AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.V. Nagarathna, J.—In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the impugned notice in so far as item No. 1 is concerned bearing F. No. 18-15/1795-INC dated 20.7.2005 (Annexure-A) issued by the Indian Nursing Council-the respondent herein, to the College of Nursing, Sanjay Gandhi Accident Hospital and Research Institute, Bangalore-11 and a writ of mandamus directing the Indian Nursing Council to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Principal of the said college.
According to the petitioner, she completed her B. Sc., in Nursing from Osmania University in the year 1973 and thereafter obtained Diploma in Psychiatry Nursing in NIMHANS, Bangalore in the year 1979 with First Rank and in Distinction and later did her Master of Science in Nursing from the University of Hawai, USA and subsequently NIMHANS conferred Ph.D. Degree in Psychiatric Nursing in April 1996. Annexure-B and Annexure-C are produced in support of the two Post-Graduate Degrees conferred on the petitioner. The petitioner also states that, she is a recipient of a Gold Medal awarded by NIMHANS and W.S.O awarded Fellowship in the year 1980 and that she has published sixteen papers in National and International Journals and has attended several Conferences and has published a Book in the entitled "Essentials of Neurological Neurosurgical Nursing". The petitioner also states that she has attended several workshops and has been an active member of Karnataka Nursing Council.
According to the petitioner, subsequent to seeking voluntary retirement from NIMHANS, she was appointed as a Principal of Sanjay Gandhi College of Nursing vide appointment order dated 12.1.2005 produced as Annexure-D and joined the said institution on 27.1.2005 as per Annexure-E. While she was serving as a Principal of the said college, the respondent issued notice dated 20.7.2005, which is impugned in this writ petition. The relevant portion of the notice is extracted as follows:
The Indian Nursing Council (INC) examined the documents submitted by College of Nursing, Sanjay Gandhi Accident Hospital and Research Institute, Byrasandra, Jayanagar East, Bangalore-560011, for recognition of B. Sc. (N) Course in the State of Karnataka for the academic year 2004-2005. Indian Nursing Council (INC) conducted inspection of the institution by a team of inspectors appointed by the Council on 14/15.06.2005.
The executive Committee of Indian Nursing Council evaluated the inspection report on the basis of number of teaching faculty, physical and clinical facilities as per the Indian Nursing Council norms. The following are the deficiency found:
Teaching faculty inadequate as per Indian Nursing Council norms.
Dr. T.P. Prema, M. Sc. (N) qualification is not equivalent to M. Sc. (N) in India as prescribed by Indian Nursing Council. So she cannot be considered as Principal...
According to the petitioner, while she was pursuing her Ph.D. programme, the Bangalore University in its letter No. VCP/DR/89-90-25-77, dated 19.3.1990 had issued a clarification that M. Sc., Degree in Nursing conferred on the petitioner by the foreign university namely; University of Hawai, USA was recognised as a corresponding degree of an Indian University as per Annexure-F and therefore the impugned notice dated 20.7.2005 stating that petitioner could not be considered as principal of the college as her qualification was not equivalent to M. Sc. (N) in India prescribed by the Indian Nursing Council is illegal and therefore ought to be quashed.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for respondent.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner while adverting to the documents referred to above has submitted that, the notice dated 20.7.2005 (Annexure-A) in so far as item No. 1 is concerned pertaining to the disqualification of the petitioner to hold the post of Principal of the College is untenable, as it is without application of mind and is wholly illegal. It is submitted that the petitioner has highest possible research degree which Doctorate of Philosophy and is sufficiently qualified to hold the post of Principal, as there is no other higher qualification in the field of Nursing, which aspect escape the contention of the respondent-Indian Nursing Council. Hence, Annexure-A notice dated 20.7.2005 in so far as it relates to the petitioner cannot be considered as eligible to hold the post of Principal of the College ought to be quashed.
