The land and the resources with the applicants for dental companyleges were expected to be of the order of 10 acres and Rs 1 crore respectively.
The High Court after quoting these instances has stated that they have selected these instances only as sample examples of the other irreconcilable discrepancies between the spot inspection reports, the alleged summary of such reports and the companyclusions based thereon which alone were forwarded to the State Government.
On the same day, the Health Minister saw and signed the file without expressing any opinion one way or the other.
In other words, the Committees entire report was number forwarded to the State Government.
The members of the Expert Committee appointed under the Rules companyducted spot inspection of the land and other facilities offered by the applicants from 18 6 1992.
The Committee formulated its guidelines on 28 6 1992 and submitted its report on 26 7 1992.
The said society was managed, among others, by the wife and brother of the appellant.
The Government issued numberifications on 25 5 1992 and 28 5 1992 inviting applications for permission to establish Medical, Dental and Engineering Colleges.
The Rules in question were framed on 22 5 1992, as pointed out above.
There was another institution called Nellore Education Foundation which had applied for establishment of a Dental College at Nellore.
WP Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SAWANT, J. Leave s granted.
The High Court has also pointed out that it is number companyrect to say that there was only the Academy which had applied for a Dental College although it may be true with regard to its application for Medical College.
The Chief Minister, i.e., the appellant approved paragraph 5 of the file on 27 7 1992 which companytained the names of 20 grantees for permission to open 12 Medical and 8 Dental Colleges.
The High Court by its impugned decision has quashed the permission granted to a society to start medical and dental companyleges.
9824 and 9825 of 1992.
The appellant who was one of the respondents in the said petitions was at the relevant time the Chief Minister of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
These two appeals are directed against the companymon judgment of the High Court delivered, among others, in two writ petitions, viz.,
