clearly transpires that the Medical Council of India has been made an All India Body which lays down the standard of teaching in the modern medicine all over the country. In order to lay down the uniform standard of the Medical teaching in the country an Apex Body was constituted so that the teaching in modern medicines can be standarised. For this purpose the Indian Medical Council was established under the Act and they were given power to lay down the standard of teaching of the medicines in the medical colleges by regulations. For this purpose the Indian Medical Council was established under the Act and they were given power to lay down the standard of teaching of the medicines in the medical colleges by regulations. These regulations were framed by the Medical Council of India and the same were made uniformly applicable to all medical colleges and institutions in India. The detailed procedure was laid down in section 33 of the said Act for framing regulations. The question, therefore, in the present case is whether the regulations which have been framed, had been framed in the manner prescribed under the said Act or not. There is no gain saying of the proposition that when a particular procedure has been laid down for framing regulation then that has to be followed in real letter and spirit. The only ground which has prevailed with the learned Single Judge was that the regulation which has been framed by the Medical Council of India for doing away with such kind of Condensed Licentiate course was not framed in the prescribed manner in the Act. Therefore he struck down the regulation and permitted the Medical Council of India to frame fresh regulation in accordance with law. The candidates who passed the course prescribed by the State of West Bengal Medical Faculty under the so called notification by the State of West Bengal shall be registered under the registration of the Medical Council of India. 15. We have bestowed the best of our consideration to the controversy involved in the matter and we are of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is not correct. Section 19A of the said Act prescribed a minimum standard of medical education for granting recognised medical qualification by the universities or medical institutions in India. For that purpose the Medical Council of India has to prepare a draft regulation and circulate to all the State Governments for their comments including for any amendment in the regulation. In the present case the Medical Council of India on 24th August, 1978 sent the draft regulations to the States including the State of West Bengal and it was tentatively decided to close down the admission to Condensed Licentiate course from 1st of January, 1980. In the present case the Medical Council of India on 24th August, 1978 sent the draft regulations to the States including the State of West Bengal and it was tentatively decided to close down the admission to Condensed Licentiate course from 1st of January, 1980. Therefore, they only forwarded the copy of the draft regulation for stopping Condensed Licentiate course and sought comments from the States within 3 months from the date of issue of the said draft regulation. In the draft regulation which was sent by the Medical Council of India it was clearly mentioned that this Condensed Licentiate course as allowed by the Medical Council of India to the holders of qualifications in Integrated Medicine (modern medicine, combined with Unani, Ayurved Sidha, etc.) e.g. BAMS, ElMS, CHM, AFMS, DM, FAM, etc. shall be available in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down by the Council from time to time upto 31st December, 1979 and there shall be no admission to the aforesaid Condensed Licentiate course on or after 1st of January, 1980. This was made clear to all the States when they sent the communication dated 24th August, 1978 along with the draft regulation. The final date which was given was 1st of January, 1980 from where all admission has to be stopped to this Condensed Licentiate courses. This was a draft regulation and it became final after getting approval from the Central Government and became effective from the date of issue that is 22nd January, 1980. Therefore, it is clear that the aforesaid notification could only be made effective from the date of issue after the sanction of the Central Government. When the Central Government approved this draft regulation by their communication dated 18th January, 1980 and the same was sent to the Medical Council of India and the Medical Council of India accordingly on 22nd January, 1980 issued the notification. The notification became effective from the date of issue only. Simply because in the draft notification it was mentioned that it is likely to come into effect in January, 1980 and it has been made effective from 22nd January, 1980 it does not mean that the final date was not mentioned, therefore, the notification stands vitiated. The notification became effective from the date of issue only. Simply because in the draft notification it was mentioned that it is likely to come into effect in January, 1980 and it has been made effective from 22nd January, 1980 it does not mean that the final date was not mentioned, therefore, the notification stands vitiated. In the communication dated 24dn August, 1978 it was clearly mentioned to send comments from the States within 3 months and naturally it is not possible that a final date could have been given. However, it was made clear