SC stays MP HC order to form panel comprising non-medical professionals to inspect 272 nursing colleges
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has recently stayed Madhya Pradesh High Court's order to inspect 272 Nursing Colleges in Gwalior-Chambal zone by constituting a high-level commission comprising Lawyers, District Judge and Collector of District.
A bench of Justices UU Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi on Friday, apart from staying the high court order for appointing commissions comprising non-medical professionals to inspect the Nursing colleges in Gwalior, Shivpuri, Sheopur, Morena, Bhind, and Datia districts, also issued notice to all the concerned people in the matter.
The original writ petitioner, Hari Om had filed a PIL in the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the month of August alleging that most of the nursing colleges in the Bhind district do not have the required land and infrastructure for proper functioning and many of them were running on fake certificates with recognition from the University.
Also Read: 51 Nursing Personnel Get National Florence Nightingale Awards 2020
Accordingly, the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court constituted a high-level commission comprising Hitendra Dwivedi, OSD of the Gwalior Branch of the HC, and senior advocates of the HC, Sanjay Dwivedi, and Vijay Dutta Sharma to conduct an investigation of the nursing colleges in the Gwalior- Chambal division, reports The Pioneer.
As per a recent media report in Free Press Journal, another advocate Umesh Bohre had also filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Gwalior bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court reporting irregularities from the part of the nursing institutions, and consequently, the HC formed a Physical Verification Committee to inspect the nursing colleges of which the petitioner, Bohre was also a member.
Recently, a Special Leave Petition (SLP) was filed by the Private Nursing College Association registered under M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 challenging the High Court order of 18th August 2021. They argued that the High Court should not have appointed commissions comprising professionals from non-medical areas like Lawyers, District Judges, and Collectors. They were also aggrieved by the decision of the High Court allowing the original petitioner in the High Court to be present at the time of the inspection.
They further argued that the power of inspection lies with the Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council which is mentioned in the state government's "Madhya Pradesh Nursing Shikshan Sansthan Manyata Niyam" passed in 2018 and only the Indian Nursing Council could issue directions for inspection by any other body.
The petitioner in the SLP contended that there is a statutory body for the inspection and it further stated that, "Whenever the Council and University conducted the inspection once a year, it was done by people from the medical field comprising one Senior Doctor from Government Medical College and one Principal from Government Nursing College,"
They also referred the judgment of the apex court in, "Bateshwari Dayal Mishr Shiksha Samiti Vs. Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council & Ors." in which the inspection was carried out by the required specialized body, which is the Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council. The petition further said that "Most of the Nursing Colleges are running for a period of 20 years and the inspection is done every year by the Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council and University also. That even recognition of the Nursing College is done by the Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council as per Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Nursing Shikshan Sansthan Manyata Niyam, 2018 and even cancellation of recognition under Rule 8 is by the Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council. "
Subsequently, the Supreme Court issued a notice in the SLP filed through Bhuvneshwari Pathak challenging the High Court order and stayed the inspection of the nursing colleges. The Court also served the respondent, who was the original writ petitioner in the High Court through the advocate who appeared on his behalf and further listed the matter for hearing on 25th October 2021, reports Live Law.
