IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Judgment reserved  on :  22.07.2022

Judgment delivered on :   16.08.2022

CORAM :

THE HON’BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI,

CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

W.A.No.324 of 2022 and W.P.Nos.11467 of 2021 and 3490 of 2022

In W.A.No.324 of 2022:

The Doctors Welfare Association of Tamilnadu Represented by its Secretary Dr.K.Srinivasan, No.Y1/9, S.A.F.Games Village,
Koyembedu, Chennai – 600 107. Versus 1.                Sri Muthukumaran Medical College Hospital    And Research Institute,     Chennai – 600 069. 2.                The Registrar, The Tamilnadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University,     No.69, Annasalai, Guindy,     Chennai – 600 032. 3.                The Secretary, Selection Committee, Directorate of Medical Education,	.. Appellant
Chennai.	.. Respondents

In W.P.No.11467 of 2021:

The Doctors Welfare Association of Tamilnadu

Represented by its Secretary Dr.K.Srinivasan,

No.Y1/9, S.A.F.Games Village, Koyembedu, Chennai – 600 107.       .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The Secretary to Government,

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department,

Government of India,

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 101.

2. The Medical Council of India, represented by its Secretary,

Pocket 14, Sector 8,

Dwaraka Phase I, New Delhi – 110 077.

3. National Medical Commission,

Pocket 14, Sector 8,

Dwaraka Phase I, New Delhi – 110 077.

4. The State of Tamilnadu represented by its Secretary to Government,

Revenue Department,

Fort St. George,     Chennai – 600 009.

5. The Registrar,

The Tamilnadu Dr. M.G.R Medical University,     No.69, Annasalai, Guindy,     Chennai – 600 032.

6. The Secretary,

Selection Committee,

Directorate of Medical Education,     Chennai.

7. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,

Thalamuthu Natarajan Building,     No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road,     Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

8. The Chief Engineer,

Public Works Department,     WRD Chennai Region,     Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

9. The Central Bureau of Investigation represented by its Head of Branch,

Anti-corruption Branch,

3rd Floor, Shastri Bhavan,

No.26, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,     Chennai – 600 006.

10. The Director and Managing Director,

TANGEDCO,

144, Annasalai,       Chennai – 600 002.

11. The Director (Distribution)

TANGEDCO,

144, Annasalai,       Chennai – 600 002.

12. Sri Muthukumaran Medical College Hospital and Research Institute,

Chennai – 600 069.    .. Respondents In W.P.No.3490 of 2022:

The Doctors Welfare Association of Tamilnadu

Represented by its Secretary Dr.K.Srinivasan,

No.Y1/9, S.A.F.Games Village, Koyembedu, Chennai – 600 107. .. Petitioner

Versus

1. Union of India represented by its

Secretary to Government,

(Higher Education),

Ministry of Education,

(Formerly Human Resources and Development),

Room No.302-C, Shastri Bhavan,     Gate No – 1, Connaught place,     New Delhi – 110 001.

2. University Grants Commission, represented by its Chairman,     Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,     New Delhi – 110 002.
3. The Joint Secretary,

University Grants Commission,

South – Eastern Regional Office,

A.P.S.F.C. Building,

4th floor, 5-9-194, PB No.152,     Chirag Ali lane,     Hyderabad – 500 001.

4. The Secretary to Government,

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department,

Government of India,

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 101.

5. National Medical Commission represented by its Chairperson,

Pocket 14, Sector 8,

Dwaraka Phase I, New Delhi – 110 077.

6. The Dental Council of India,

Represented by its President,

Aiwan-E-Galib Marg,

Kotla Road, Temple lane,     New Delhi – 110 002.

7. All India Council for Technical Education,

Represented by its Chairman,

Nelson Mandela Marg,     Vasant Kunj,     New Delhi – 110 070.

8. Indian Nursing Council represented by its President,

8th floor, N.B.C.C. Center,

Plot No.2, Community Centre,     Okhla Phase 1,     New Delhi – 110 020.

9. The Tamilnadu Nurses and Midwives Council represented by its President/Registrar,

Old No.140, 56 Santhome High Road,     KuilThope Mylapore,     Chennai – 600 004.

