Authorities must decide the nursing institution’s recognition application within eight weeks after prolonged inaction.

The petitioner, a nursing institute at Algana, Jehanabad, sought a direction for grant of permanent recognition to conduct the Auxiliary Nursing Midwifery (ANM) course.

The institution relied on No Objection Certificates issued by the Civil Surgeon and District Magistrate, Jehanabad, and on a favourable inspection report submitted by the duly constituted inspection team on 10 February 2024.

The petitioner contended that, under the Nurses Training—Recognition, Affiliation and Conduct of Examination of School of Nursing Rules, 1997, the respondents were required to decide the question of recognition within six months of the inspection report, but no decision had been taken despite the passage of more than two years.

During the proceedings, the State submitted that recognition would be considered on the basis of data uploaded on the Bihar Nurses Registration Council’s online portal and that the petitioner’s case would also be processed in accordance with law.

The petitioner maintained that the online process had already been completed, but no decision had followed.

Whether the respondents were required to take a decision on the petitioner’s application for permanent recognition of its ANM course after submission of the inspection report and completion of the online process

Whether the respondent no. 3 should be directed to conclude the recognition process within a specified time period

The Court considered the Nurses Training—Recognition, Affiliation and Conduct of Examination of School of Nursing Rules, 1997, under which the petitioner asserted that a decision on recognition was required within six months of submission of the inspection report.

The Court also applied the general administrative-law principle that a competent statutory authority must consider and decide a pending application in accordance with law and within a reasonable, court-directed period, particularly where the relevant inspection and procedural requirements have already been completed.

The Court noted that the inspection report had been submitted on 10 February 2024 and that the petitioner asserted completion of the online process.

Although the State indicated that the matter would be considered through the BNRC online portal, the Court found that no decision had yet been taken despite the considerable delay.

In view of the pending recognition request, the long-standing inspection report, and the absence of a final administrative decision, the Court directed respondent no. 3 to take up the petitioner’s case and bring it to its logical conclusion.

The direction required consideration and decision in accordance with law; it did not itself grant permanent recognition to the institution.

The Court further cautioned that failure to comply with the stipulated period could render the erring officials liable to compensate the petitioner.

The Court granted procedural relief by directing timely consideration, without making a final determination on the petitioner’s entitlement to recognition.