H. R. PREM SACHDEVA v. UNION OF INDIA — 1995 DIGILAW 667 (DEL)

P. P. WADHWA ( 1 ) THE petitioners numbering seven and all dentists have filed this petition (CWP No. 3021/95) under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking restraint on the holding of the meeting of the Dental Council of India at Bangalore on 8, 9 and 10 September 1995 as per notice dated 30 July 1995 issued by the Secretary, Dental Council of India. The petitioners also want appointment of a nominee of the Central Government as Administrator of the Dental Council of India till proper elections to the Dental Council and to the Executive Cmmittee are held. Various other prayers are also sought which we will consider as we proceed with the judgment. There are three respondents. The third respondent was the Vice President and in the absence of the President he performs the functions of the President. ( 2 ) IN Writ Petition (CWP No. 3023/95) filed by Dr. Pradip Jayna, also a dentist, there is challenge to the communications dated 2 February 1995 and 8 May 1995 of the second respondent as well as to the order dated 31 July 1995 of the first respondent. Restraint is also sought on the resspondents from preventing the petitioner to act as a member of the Dental Council. ( 3 ) PETITIONERS have contended that the last meeting of the Dental Council was held in Delhi on 13/14 December 1994, and the third respondent, the Acting President, was not authorised to fix the venue and the date of the next meeting of the Dental Council which he did so unauthorisedly fixing the meet at Bangalore for 8 to 10 September 1995. Before we discuss the rival contentions it may be appropriate to set out the relevant provisions of the Dentists Act, 1948 (for short the Act ) under which the Dental Council is constituted and the Regulations of the Dental Council of India and so also the Dental Council (Election) Regulations, 1952. Both the Regulations have been framed by the Dental Council of India with the approval of the Central Government under section 20 of the Act. It is not disputed that the regulations are statutory. ( 4 ) SECTION 3 of the Act provides for constitution and composition of the Dental Council. Section 6 provides the term of office of the members and casual vacancies, and section 9 gives the composition of Executive Committee. It is not disputed that the regulations are statutory. ( 4 ) SECTION 3 of the Act provides for constitution and composition of the Dental Council. Section 6 provides the term of office of the members and casual vacancies, and section 9 gives the composition of Executive Committee. These sections and the regulations which have been referred to; in relevant part, are as under :- SECTION 3: "3. The Central Government shall, as soon as may be, constitute a Council consisting of the following members, namely :- (a) one registered dentist possessing a recognised dental qualification elected by the dentists registered in Part A of each State register; (b) one member elected from amongst themselves by the members of the Medical Council of India; (c) not more than four members elected from among themselves, by - (a) Principals, Deans, Directors and Vice-Principals of dental colleges in the States training students for recognised dental qualifications: Provided that not more than one member shall be elected from the same dental college; (b) Heads of dental wings of medical colleges in the States training students for recognised dental qualifications; (d) one member from each University established by law in the States which grants a recognised dental qualification, to be elected by the members of the Senate of the University, or in case the University has no Senate, by the members of the court, from amongst the members of the Dental Faculty of the University or in case the University has no Dental Faculty, from amongst the members of the Medical Faculty thereof. ; (e) one member to represent each State nominated by the Government of each such State from among persons registered either in a medical register or a dental register of the State. Explanation:- In this clause, "state" does not include a Union territory. ; (e) one member to represent each State nominated by the Government of each such State from among persons registered either in a medical register or a dental register of the State. Explanation:- In this clause, "state" does not include a Union territory. (f) six members nominated by the Central Government, of whom at least one shall be a registered dentist possessing a recognised dental qualification and practising or holding an appointment in an institution for the training of dentists in a Union Territory and at least two shall be dentists registered in Part B of a State register: (g) the Director General of Health Services, ex Officio: Provided that pending the preparation of registers the State Governments may nominate to the first Council members referred to in parts (a) and (e) and the Central Government members referred to in part (f) out of persons who are eligible for registration in the respective registers and such persons shall hold office for such period as the State or Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify. " SECTION 6: "6. