[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: The validity of Sec. 10(1)(I) of the NMC Act, 2019 has been upheld. Court has held that all medical colleges, including those run by deemed universities, will come under NMC fee fixation only. With respect to the Office Memorandum, the Court has held that directing fees for 50% of seats to be fixed equivalent to govt college fees will result in cross subsidy which is barred by the Supreme Court. The court has further held that the same will also result in seats going vacant due to high fees. Therefore, the Court has directed the NMC to reconsider and issue a fresh Office Memorandum in light of the judgment. Till then, the court has directed that existing fee fixation practise will continue. [9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: Mr. Vijaynarayan, PS Raman and ArL Sundaresan appeared for petitioners. [9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: Learned ASG appeared for respondents.

 

 

[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: The validity of Sec. 10(1)(I) of the NMC Act, 2019 has been upheld. Court has held that all medical colleges, including those run by deemed universities, will come under NMC fee fixation only.

With respect to the Office Memorandum, the Court has held that directing fees for 50% of seats to be fixed equivalent to govt college fees will result in cross subsidy which is barred by the Supreme Court. The court has further held that the same will also result in seats going vacant due to high fees.

Therefore, the Court has directed the NMC to reconsider and issue a fresh Office Memorandum in light of the judgment. Till then, the court has directed that existing fee fixation practise will continue.
[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: Mr. Vijaynarayan, PS Raman and ArL Sundaresan appeared for petitioners.
[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: Learned ASG appeared for respondents.

 

[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: The validity of Sec. 10(1)(I) of the NMC Act, 2019 has been upheld. Court has held that all medical colleges, including those run by deemed universities, will come under NMC fee fixation only.

With respect to the Office Memorandum, the Court has held that directing fees for 50% of seats to be fixed equivalent to govt college fees will result in cross subsidy which is barred by the Supreme Court. The court has further held that the same will also result in seats going vacant due to high fees.

Therefore, the Court has directed the NMC to reconsider and issue a fresh Office Memorandum in light of the judgment. Till then, the court has directed that existing fee fixation practise will continue.
[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: Mr. Vijaynarayan, PS Raman and ArL Sundaresan appeared for petitioners.
[9/9, 13:02] Sekarreporter1: Learned ASG appeared for respondents.

 

 

 

 

 

udge r subramaniyam order view of the above, while condemning the second respondent for its outrageous and inexplicable conduct, I direct the second respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the petitioner.  The said compensation shall be paid within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the compensation amount will carry interest at 9% per annum from the date of the order of Hon’ble Mrs.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, i.e., 30.06.2017 till date of payment. 21. The Writ Petition will stand allowed as directed above. Apart from the damages the second respondent will also pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 07.09.2022 jv https://sekarreporter.com/judge-r-subramaniyam-order-view-of-the-above-while-condemning-the-second-respondent-for-its-outrageous-and-inexplicable-conduct-i-direct-the-second-respondent-to-pay-a-compensation-of-rs-1000000/

Judge r subramaniyam order view of the above, while condemning the second respondent for its outrageous and inexplicable conduct, I direct the second respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the petitioner.  The said compensation shall be paid within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the compensation amount will carry interest at 9% per annum from the date of the order of Hon’ble Mrs.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, i.e., 30.06.2017 till date of payment. 21. The Writ Petition will stand allowed as directed above. Apart from the damages the second respondent will also pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 07.09.2022 jv https://sekarreporter.com/judge-r-subramaniyam-order-view-of-the-above-while-condemning-the-second-respondent-for-its-outrageous-and-inexplicable-conduct-i-direct-the-second-respondent-to-pay-a-compensation-of-rs-1000000

Judge r subramaniyam order view of the above, while condemning the second respondent for its outrageous and inexplicable conduct, I direct the second respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the petitioner.  The said compensation shall be paid within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the compensation amount will carry interest at 9% per annum from the date of the order of Hon’ble Mrs.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, i.e., 30.06.2017 till date of payment. 21. The Writ Petition will stand allowed as directed above. Apart from the damages the second respondent will also pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 07.09.2022 jv https://sekarreporter.com/judge-r-subramaniyam-order-view-of-the-above-while-condemning-the-second-respondent-for-its-outrageous-and-inexplicable-conduct-i-direct-the-second-respondent-to-pay-a-compensation-of-rs-1000000/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You may also like...