in the draft resolution that no admission to the aforesaid Condensed Licentiate course should be made after 31st December, 1979. There was clear indication in the draft resolution that as far as Medical Council of India is concerned they have decided a cut off date that is 1st of January, 1980 from where there will be no admission to the aforesaid courses. It takes time to do necessary exercise to analyse the various comments received from the States and the same has to be received and properly deliberate over them, thereafter the Government of India has to be apprised of the final decision taken by the Medical Council of India. But the Medical Council of India has clearly indicated in the draft regulation that they propose to stop admission to these courses after 1st of January, 1980. This has been approved by the Government of India and the Government of India has intimated to the Medical Council of India on 18th January, 1980 and on 22nd January, 1980 Medical Council of India issued a regulation stopping admission to such courses. It is strange that notwithstanding the fact that the matter was under consideration of the Government of India and the Medical Council of India in no uncertain terms informed the State of West Bengal' that they do not propose to grant permission for starting of this course coupled with the fact that the State of West Bengal has already informed the Government of India on 19th January, 1979 that there is no such course, despite that they again initiated for starting this course. The Medical Council of India by their communication dated 16th June, 1979 informed the State of West Bengal that the matter was considered by the Executive Committee of the Indian Medical Council and they are against starting any Condensed Licentiate course in West Bengal. The matter remained in protracted correspondences with the Government of India and the Government of India also did not give them green signal and asked to interact with the Medical Council of India and the Medical Council of India has already given their mind. Despite all this the State of West Bengal passed a resolution on 25th November, 1980 and issued a notification on 12th December, 1980. This act on the part of the State of West Bengal is not understandable. Since the State of West Bengal has started this course on their own they cannot force the Medical' Council of India that they must necessarily recognise such certificates issued under this course. As already mentioned above, the Medical Council of India is the Apex Body in the country and it is therefore their function to lay down norms for medical education in the country and that being so if any institution on their own without the approval of the Medical Council of India or the Government of India starts such condensed course then they have to thank themselves for it. It cannot force Medical Council of India to recognise such courses. As far as the defect pointed out by the learned Single Judge in the notification, we are of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is apparently against the law because a draft regulation is always a draft regulation. It is only finalised after comments being received from all concerned party. In this case a final draft was prepared and submitted to the Government of India for approval and after the Government of India approved the recommendation of the Medical Council notification was accordingly issued. It the Government of India had not agreed then the proposed regulation could not have been framed as per the procedure laid down in section 19A read with section 33 of the said Act. It the Government of India had not agreed then the proposed regulation could not have been framed as per the procedure laid down in section 19A read with section 33 of the said Act. In the draft regulation it was pointed out that the Medical Council of India decided to stop all these condensed courses from 1st of January, 1980 that was sufficient indication to all the States that this is the resolution of the Medical Council of India. However, it is subject to the approval of the Government of India. But they have already warned all the States not to give admission to the students to such courses after 1st of January, 1980. Therefore, there was sufficient indication given in the draft regulation and that draft regulation was sent to the State of West Bengal including all the States in the country. After the approval of the draft regulation by the Government of India on 18th of January, 1980 the regulation was notified on 22nd January, 1980. Therefore, it became effective from 22nd January, 1980 and that is the law for all the medical institutions in the country and if they do not abide by that then candidates passing from such institutions cannot, as a matter of right, seek registration under the Medical Council of India to practice modern medicine all over the country. 