Per contra, the learned Counsel for the respondent has adverted to the counter affidavit filed by the Secretary of the Council to submit that the writ petition is totally misconceived and that the petitioner has suppressed the material facts before this Court namely that she had approached the Indian Nursing Council as far back in the year 1996 seeking a clarification about her M. Sc., degree acquired by her from the University of Hawai (USA) and Equivalence Committee of the Indian Nursing Council, respondent herein, at its meeting held on 7.11.1996 on consideration of the representation made by the petitioner as well as on comparing the syllabus prescribed by the Indian National Nursing Council with that of the degree obtained by the petitioner from the University of Hawai, USA and other aspects regarding the course as such, held that the M. Sc., certificate possessed by the petitioner issued by the University of Hawai was not equivalent to M. Sc., Nursing, Indian Council of India as prescribed by the Indian National Nursing Council. Item No. 7 of the Minutes of the Meeting of the equivalence Committee was communicated to the petitioner. A copy of the Minutes of the equivalence Committee meeting held on 7.11.1996 is annexed as Annexure-R1 to the counter affidavit. The relevant portion is extracted as follows:
Item No. 7:
To consider M.Sc. (Nursing) certificate The Committee members went obtained from Hawai and equivalent through the transcript submitted to Masters Degree in India possessed by her and compared with the by Mrs. T.P. Prema. syllabus offered by the Indian Nursing Council and found it to be defecient as below:- 1) Instruction hours not mentioned. 2) The Nursing Education Course was found to be deficient. 3) The experience on thesis was found to be defecient. The members recommended to write to Mrs. T.P. Prema that M.Sc. Certificate possessed by her is not Equivalent to M.Sc. Nursing course in India as prescribed by the Indian Nursing Council.
Hence, it is contended by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has joined the Nursing College, although she does not have equivalent degree and further till date she has not challenged the Minutes of the Equivalence Committee Meeting and therefore at this point of time, it is not possible to reopen the issue. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the college in which the petitioner is holding the post as Principal has not objected to the deficiencies pointed out by the Council, specifically with regard to qualification of the petitioner and that the filing of the writ petition by the petitioner is an abuse of process of the Court and therefore the writ petition ought to be dismissed.
At the outset, it is necessary to reiterate that the issue of equivalence of degrees secured by the candidates from Universities within India or Overseas is a matter to be left to expertise of the Universities and All India bodies which lay down and maintain academic standards in education and it is not for the Court to engage itself on such a matter. In this context, it is relevant to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Mathur Ors. Vs. Karnataka University and Another, where in the context of eligibility for admission to B.E. Degree course, students seeking admissions had to pass two year Pre-University Examination of the Pre-University Board, Bangalore or an examination held by any other Board or University recognised as equivalent to it, the Hon''ble Supreme Court held that students passing Higher Secondary Examination held by Secondary Education Board, Rajasthan, would be clearly ineligible for admission to the degree course when that examination was not recognised as equivalent by the Karnataka University to the Pre-University Examination held by the Pre-University Board, Bangalore. According to the Apex Court, it is for each University, (in the instant case, the Indian Nursing Council) to decide the question of equivalence of an examination of any other Board with the examination which primarily constitutes the basis of eligibility and further it would not be for the Courts to sit in judgment over the decision of the University, because it is not a matter on which the Court possesses any expertise. The University or its council is best fitted to decide whether any examination held within the State having regard to the courses, syllabus, the quality of teaching or instruction and the standard of examination. It is an academic question in which the Court should not disturb the decision taken by the University.
Following the above decision, the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 5795/2003 (S-RES), in the case of Dr. T.R. Gururaja Rao v. The Dental Council of India and Another considered the question as to whether the qualification of Master of Science (Dentistry) was equivalent to the degree of Master of Science in Experimental Oral Pathology. In this case, the appellant was working as a professor and Head of the Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology in Oxford Dental College and Hospital, Bangalore and had been removed from service on the ground that he was not eligible to hold the post for which the minimum qualification prescribed was Master of Science (Dentistry). Therefore, the appellant had sought a declaration from the Dental Council of India that two qualifications were equivalent. The Dental Council of India, however held that two courses could not be equated and the said action of the Dental Council of India in not treating the two qualifications as equivalent was challenged before this Court in a writ petition, which was dismissed and on an appeal against the said order, the Division Bench held whether the two qualifications are the same or equivalent are matters at best be decided by expert bodies like the Dental Council of India, as this Court does not possess the requisite expertise to determine the questions of equivalence. Accordingly, appeal was dismissed.
The decision rendered in the writ appeal pertains to Dental Council of India and the same squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of this case, wherein the respondent-Indian Nursing Council as way back in 07.11.1996 rejected the equivalence of M. Sc., in Nursing obtained by the petitioner from University of Hawai, USA. The said rejection was also known to the petitioner but she was nevertheless appointed as principal of the College.
In view of the rejection order with regard to equivalence passed by the respondent''s Council in so far as the qualification of the petitioner is concerned, and the two decisions referred to above, in my view, the petitioner cannot succeed, despite the fact that the petitioner is holding doctorate degree and has acquired vast experience in the field of Nursing.
Taking into consideration the facts and the decisions referred to above, I have no hesitation in holding that the writ petition is devoid of merits and has to be dismissed but without any order as to costs.