Swami Vivekanand College Of Nursing vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86330
1 WP-6847-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
th
ON THE 27 OF OCTOBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 6847 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC010134652026
SWAMI VIVEKANAND COLLEGE OF NURSING
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Arpran Pawar - Senior Advocate with Shri Jaideep Verma, Shri
Pulkit Pawar and Shri Chranjeev Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Ajay Shukla - Government Advocate for respondent No. 1 and 2.
Shri Abhijeet Awasthi - Deputy Advocate General with Shri Rohit
Raghuwanshi - Advocate for the respondent No.3.
ORDER
Per: Justice Anand Pathak
With consent heard finally.
2. The present writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of
Constitution seeking following reliefs :
(i) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus
thereby directing the respondents to act upon the order
dated 29.12.2025 and reiterated vide order dated
11.02.2026, in the interest of justice.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
17:01:10

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86330
2 WP-6847-2026
(ii) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus and

direct the respondent No.2 and 3 to issue the certificate
of recognition (renewal) for the Academic Year 2025-
26 to the petitioner institute and to update their online
portal so as to give status of suitability/recognition for
the Academic Year 2025-26, in the interest of justice.
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus thereby directing
the respondents to update their web portal thereby
showing the petitioner institute in the suitable category
for the Academic Year 2025-26, in the interest of
justice.
(iv) Issue writ of mandamus thereby directing the
respondents to make available the portal for filling the
form of recognition under renewal category for the
Academic Year 2026-27, in the interest of justice.
(v) Issue any other Writ, order or direction as this
Hon'ble Court deems fit.
3. It is the submission of learned Counsel for petitioner that petitioner
institute is running ANM course since 2008, B.Sc. since 2013 and M.Sc.
Nursing since 2018. They were so far recognized college. However, after the
filing of writ petition WP 1080 of 2022 inspection was carried out and in the
inspection, petitioner college was found unsuitable for 2024-25 as per CBI
report.
4. It further appears that for academic session 2025-26 also petitioner
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
17:01:10

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86330
3 WP-6847-2026
did not get recognition by Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council

(respondent No. 3 herein) which prompted the college/petitioner college to
file appeal before the State Government and Principal Secretary, Health vide
order dated 29.12.2025 (P-4 of writ petition) allowed the appeal and found
the deficiency of lesser number of years of experience of Principal as cured
and directed the respondent No. 3 to do the needful as per required
parameters.
5. It is the submission of Counsel for petitioner that once petitioner
college got status of recognized college by the State Government in appeal,
then for academic session 2025-26 college is to be treated as recognized
college. Although college was treated as recognized by State Government in
appeal, but by that time, last date for admission (30.12.2025) expired.
Therefore students could not be admitted. He refers Rule 6(5) of Madhya
Pradesh Nursing Shikshan Sanstha Manyata Niyam, 2018 which
contemplates that if any nursing institution is not recognized for any course
for two consecutive years or no student is admitted in any course for two
years, then the applicant/institution will have to submit the application for
recognition for the new session as a new course. Here the predicament of
petitioner lies.
6. As submitted, this rule haunts the petitioner for the reason that if for
academic session 2024-25 and academic session 2025-26 petitioner is treated
as unrecognized institution, then petitioner will have to face the
consequences (low priority for availability of beds in Government Hospitals)
and then petitioner college shall also have to take recognition afresh. In
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
17:01:10

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86330
4 WP-6847-2026
present case since two sessions went dry where no student was imparted

teaching because of involvement of petitioner college in litigation, petitioner
may be treated by the nursing council (MPNRC) as fresh institute and this
would entail severe repercussions. Availability of beds in Government
colleges is one of the main factors for which petitioner is seeking proper
placement as college with recognition and falling under Renewal category
rather than fresh/new course.
7. Counsel for respondent opposed the contentions. Shri Awasthi refers
the reply and submits that as per Rule 6(5) of Rules 2018 this decision was
taken regarding treating the petitioner college as aspirant for new course.
However, he fairly submits that Principal Secretary, Health in its order dated
29.12.2025 allowed the appeal of petitioner college when Nursing Council
rejected the case of petitioner for renewal. Effect of said order is that
petitioner college is treated as suitable and recognized in all respects.
8. It is further submitted that if petitioner college is treated as hardship
case, then suitable order may be passed provided exemplary cost be imposed
over the college for their default.
9. Shri Alok Vagrecha, learned Counsel who is counsel for petitioner
in WP 1080 of 2022 (Law Students Association vs. State of MP & Others)
refers the fact that Principal of petitioner college did not possess adequate
qualification/adequate experience. He was required to have experience for 15
years, but he was engaged in some other profession for the time being,
therefore falls short of requisite parameters. He further submits that although
State Government in appeal allowed the appeal preferred by petitioner and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
17:01:10

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86330
5 WP-6847-2026
set aside the order of MPNRC, still petitioner should be saddled with

exemplary cost so that it would give a lesson to other colleges.
10. Heard the rival contentions.
11. After considering the rival submissions and going through the
documents appended with the petition and reply, it appears that Rule 6(5) of
Rules 2018 is relevant in present issue and same contemplates the issue in
following manner :
"6(5) If any nursing institution is not recognized for any course for
two consecutive years or no student is admitted in any course for
two years, then the applicant institution will submit the application
for recognition for the new session as a new course."
12. Perusal of the said rule indicates that if petitioner college did not
have any student for two years or was not recognized for two consecutive
years, then college was required to be treated as new applicant for new
course. However, here a twist comes in the case when State Government vide
order dated 29.12.2025 allowed the appeal preferred by petitioner. Last date
for inducting students was 30.12.2025, and by the time this order reached
MPNRC on 02.01.2026, last date for induction of students was over.
Therefore petitioner college despite getting order in its favor lost the battle
so far as Rule 6(5) is concerned. State Government allowed the appeal and
MPNRC or any aggrieved person did not challenge the said order further,
therefore said order dated 29.12.2025 attained finality.
13. Since order dated 29.12.2025 passed by State Government is in
favor of petitioner and the qualification of Principal of said college was
found to be suitable/eligible, therefore at this stage, in absence of any
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
17:01:10

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86330
6 WP-6847-2026
challenge to the said order, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case,

benefit may be given to the petitioner to the extent that it shall not be treated
as a new college seeking permission for new courses for forthcoming session
i.e. 2026-27. Case of petitioner shall be treated as of renewal rather than of
fresh recognition.
14. However, looking to the deficiency earlier entailed as well as facts
and circumstances of the case where petitioner ought to had been a suitable
college since inception but failed to do so, therefore in peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case, cost of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) is
being imposed over petitioner, which shall be deposited by petitioner within
one month in the Juvenile Justice Fund having Saving Bank Account
No.60411029562 of Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Govindpura, Bhopal,
IFSC Code MAHB0001988 (a statutory fund created for the welfare of
juveniles).
15. It is made clear that petitioner college shall be kept at the bottom
of the recognized/renewed institutions for academic session 2026-2027. This
order is passed in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
16. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands allowed and
disposed of in above terms.
(ANAND PATHAK)
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
JUDGE
DevS

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
17:01:10