10. The Director General of Health Services,

Nirman Bhavan,       Moulana Azath Road,       New Delhi – 110 011.

11. The State of Tamilnadu represented by its

Principal Secretary to Government,

Health and Family Welfare Department,

Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

12. The Principal Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department,       Fort St George, Chennai – 600 009.
13. The Member Secretary,

Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,

Thalamuthu Natarajan Building,       No 1, Gandhi Irwin Road,       Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

14. The Director of Town and Country Planning,

CMDA Office Complex E&C, Market Road,       Koyembedu,       Chennai – 600 107.

15. The Central Bureau of Investigation represented by its Head of Branch,

Anti-corruption Branch,

3rd Floor, Shastri Bhavan,

No.26 Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,       Chennai – 600 006.

16. Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education, and Research (MAHER),

Commonly Referred as Meenakshi University,

No.12, Vembuliamman Koil Street,

Annaji Nagar, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.             …   Respondents

Prayer in W.A.No.324 of 2022: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to allow the above Writ Appeal and set aside the order of the learned Judge, dated 20.01.2022 made in W.P.No.690 of 2022.

Prayer in W.P.No.11467 of 2021: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 3 to inspect the 12th respondent College and find out whether the building as satisfied the norms prescribed by the 3rd respondent and is established in the lands exclusively required to be ear marked for the 12th respondent Medical College or it has been pup up in the lands already shown for other 10 institutions by the same trust as pointed out by the 9th respondent and whether it violet the Tamilnadu State Town and Country plan and the regulations framed by the 7th respondent and take appropriate action forthwith to safe guard the interest of students common people, patients and staff of 12th respondent College.

Prayer in W.P.No.3490 of 2022: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take appropriate action on the decision taken by the second respondent “University Grants Commission” in its minutes of 544th meeting of the University Grants Commission held on 16th October, 2019 in respect of the 16th respondent (2.05 (Action : JS(CCP-I/DU)).

In W.A.No.324 of 2022:

For  Appellant          : Mr.S.Selva Thirumurugan

For Respondents : Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel   for Mr.Rahul Balaji, for R1

: M/s. Ramalingam & Associates, for R2

: Mrs.M.Sneha, for R3

In W.P.No.11467 of 2021

For Petitioner	: Mr.S.Selva Thirumurugan
For Respondents	: Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Central Government Senior Panel Counsel   for R1

: Mr.P.Muthukumar,

State Government Pleader for RR-4 and 8

: Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth,

Standing Counsel for RR-2 and 3

: Mr.Elayarajakumar   for M/s.Ramalingam & Associates for R5

: Mrs.M.Sneha, Standing Counsel for R6

: Mrs.P.Veena Suresh,

Standing Counsel for R7

: Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh,

Standing Counsel for RR-10 & 11

: Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel   for Mr.Vishnu Venkatesh, for R12

: No Appearance for R9

In W.P.No.3490 of 2022

For Petitioner	: Mr.S.Selva Thirumurugan
For Respondents	: Mr.N.Ramesh, Senior Standing Counsel for RR-1 and 4

: Ms.V.Sudha,

Standing Counsel for RR-2 & 3

: Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth,   Standing Counsel for R5

: Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi

Standing Counsel for R6

: No Appearance for RR-7, 8, 9, 10 and 15

: Mr.P.Muthukumar,

State Government Pleader for RR-11 and 12

: Ms.P.Veena Suresh,

Standing Counsel for RR-13 and 14

: Mr.T.Meikandan

 

COMMON JUDGMENT D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARHY, J.

The petitioner is an association registered under the Societies

Registration Act, 1860 and is represented in these proceedings by its Secretary, namely one Dr.K.Srinivasan.  The Writ Petition No.11467 of 2021 is filed with a prayer to direct the respondents 1 and 3, namely The Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department, Government

of India, and the National Medical Commission to inspect the 12^th respondent College and find out whether the buildings have satisfied the norms prescribed by the third respondent and is established in the lands exclusively required to be earmarked for the 12^th respondent Medical College or it has been put up in the lands already shown for ten other institutions by the same trust, as appointed by the ninth respondent and whether it violates the Tamil Nadu State Town and Country Planning and the regulations framed by the seventh respondent and to take appropriate action forthwith to safeguard the interest of the students, common people, patients and staff of the 12^th respondent College.

