Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1849 (MAD)

Annai Veilankannis Educational and Cultural Society, Represented by its President Dr. S. Devaraj v. Indian Nursing Council, represented by its Secretary, combined Council Building & Another

2009-06-22

M.JAICHANDREN

body2009
Judgment :- 1. This writ petition had been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the Indian Nursing Council, the first respondent herein to inspect the petitioner Institute and to grant recognition for the B.Sc., Nursing Degree proposed to be offered by the petitioner Institute from the academic year 2009-2010. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in spite of the application having been made by the petitioner Institute to the first respondent, on 21. 2009, within the cut off date prescribed, namely, 31. 2009, complying with all the necessary requirements and having enclosed all the necessary records, the first respondent had not inspected the petitioner Institute or passed appropriate orders thereafter, granting recognition to the B.Sc., Nursing Degree, proposed to be offered by the petitioner Institute, from the academic year 2009-2010. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had further submitted that the essentiality certificate had been issued by the second respondent only, on 25. 2009, and the same had been submitted to the first respondent, on 25. 2009. Therefore, there was no fault on the petitioner Institute relating to the belated submission of the essentiality certificate. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent had submitted that even though the petitioner Institute had submitted the application for the grant of recognition for the B.Sc., Nursing Degree, for the academic year 2009-2010, within the time limit prescribed i.e., 31. 2009, the essentiality certificate had not been submitted by the petitioner Institute, within the prescribed time limit. Therefore, the first respondent had not inspected the petitioner Institute for the granting of recognition, as prayed for by the petitioner Institute. 5. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had placed before this Court, earlier orders passed by this Court, dated 10. 2007, made in W.P.No.7800 of 2007 and an order, dated 19. 2008, made in W.P.No.18891 of 2008, wherein, under similar circumstances, the Indian Nursing Council, New Delhi, the first respondent herein had been directed to inspect the concerned petitioner Institutes and to pass appropriate orders thereon, while considering the question of the granting of recognition, as prayed for by the petitioners therein. 6. 2008, made in W.P.No.18891 of 2008, wherein, under similar circumstances, the Indian Nursing Council, New Delhi, the first respondent herein had been directed to inspect the concerned petitioner Institutes and to pass appropriate orders thereon, while considering the question of the granting of recognition, as prayed for by the petitioners therein. 6. In such circumstances, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the first respondent to inspect the petitioner Institute and to pass appropriate orders thereon, for the purpose of granting of recognition for the B.Sc. Nursing Degree for the academic year 2009-2010, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.No.1 of 2009 is closed.