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section an elected or nominated member shall hold office for a term of five years from the date of his election or nomination or until his successor has been duly elected or nominated, whichever is longer: Provided that a member nominated under clause (e) or clause (f) of section 3, shall hold office during the pleasure of the authority nominating him. XX XX XX " SECTION 9: "9. (1) The Council shall constitute from among its members an Executive Committee, and may so constitute other Committees for such general or special purposes as the Council considers necessary for carrying out its functions under this Act. (2) The Executive Committee shall consist of the President and Vice-President ex officio and the Director-General of Health Services ex officio, and five other members elected by the Council. (3) The President and Vice-president of the Council shall be Chairman and Vice-Chairman, respectively of the Executive Committee. (4) A member of the Executive Committeeshall hold office as such until the expiry of his term of office as member of the Council but, subject to his being a member of the Council, he shall be eligible for re-election. XX XX XX REGULATIONS OF THE DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA: "3. (4) A member of the Executive Committeeshall hold office as such until the expiry of his term of office as member of the Council but, subject to his being a member of the Council, he shall be eligible for re-election. XX XX XX REGULATIONS OF THE DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA: "3. (1) Meetings of the Council shall ordinarily be held at New Delhi, or at a place decided by the Council when in session or by the Executive Committee if the Council fails to decide during its session on such dates as may be fixed by the Executive Committee or the Council provided that the President :- (i) may call a special meeting at any time on 15 days notice to deal with any urgent matter requiring the attention of the Council: (ii) shall call a special meeting on 15 days notice, if he receives a requisition in writing signed by not less than 10 members and stating purpose other than that mentioned in the first proviso to Regulation No. 7 (1) (b) and being a purpose within the scope of the Council s functions, for which they desire the meeting to be called. 5. Notice of every meeting other than a special meeting called under the proviso to Regulation No. 3 (1) or under the first proviso to Regulation No. 7 (1 ) (b) shall be despatched by the Secretary to each member of the Council not less than 40 days before the date of the meeting. 8. (1) Every meeting of the Council shall be presided ovr by the President, or if he is absent, by the Vice-president, or, if both the President and the Vice-president are absent, by a Chairman to be elected by the members present from among themselves. 28. The proceedings of the meetings of the Council shall be preserved in the form of printed minutes which shall be authenticated, after confirmation, by the signature of the President. 29. A copy of the minutes of each meeting shall be submitted to the President within 10 days of the meeting and attested by him and they shall then be sent to each member within 30 days of the meeting. 30. 29. A copy of the minutes of each meeting shall be submitted to the President within 10 days of the meeting and attested by him and they shall then be sent to each member within 30 days of the meeting. 30. The minutes of each meeting shall contain such motions and amendments as have been moved and adopted, or negatives, with the names of the mover and the seconder, but without any comment and without any record of observations made by any member at the meeting. 31. If any objection regarding the correctness of the minutes is received within 30 days of the despatch of the minutes by the Secretary, such objections together with the minutes as recorded and attested shall be put before the next meeting of the Council for confirmation. At this meeting no question shall be raised except as to the correctness of the records of the meeting. Provided that if no objection regarding a decision taken by the Council at a meeting is received within 30 days of the despatch by the Secretary of the minutes of that particular meeting such decision may, if expedient, be put into effect before the confirmation of the minutes at the next meeting. Provided further that the President may direct that action be taken on a decision of the council before the expiry of the period of 30 days mentioned above. 32. The minutes of the Council shall, as soon as is practicable after their confirmation, be made up in sheets and consecutively paged for insertion in a volume, which shall be permanently preserved. A copy of such volumes shall be supplied free to each member of the Council and such copies may be sold to the public at a price to be fixed by the Council. XX XX XX ( 5 ) DENTAL Council (Election) Regulations, 1952, prescribe the manner in which elections under Chapter II of the Act containing sections 3, 6 and 9 are to be conducted. Chapter II of the Regulations provide for elections to the Council under clause (a) of section 3; Chapter III for that under clause (b) of section 3: Chapter IV for that under clause (c) of section 3; and Chapter V for that under clause (d) of section 3. Chapter II of the Regulations provide for elections to the Council under clause (a) of section 3; Chapter III for that under clause (b) of section 3: Chapter IV for that under clause (c) of section 3; and Chapter V for that under clause (d) of section 3. ( 6 ) THE Dental Council is a statutory body and under section 4 it