2. The gist of the allegations made in the affidavit filed in support

of the Writ Petition is that the 12^th respondent is run by a trust which is also running several other colleges.  Without clearly earmarking lands in respect of each and every college and without putting up buildings after due

approval of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, the 12^th respondent College is showing the same buildings for the purpose of

satisfying the infrastructure which are for the infrastructure requirement of other colleges also.  This apart, there are several irregularities relating to the buildings.  It is further submitted in the Writ Petition that the writ petitioner has learned that one K.M.Krishnan, a Social Activist has taken the steps questioning the illegalities consistently committed by the 12^th respondent College.  The said K.M.Krishnan had already filed three Public Interest Litigations in respect of the same institutions in W.P.No.19812 of 2018, W.P.No.2807 of 2019 and W.P.No.17964 of 2019.  It is further stated, in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, that a Writ Appeal in W.A.No.2895 of 2019 was filed by the said K.M.Krishnan against an order permitting the 12^th respondent College to admit students for the Academic Year 2019-20.

3. It is further mentioned that a Coordinate Bench was pleased to

permit the said petitioner to move the Writ Appeal as third party on 26.08.2019, but, however, within two days on i.e., on 28.08.2019, the said Writ Appeal No.2895 of 2019 was dismissed by another Division Bench on the ground of locus standi with costs and the same was challenged before the Apex Court and the said Special Leave Petition was dismissed at the admission stage itself.  It is further mentioned that there is no order passed on merits in respect of the contentions raised by him in the present Public Interest Litigation and hence, it does not bar the present petitioner who is meant for the welfare of Doctors and the public, to demand for strict compliance of rules and regulations governing the approval of medical

colleges and admission of students.

4. When the above Writ Petition was pending, the 12^th respondent

in the above petition, namely Sri Muthukumaran Medical College, Hospital and Medical Institute had independently approached this Court by way of W.P.No.690 of 2022 stating that the college had complied with certain deficiencies pointed by the first respondent in the Writ Petition, namely the Registrar, The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R Medical University and therefore, sought for a Mandamus to consider its case to issue provisional affiliation and also include the college in the seat matrix for the Academic Year 202122.  The said Writ Petition was disposed off by way of a Mandamus

directing the university, the first respondent therein and the Secretary of the Selection Committee, the second respondent therein to consider the case on merits in accordance with law by a judgment, dated 20.01.2022.  Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment, after obtaining leave, the above mentioned Writ Petitioner, namely the Doctors Welfare Association of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary Dr.K.Srinivasan, had filed the Writ Appeal No.324 of 2022 against the said order of the learned Judge.

5. Thereafter, complaining the very same building regulations and

also other violations by another institution, namely Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research, which is administered by the trustees to the same family, the very same petitioner filed a Writ Petition for issue of Mandamus directing the first respondent therein, namely the Secretary to the Ministry of Education, Government of India to take appropriate decision taken by the second respondent, namely University Grants Commission in its minutes of 544^th meeting of the University Grants Commission held on 16.10.2019 in respect of the said institution.  The gist of the allegations in the said affidavit is that by the above meeting, the University Grants Commission has recommended withdrawal of the deemed university status

to the said institution and ordered that the institution has to seek affiliation to the university, having jurisdiction of the same, is not implemented and

prays for implementation of the same.

6. Since the above matters involve the same set of institutions,

they were taken up together and the 12^th Respondent institution had filed a counter-affidavit and also documents in W.P.No.11467 of 2021 and the National Medical Commission had also filed a status report along with the

supporting documents.

