Madras HC advocates for PPP model in Medical Education, dismisses DME order
Chennai: Clarifying that a constituent medical college of a private university in Tamil Nadu need not be affiliated to Dr. MGR Medical University, the Madras High Court bench recently ruled in favour of Public-private partnership model in imparting medical education in the state.
Rejecting the stand of Directorate of Medical Education (DME), which demanded that a private medical or dental institute was required to be affiliated to Dr. MGR Medical University for being included in the common counselling, the HC bench made it clear that such a stand was against the Tamil Nadu Private Universities Act of 2019.
Speaking in favour of PPP model in medical education system, the bench comprising of Justice Anita Sumanth noted, "Public-private partnership in imparting education will augur well for citizens and also for the cause of social justice."
Referring to Section 56 of TNPU Act of 2019, the bench observed, "The Section is an important provision in the laudable endeavour to bring forth an era of public-private partnership in medical education. The State assumes the mantle of setting the overall direction and supervision in this regard and the private enterprise provides the muscle, time, effort, energy and expertise to carry this vision into fruition."
Such observations came from the bench while it was considering a plea filed by Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital, which has the affiliation of Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan University (DSU), was established by Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust in the year 2021 as a private not-for-profit self-financing institution.
The college approached the Court challenging the refusal of DME to fill the seats of the college through common counseling on the ground that the college was not affiliated to State University.
As per the latest media report by The Hindu, DME informed the private medical and dental institutes on January 3 that the MBBS/BDS seats in those medical colleges would be included in the state/management quota counselling only if such colleges had the affiliation of Dr. MGR Medical University, Tamil Nadu.
While this was the stand of DME, the counsel for the medical college, senior counsel Vijay Narayan, contended on the other hand that DME's stand was against the Tamil Nadu Private Universities Act of 2019. This Act clarified that trusts, societies and not-for-profit companies could establish private universities to provide medical or engineering education.
After taking note of the submissions made by both the parties, the HC bench noted that DSU's application under the 2019 Act had found favour with an expert committee which submitted its recommendation to the government on May 28, 2020. Following this, a Government order was issued on January 20, 2021 by which it was listed as a Private University.
Thereafter, DSU approached the National Medical Commission (NMC) and sought an allotment of MBBS seats for its Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital and got nod from the Apex body on September 22, 2021 for admitting 150 students. However, DME denied to include the college in the counselling process on the ground that it was not affiliated to Dr. MGR Medical University.
Agreeing with the submissions made by the counsel for the medical college that DME's stand was against Tamil Nadu Private Universities Act of 2019, the bench also observed that Section 56 of the Act provided for constitution of a regulatory body by the government to promote teaching, research, development and training to impart world class higher education.
Terming this provision as an "umbilical cord" between the government and the private universities, the bench noted, "The Section is an important provision in the laudable endeavour to bring forth an era of public-private partnership in medical education. The State assumes the mantle of setting the overall direction and supervision in this regard and the private enterprise provides the muscle, time, effort, energy and expertise to carry this vision into fruition."
"Substantial responsibility is cast upon the State as well the private university concerned in this regard. Conceptually, it is an effort that must gladden the heart of any citizen as a successful partnership would position the country on a vantage spot on the world stage as far as standards of excellence in medical education are concerned," further added the bench.
At this outset, the HC bench further noted that even though the qualifications of the regulatory body had to be set by statutory rules, such rules had yet not been framed and placed before the Legislative Assembly.
Referring to this, the bench noted, "Stressing that the 2019 Act must be given effect to in full, the judge lamented that the State government did not appear to be inclined to do so. "Clearly, there has been a departure in the thinking of the State from the time when the TNPU Act was enacted to the present day. However, such a deviation in stand is unsupported by the TNPU Act."
Observing that a private university established under the TNPU Act was a full-fledged university and was empowered to grant affiliation to its constituent colleges, the bench clarified that the government could not claim that a constituent medical college of a private university should only get affiliated with the State medical university.
"A college can be affiliated to only one university and not multiple universities," noted the bench.
Next Story
