Facts
The petitioner, Maa Mangala Nursing College, challenged the letter dated 24 July 2026 issued by respondent No. 3, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Memorial Health Science Ayush University, and the letter dated 27 July 2026 issued by respondent No. 4, the Chhattisgarh Nurses Registration Council.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2The petitioner alleged that, despite being a recognized institution, it was being required to obtain a suitability certificate from the Indian Nursing Council for the B.Sc. Nursing academic session 2026–27.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 maintained that the suitability certificate was necessary and that the petitioner was required to approach the competent authority for verification of faculty and other prescribed criteria, following which a recommendation could be made to respondent No. 2, the Indian Nursing Council.
Source reference: p. 3, para. 4During hearing, the petitioner agreed to approach the concerned authority for the necessary recommendation.
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5Issues
Whether the petitioner-institution could be permitted to continue relying upon its recognition for the academic session 2026–27 without obtaining a suitability certificate from the Indian Nursing Council
Source reference: p. 2–3, paras. 2–4Whether the petitioner’s application for suitability certification should be considered by the competent authority after verification under the Indian Nursing Council (Minimum Pre-Requisites for Granting Suitability to Nursing Programs) Regulations, 2020
Source reference: p. 3–4, para. 6Law Applied
The Court applied the Indian Nursing Council (Minimum Pre-Requisites for Granting Suitability to Nursing Programs) Regulations, 2020, under which the prescribed conditions relating to nursing programmes, including faculty and other institutional requirements, must be verified before suitability is granted.
Source reference: p. 3–4, para. 6The Court further applied the principle that the competent statutory authority must consider and decide an application in accordance with law, on its own merits, and without the Court expressing a premature opinion on the merits.
Source reference: p. 3–4, para. 6Reasoning
The Court did not finally determine whether the petitioner was already entitled to continue its recognition without a suitability certificate.
Source reference: p. 3, paras. 4–5In view of the respondents’ submission that the certificate was essential and the petitioner’s subsequent willingness to approach the competent authority, the Court treated the matter as one requiring administrative consideration rather than immediate judicial adjudication on merits.
Source reference: p. 3, paras. 4–5Accordingly, it directed the petitioner to submit its application within 15 days and required the concerned authority to verify compliance with the 2020 Regulations and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
Source reference: p. 3–4, para. 6Holding
The writ petition was disposed of without adjudicating the merits of the petitioner’s claim.
The petitioner was directed to approach the concerned authority within 15 days from receipt of the order.
Source reference: p. 3–4, paras. 6–7The authority was directed to consider and decide the application after due verification of the conditions prescribed under the Indian Nursing Council (Minimum Pre-Requisites for Granting Suitability to Nursing Programs) Regulations, 2020, strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits.
Source reference: p. 3–4, paras. 6–7Original Court PDF
MAA MANGALA NURSING COLLEGE RAIPUR (C.G.)vsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![Relief is made contingent on the Supreme Court’s eventual determination in the analogous pending case.. Ashok Tolani vs REVENUE. CAT - ['Jaipur']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/relief-is-made-contingent-on-the-supreme-courts-eventual-determination-in-the-analogous-pe-0a05b6600e0644cf9facfda571d15955.webp)