7. Heard S.Selva Thirumurugan, learned Counsel for the

petitioners/appellant and Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel for the first

respondent in W.A.No.324 of 2022 and twelfth respondent in W.P.No.11467 of 2021; M/s.Ramalingam & Associates for the second respondent in W.A.No.324 of 2022; Mrs.M.Sneha, learned Counsel for the third respondent in W.A.No.324 of 2022 and sixth respondent in

W.P.No.W.P.No.11467 of 2021; Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, learned Central Government Senior Panel Counsel for the first respondent in W.P.No.11467 of 2021; Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.4 and 8 in W.P.No.11467 of 2021 and respondent Nos.11 and 12 in W.P.No.3490 of 2022; Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in W.P.No.11467 of 2021 and fifth respondent in W.P.No.3490 of 2022; Mr.Elayarajakumar, learned Counsel for the fifth respondent in W.P.No.11467 of 2021; Mrs.P.Veena Suresh, learned Standing Counsel for the seventh respondent in

W.P.No.11467 of 2021 and respondent Nos.13 and 14 in W.P.No.3490 of 2022; Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent

Nos.10 and 11 in W.P.No.11467 of 2021; Mr.N.Ramesh, learned Senior

Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.3490 of 2022; Ms.V.Sudha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in W.P.No.3490 of 2022; Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, learned Standing Counsel for the sixth respondent in W.P.No.3490 of 2022 and Mr.T.Meikandan,

learned Counsel for the sixteenth respondent in W.P.No.3490 of 2022.

8. At the outset, P.S.Raman, the learned Senior Counsel

appearing on behalf of the first respondent in the Writ Appeal, submitted that they have raised an issue of preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of these Writ Petitions and Writ Appeal and therefore, prayed that this Court should take up the said issue first.  The preliminary

objections raised by the learned Senior Counsel are:-

• Already raising the self-same objections in respect of the very

institutions, one K.M.Krishnan, a retired Physical Education Teacher, claiming himself as a Social Activist, had filed Writ Appeal No.2895 of 2019, in which, the very question as to the infrastructure was considered by a Division Bench of this Court and by an order, dated 28.08.2019, it has held that already, the appropriate statutory authorities have taken up the issue and it is for the 12^th Respondent Institution to give such undertaking and the public bodies cannot be presumed to be working illegally and malafidely and the said person was held to be abusing the process of law and it was held that the third party cannot have any locus standi to maintain the appeal and since the appeal is frivolous one, the same was dismissed with costs of Rs.1,00,000/-.  This apart, it was held that no further petition or appeal by the said K.M.Krishnan shall be entertained by the Registry of this Court.  Therefore, it is his first submission that the matter has already been considered and taking  note of  the fact that the appropriate authorities are taking up the issue of infrastructure and the other complaints, the Court has decided not to entertain the Public Interest Litigation/third party Appeal in the matter and therefore, once again the matter cannot be re-agitated by

way of these present matters;

• It is his second contention that not only the matter was refused

to be entertained, but also this Court has specifically prohibited the said K.M.Krishnan, from filing any future petitions or appeals.  In this regard, it can be seen that the address of the said K.M.Krishnan is No.15, New Street, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033.  The registered address of the present petitioner is also the same.  However, willfully and wantonly, in these petitions, the address is given as No.Y1/9, S.A.F Games Village, Koyembedu, Chennai – 600 107.  He would further submit that even in the earlier Writ Petitions filed by the petitioner association herein, the address was given only as No.15, New Street, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033. Therefore, he would submit that only to overcome the embargo imposed by the petitioner, the very same persons who are behind the earlier round of litigations, are now filing the present Writ Petitions in a different name and therefore, this is a proxy litigation and a sheer abuse of process of law.

9. The learned Counsel for the writ petitioner filed an affidavit

explaining the stand of the petitioner in response to the said preliminary objections.  According to the petitioner, the association has got nothing to do with the said K.M.Krishnan.  As far as the address is concerned, the learned Counsel would submit that the building at No.15, New Street, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033 contains several rooms which are given on rent on commercial basis and the petitioner’s office was in one room and the said K.M.Krishnan was occupying another room.  This apart, subsequently, the office of the petitioner association was shifted to the address mentioned

in the petition, namely No.Y1/9, S.A.F Games Village, Koyembedu, Chennai – 600 107.  Therefore, he would submit that the petitions/appeal be

heard on merits.

