Karuthakkannan .J vs. The Chairman National Medical Commission
Facts
The petitioner, J. Karuthakkannan, filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus. The prayer was to direct respondents 1 to 4 (National Medical Commission, Director of Medical Education, Registrar of Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University, and Director of Academic Counsel (Physiotherapy) of the same University) to take action against the fifth respondent, Santhosh Physiotherapy College. This action was to be based on the petitioner's representation dated 25.04.2022. The petitioner stated that the petition was filed in the public interest, as he had no personal interest in the matter.
Held
The Court noted that the writ petition was filed in public interest, as the petitioner explicitly stated he had no personal interest. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's right to file a separate writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation. Consequently, the present writ petition was disposed of, preserving the petitioner's right to pursue the matter as a Public Interest Litigation. No order as to costs was made. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's representation or the actions of the respondents concerning the fifth respondent college. The core decision was to allow the petitioner to re-file as a PIL, rather than deciding the original writ's prayer on its merits.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner has locus standi to file this writ petition in public interest, given that he claims no personal interest in the matter (Article 226 of the Constitution of India). Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the writ petition was filed in public interest, implying a right to approach the court for redressal of grievances affecting the public, even without direct personal involvement. Revenue/State Argument: The judgment does not record any specific argument from the respondents regarding the petitioner's locus standi or the merits of the representation. The respondents' role was to respond to the court's direction regarding the petitioner's representation.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.01.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.9796 of 2022 J.Karuthakkannan ... Petitioner Vs.
The Chairman, National Medical Commission, Pocket 14, Sector – VIII, Dwarka Phase – 1, New Delhi – 110 007. 2. The Director of Medical Education, Office of the Directorate of Medical Education, No.156, Poonammalli High Road, New Bupathy Nagar, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. 3. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University, No.69, Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai – 32. 4. The Director of Academic Counsel (Physiotherapy) Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University, No.69, Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai – 32. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The Secretary, Santhosh Physiotherapy College, No.15B, GST Road, Thannakkankulam, Thirunagar – 625 006, Madurai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the fifth respondent college based on the pet
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.