HC dismisses petition seeking recognition of paramedical diplomas from IIPT Kohima

March 27, 2025 7 Views No Comment

Kohima, March 26 (MExN): The Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench, on March 25 dismissed a writ petition filed by 18 petitioners seeking recognition of their Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology (DMLT) obtained from the Indian Institute of Paramedical Technology (IIPT), Kohima.

The court ruled that the diplomas lacked valid recognition from the Paramedical Council of India (PCI), making them ineligible for official acceptance in recruitment processes.

Background of the Case
According to the judgment and order issued by Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita, the petitioners approached the court after their applications for Laboratory Technician posts, advertised by the Nagaland Health and Family Welfare Department in 2020, were citing qualifications from an unrecognised institution.

The petitioners had obtained their diplomas from IIPT Kohima, which was initially approved by the Nagaland government and granted provisional authorisation by the PCI in 2012 for six years.

However, the institute failed to secure permanent affiliation, leading to complications in job applications.

Challenging the rejection, the petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking recognition of their diplomas for future recruitment.

Court’s Observations and Ruling
Justice Kalita held that while IIPT was granted provisional authorisation by the PCI, this could not be regarded as full affiliation, as the authorisation letter explicitly stated that it “may not be treated as an affiliation.”

Furthermore, as the institute had to be closed before obtaining formal recognition from the PCI, the diplomas awarded by it could not be considered valid, the court stated.

The judge also noted that the petitioners did not claim that IIPT was unlawfully denied recognition by the PCI. Instead, the failure to secure approval was due to the institute’s lapses in meeting regulatory requirements.

Even though the Government of Nagaland had issued a “No Objection Certificate” (NOC) to IIPT, the court clarified that the NOC was solely for facilitating the establishment of the institute.

The responsibility of obtaining approval and recognition for the courses lay with the institute itself.

Since IIPT failed to secure affiliation and recognition from the PCI, the Court ruled that it could not grant recognition to the diplomas merely on humanitarian grounds, as doing so would be contrary to the law.

The court referred to a 2014 inspection report submitted by a committee constituted by the Nagaland Government, which highlighted several deficiencies in IIPT. These included the absence of a proper NOC from a competent regulatory body, insufficient land and infrastructure, inadequate academic facilities such as classrooms, laboratories, a library, and conference halls, and other essential shortcomings.

Justice Kalita further stated that it is the responsibility of regulatory bodies such as the PCI to decide whether a diploma course meets the necessary criteria for recognition. In this case, the PCI had not granted recognition to the IIPT diploma, and no fault was attributed to the council for this decision.

Since the concerned regulatory authority had not recognised the diploma, the Court found no justification for granting recognition solely on humanitarian grounds.

Issuing any direction to recognise the DMLT obtained by the petitioners for future selection processes in the absence of PCI approval and without evidence that IIPT fulfilled the requisite criteria would be unlawful, the judge added.

Citing Supreme Court rulings, the court reaffirmed that degrees or diplomas from unrecognised institutions cannot be considered valid for employment or further education.