10. We have considered the rival submissions made on either side

and perused the material records of the case.  First, the averments of the writ petitioner in the P.I.L filed by him in W.P.No.11467 of 2021 in paragraph Nos.55 and 56 of the affidavit that the questions raised in the Writ Petition are not considered by the earlier Division Bench in W.A.No.2895 of 2019 and that it was dismissed only on  locus standi is per se erroneous.  On a complete reading of the said judgment, dated 28.08.2019 in Writ Appeal in W.A.No.2895 of 2019, it would be clear that the Division Bench had held that it is for the petitioner institution to give undertaking and it is for the

university to consider the same and grant provisional affiliation and accordingly, the counseling process and admission process has to be

finalised.  It is further held that the public bodies cannot be presumed to be working illegally and malafidely.  It is further held in paragraph No.21 of the said judgment that it is for the government bodies to ensure the compliance of laws by the institution concerned.  Therefore, the Division Bench has already decided the issue that the deficiency, if any, has to be looked into by the concerned authorities and need not be entertained by way

of Public Interest Litigation.

11. In this context, the appropriate authorities, namely National Medical Commission, has filed a status report, in which, it is stated that it

has conducted an inspection on 04.02.2022 and 05.02.2022 and since serious allegations, regarding land and building, are made, the National Medical Commission had also called for a report from the C.M.D.A and noting certain deficiencies and discrepancies in the minimum statutory standards, a show-cause notice, dated 29.03.2022 has been issued and

accordingly, the action is pursued against the institution.  A status report is also filed by the C.M.D.A, whereunder, it is averred that in respect of the unauthorised blocks of the buildings, necessary enforcement action is being taken.  In the report, the particulars of the buildings which are approved and

the blocks which are unauthorised are all given in detail.

12. As a matter of fact, from the order under Writ Appeal, it can also be understood that the university also had pointed out certain deficiencies and the 12^th respondent is complying with the same. It is in this context, when the earlier Division Bench has held that when the authorities are performing their lawful duties, there was no necessity to entertain a Public Interest Litigation or a Writ Appeal by granting the leave to the third party and therefore, the same decision being made in the very same subject matter, the present Writ Appeal and Writ Petitions cannot be entertained by this Court in view of the decision of the earlier Division Bench. Repeated Public Interest Litigations even by different persons cannot be entertained, once this Court has taken a decision in respect of the subject matter.
13. Now, coming to the second limb of the preliminary

objections, on a perusal of the affidavit filed by the petitioner himself in the Writ Petition No.11467 of 2021, it would be clear that the case of the petitioner association that it has got nothing to do with the said K.M.Krishnan, who had filed the earlier Writ Petitions and Writ Appeal is, on the face of it, unacceptable.  When the petitioner is able to spell out in the affidavit filed along with the Writ Petition , even before the respondents

could come up with the preliminary objection, every detail about the various Writ Petitions and Writ Appeal filed by the said K.M.Krishnan and especially when the averments as to how the petitioner came to know of those proceedings, are absent in the affidavit, the same, by itself smacks the connection between the petitioner association and the said K.M.Krishnan. The mentioning of the address of the said K.M.Krishnan, at No.15, New Street, West Mambalam, Chennai fortifies the said allegation.  Even though an explanation is sought to be given by the petitioner about the commercial rooms for the rent and the change of address, it is asserted by the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the 12^th respondent institution by producing the records on the file of the Registrar of Societies that even as on date, the registered address of the petitioner association is shown only as No.15, New Street, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033 and had the office upon shifted, as mentioned by the petitioner, in the year 2021 itself, by now in the normal course, the petitioner would have informed the same to the Registrar of Societies.

14. A perusal of the documents produced by the Writ Petition, in

the additional typed set of papers in the form of R.T.I replies, suggest the address in No.Y1/9, S.A.F Games Village, Koyembedu, Chennai – 600 107 , is the residence of the Secretary to the petitioner association, Dr.K. Srinivasan.  Therefore, we are not in a position to accept the explanation given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and we hold that only to avoid the embargo imposed on the said K.M.Krishnan, the petitioner

association has come up with the present Writ Petitions and Writ Appeal.