16. In this connection our attention was invited to an unreported decision of the Bombay High Court in Sub hash Haushilal Shah & Ors. vs. Medical Council of India (Civil Appeal No. 2374 of 1977, judgment dated 26.6.1978). In that case an earlier writ petition was filed where a same resolution was passed by the Medical Council of India and in the earlier special civil application the contention of the party was accepted that mere resolution of Medical Council of India without passing a regulation such course cannot be stopped and that judgment was delivered in 1976. Thereafter, the Medical Council of India moved the Central Government to give effect to their earlier resolution in terms of the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 16th December, 1976 by proposing the impugned regulation and the regulation dated 18th February, 1977 was brought into force with the sanction of the Central Government. Thereafter, the Medical Council of India moved the Central Government to give effect to their earlier resolution in terms of the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 16th December, 1976 by proposing the impugned regulation and the regulation dated 18th February, 1977 was brought into force with the sanction of the Central Government. This was again challenged that these regulations have been passed without complying the mandatory provisions of section 19A of the Medical Council Act of India, 1956. In this writ petition the challenge was that the regulation which has been approved by the Central Government was not circulated to all the States for their comments. It was observed that it was obligatory on the part of the Medical Council to send copies of the draft regulations to all the State Governments before submitting the same for sanction to the Central Government and the Central Government is also under an obligation to take into consideration the comments of any State received within the prescribed period indicated therein. In the petition the petitioners have averred that the such requirements of this section were not complied with. Unfortunately the Medical Council did not care to enter appearance at any of the hearings. No affidavit was filed denying the averments made in the petition even by the Union of India. Mr. Tipnis, the learned Asst. Govt. Pleader, appearing for the State Government informed the Court that he does not want to oppose the special civil application. 17. In these circumstances on account of non-filing of the affidavits by the Government of India of the allegations made by the petitioner, the Court struck down the earlier regulation, but that is not the case here. As we have discussed above in detail that the draft regulation was circulated to all the States and a date was mentioned that it has to come into effect from January, 1980 and after the Government of India approved the resolution of the Medical Council of India and a notification was issued on 22nd January, 1980. Therefore, the present regulation does not suffer from any shortcomings as found in earlier regulation by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Hence this case does not support the writ petitioner. 18. Therefore, the present regulation does not suffer from any shortcomings as found in earlier regulation by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Hence this case does not support the writ petitioner. 18. In another decision of the Bombay High Court in Diploma in Medical Practice Association, Nagpur vs. The Medical Council of India, reported in 1968 BLR, Volume LXXI page 587, a writ petition was filed quashing of the resolution of the Medical Council of India conveyed by the letter dated 15th November, 1966. It was also prayed that the petitioners who were medical students should be declared eligible to seek admission to the Condensed MBBS course at the Medical College, Nagpur, or elsewhere on their passing the Condensed LMP course. In that case the question was with regard to interpretation of section 19A read with section 33 and it was observed by the Hon'ble Court that the ultimate power has been given to the Central Government and till the Central Government frames the regulation a mere resolution of the Medical Council of India cannot lay down the medical standards. Therefore their Lordships observed: "We are, therefore, at a loss to understand how the various resolutions passed by the Council could have anything but advisory value though undoubtedly that was an advice coming from a disinterested source and was entitled to every respect, and whatever possible, to acceptance by the authorities concerned in the implementation of the scheme of the Act. But we do not think that beyond this consultative status of the Council, where the Council does not choose to exercise its power of framing regulations for prescribing standards of medical education, which power has been expressly vested in it under section 19A and for which specific power to make regulations has been given under section 33 by amending the clauses, the Council is not required to bring about the same result". 19. Therefore in this case no amendment was brought about in the regulation as required under section 19A read with section 33 of the Act of 1956. The Medical Council of India passed certain resolution for the maintenance of medical standard in the various medical institutions. Therefore their Lordships observed that it is nothing but an advisory body and it cannot be enforced unless the amendment is brought about in the regulation in accordance with section 19A read with section 33 of the Act. The Medical Council of India passed certain resolution for the maintenance of medical standard in the various medical institutions. Therefore their Lordships observed that it is nothing but an advisory body and it cannot be enforced unless the amendment is brought about in the regulation in accordance with section 19A read with section 33 of the Act. But that is not the case here. All these shortcomings which have been pointed out was rectified and a proper regulation has been framed under section 19A read