Summary
The Central Government had to reconsider medical-college permission decisions through a fair hearing and reasoned assessment of all relevant recommendations. Its unexplained debarment and bank-guarantee decision ignored the Hearing Committee, DGHS and Oversight Committee materials. The Court ordered a fresh decision within ten days, without itself granting admission permission.
Issues
- Whether the unreasoned debarment decision satisfied the statutory requirement of reasonable opportunity of hearing.
- What role the Oversight Committee’s recommendations required in reconsideration.
Provisions considered
- Section 10A(4), proviso, Indian Medical Council Act, 1956Disapproval requires a reasonable hearing embodying substantive fairness and consideration of the relevant materials. (¶ 21–25)
Held
- A formal hearing did not suffice where the final decision omitted the divergent recommendations and relevant developments. On these particular facts the decision failed the letter and spirit of the statutory hearing requirement. (¶ 21–23)
- The Court-appointed Oversight Committee’s recommendations could not be ignored. The relevant MCI, Hearing Committee, DGHS and Oversight materials required fresh evaluation to avoid injustice. (¶ 24–25)
Result
Central Government directed to reconsider the materials, afford hearing to the extent necessary and issue a final reasoned decision within ten days. Matters retained and listed for 24 August 2017.