15. Therefore, the present Writ Appeal and Writ Petitions are

dismissed and we reiterate the earlier judgment in W.A.No.2895 of 2019, dated 28.08.2019.

16. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case,

considering the fact that already in the earlier round, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/was imposed as costs, we refrain from imposing exemplary costs on the petitioner.  Consequently, C.M.P.No.2516 of 2022, W.M.P.Nos.12202 of 2021 and 3619 of 2021 are closed.

(M.N.B., CJ)           (D.B.C., J.)

16.08.2022

Index : Yes/No

Speaking order/Non-speaking order grs

To

1. Sri Muthukumaran Medical College Hospital And Research Institute,     Chennai – 600 069.
2. The Registrar,

The Tamilnadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University,     No.69, Annasalai, Guindy,     Chennai – 600 032.

3. The Secretary,

Selection Committee,

Directorate of Medical Education,     Chennai.

4. The Secretary to Government,

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department,

Government of India,

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 101.

5. The Secretary

Medical Council of India,

Pocket 14, Sector 8,

Dwaraka Phase I, New Delhi – 110 077.

6. National Medical Commission,

Pocket 14, Sector 8,

Dwaraka Phase I, New Delhi – 110 077.

7. The Secretary to Government,

Revenue Department,

Fort St. George,     Chennai – 600 009.

8. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,

Thalamuthu Natarajan Building,     No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road,     Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

9. The Chief Engineer,

Public Works Department,     WRD Chennai Region,     Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

10. The Head of Branch,

Anti-corruption Branch,

Central Bureau of Investigation,

3rd Floor, Shastri Bhavan,       No.26, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,       Chennai – 600 006.

11. The Director and Managing Director,

TANGEDCO,

144, Annasalai,       Chennai – 600 002.

12. The Director (Distribution),

TANGEDCO,

144, Annasalai,       Chennai – 600 002.

13. The Secretary to Government,

(Higher Education),

Ministry of Education,

(Formerly Human Resources and Development),

Union of India

Room No.302-C, Shastri Bhavan,       Gate No – 1, Connaught place,       New Delhi – 110 001.

14. The Chairman

University Grants Commission,       Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,       New Delhi – 110 002.

15. The Joint Secretary,

University Grants Commission,

South – Eastern Regional Office,

A.P.S.F.C. Building,       4th floor, 5-9-194, PB No.152,       Chirag Ali lane, Hyderabad – 500 001.

16. The President,

The Dental  Council of India ,

Aiwan-E-Galib Marg,

Kotla Road, Temple lane,       New Delhi – 110 002.

17. The Chairman,

All India Council for Technical Education,

Nelson Mandela Marg,       Vasant Kunj,       New Delhi – 110 070.

18. The President,

Indian Nursing Council,

8th floor, N.B.C.C. Center,

Plot No.2, Community Centre,       Okhla Phase 1,       New Delhi – 110 020.

19. The President/Registrar,

The Tamilnadu Nurses and Midwives Council

Old No.140, 56 Santhome High Road,       KuilThope Mylapore,       Chennai – 600 004.

20. The Director General of Health Services,

Nirman Bhavan,       Moulana Azath Road,       New Delhi – 110 011.

21. The Principal Secretary to Government

The State of Tamilnadu,       Health and Family Welfare Department,       Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

22. The Principal Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department,       Fort St George, Chennai – 600 009.
23. The Member Secretary,

Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,

Thalamuthu Natarajan Building,

No 1, Gandhi Irwin Road,

Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

24. The Director of Town and Country Planning,

CMDA Office Complex E&C, Market Road,       Koyembedu,       Chennai – 600 107.

25. Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education, and Research (MAHER),

Commonly Referred as Meenakshi University,       No.12, Vembuliamman Koil Street,

Annaji Nagar, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARHY, J.

grs

W.A.No.324 of 2022 and W.P.Nos.11467 of 2021 and 3490 of 2022

16.08.2022