with section 33 as reproduced above and now it is enforceable as they are statutes. Therefore, the view taken by the learned Single Judge relying on this judgment does not hold good. , 20. Our attention was also invited to an unreported decision of the Bombay High Court in Balmukand Ramdov Baheti & Anr. vs. Indian Medical Council & Ors. (Special Civil Application No. 4138 of 1976, judgment dated 16th December, 1976). In this case a writ petition was filed on behalf of the students who have already passed BAM & S examination as Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery seeking a writ or direction for quashing the resolution dated 19th March, 1969, 20th January, 1976 and 23rd March, 1976 passed by the Indian Medical Council under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 for discontinuation of the Condensed MBBS course from June, 1975 and thereafter from June, 1976 when their Lordships observed that mere passing of a resolution will not have the effect of laying down the medical standard in the medical institutions unless a proper regulation is framed in terms of section 19A read with section 33 of the Act. But as already pointed out above that the regulation impugned in the instant case has already been lawfully made by the Medical Council of India with the prior approval of the Central Government. Therefore, this case is of no assistance to the writ petitioner. 21. Our attention was also invited to an unreported decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mukhtiar Chand & Ors. vs. The State of Punjab & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 89 of 1987). This case has hardly any relevance to the controversy involved in the present application. In this case question was with regard to validity of clause (3) of Rule 2(ee) of the Drug Rules, 1945 framed under the Indian Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. vs. The State of Punjab & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 89 of 1987). This case has hardly any relevance to the controversy involved in the present application. In this case question was with regard to validity of clause (3) of Rule 2(ee) of the Drug Rules, 1945 framed under the Indian Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The aforesaid rule was declared ultra vires by the Rajasthan High Court and some other Courts. Therefore, the matter was taken up in a special leave petition and their Lordships after considering over the matter came to the conclusion that the aforesaid rule is not contrary to the provisions of the Act and they upheld the validity of the aforesaid Rule, but that is not the case here. 22. Our attention was also invited to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Singh & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 1994(4) SCC 401 . In this case their Lordships interpreted the provisions of section 20 and section 33(j) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and it was held that the regulation made by the Council providing that admission to post graduate course should be exclusively on the basis of merit without any reservation is advisory. The regulations made by the Council should be read consistent with Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India. This case provides no assistance to the appellant because as per Article 15(4) certain reservation was made for the Schedule Caste, Schedule Tribe and Other Backward Class, that was sought to be challenged and their Lordships held that the recommendation made by the Medical Council of India should only be treated as advisory in nature and it cannot run counter to Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India. It was observed by their Lordships: "The regulation does not say that no reservation can be provided under Article 15(4). The power conferred upon the State by clause (4) of Article 15 is a constitutional power. The said power could not have been overridden or suspended by a Regulation made by the Indian Medical Council under the Act, The Regulation must be read consistent with Article 15(4) and if so read, it means that the students shall be admitted to postgraduate training strictly on the basis of merit in each of the relevant classes or categories, as the case may be. Any other construction seeking to give an absolute meaning to the said Regulation would render it invalid on the ground of traveling beyond the Act. It may also fall foul of Article 15(4)." Therefore, this case also does not help the writ petitioner in any manner whatsoever. 23. The Apex Court observed in the case of Poonam Verma vs. Ashwin Patel, reported in (1996) 4 SCC 332 , a person who is not equipped with a particular system of medicine should not be permitted to practice and such kind of quack should be stopped. It was observed by their Lordships as under: "A person who does not have knowledge of a particular system of medicine but practices in that system is a quack and a mere pretender to medical knowledge or skill, or to put it differently, a charlatan." 24. As a result of the above discussion we are of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is not correct and we hereby set aside the order dated 24th November, 1993 passed by the learned Single Judge and allow the appeal and dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs. Later: 25. Request made by the learned counsel, for the State, for stay of operation of this order, is considered and refused. Ronojit Kumar Mitra, J. : I agree. Appeal Allowed