is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal, with power to acquire and hold property both movable and immovable, and shall by the said name sue and be sued. ( 7 ) DURING course of arguments it was submitted that provisions of section 6 of the Act were part materia with those ofsection 7 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, under which Medical Council of India had been constituted. We may, therefore, set out section 7 of that Act in relevant part as under :- SECTION 7: "7. (1) The President or Vice-President of the Council shall hold office for a term not exceeding five years and not extending beyond the expiry of his term as member of the Council. (2) Subject to the provisions of this section, a member shall hold office for a terms of five years from the date of his nomination or election or until his successor shall have even duly nominated or elected, whichever is longer. (6) Where the said term of five years is about to expire in respect of any member, a successor may be nominateed or elected at any time within three months before the said term expires but he shall not assume office until the said term has expired. " ( 8 ) WE may also reproduce various communications received from the Central Government by the Dental Council of India which are subject-matter of challenge and are impugned as well in the two petitions :- NO. V. 12025/10/94-PMS Government of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Deptt. of Health) Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi, Dated the 2nd February, 1995. To, The Secretary, Dental Council of India, Kotla Road, Temple Lane, New Delhi-2. Subject: Term of the Executive Committee Members under Section 9 (4) of the Dentists Act, 1948 - regarding -. V. 12025/10/94-PMS Government of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Deptt. of Health) Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi, Dated the 2nd February, 1995. To, The Secretary, Dental Council of India, Kotla Road, Temple Lane, New Delhi-2. Subject: Term of the Executive Committee Members under Section 9 (4) of the Dentists Act, 1948 - regarding -. Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter No. DE-108/94/644 dated 13th May, 1994, on the subject cited above to say that this matter has been re-examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (Department of Legislative Deptt.) and it has been decided that the opinion contained in this Ministry s letter No. F. 3-8/69-MPT dated 19th April, 1968, is not legally sustainable. 2. In its judgement dated 21. 11. 90 in CWP No. 1003/90- Dr. Harcharan Singh and others v. MCI and Ors. , the Hon ble High Court of Delhi made the following observations in regard to the term of members to the Medical Council of India :- "the provision of continuation of membership until the successor is elected or nominated is only a stop-gap arrangement for a short duration and not meant for the continuation of membership perpetually. " 3. Drawing an analogy from the above observation, it would be reasonable to finalise conducting of an election or nomination of member of the Dental Council of India within a period of 3 months. In this connection, your attention is also invited to Regulation 23 of the Dental council of India (Election) Regulation, 1952, which provides that the President shall not later than 60 days before the date of occurrance of a vacancy or vacancies forward a notice by registered post to the Registrar of each University concerned, requesting to hold an election not later than the date specified in the notice. 4. The Dental Council of India is, therefore, advised that the membership of those, whose term has expired and more than 3 months have lapsed from the date of expiry of term of membership should be treated as having been terminated and immediate action should be taken to fill up the resultant vacancies under intimation to this Ministry. Yours faithfully, sd\- (H. N. Yadav) UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA Tel: 3013968" "no. V. 12013/8/94-PMS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi, Dated the 8th May, 1995. Yours faithfully, sd\- (H. N. Yadav) UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA Tel: 3013968" "no. V. 12013/8/94-PMS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi, Dated the 8th May, 1995. To, The Secretary, Dental Council of India, Kotla Road, Temple Lane, New Delhi-2. Subject: Notification of elected/nominated members by Universities/states to the Dental Council of India u/s 3 of the Dentists Act, 1948. Sir, I am directed to refer to the discussion held in the room of shri Alok Porti, Director (ME) in this Ministry on 2nd March, 1995 on the subject mentioned above and to say that necessary action may kindly be initiated in respect of membership of the Council as indicated below :- i) Names of those persons who have completed their term and more than 3 months have lapsed should be deleted from the list of members. ii) In cases where nominations have been made by State govts. and there is no State Register the names of persons should be deleted from the list of members as such nominations as not legally valid. iii) In those cases where doubts had been appeared on the process of election or nominations, the Council may initiate the process of scrutiny and provide the Ministry with detailed information in respect of each case to take a decision regarding validity of such members. I am further directed to request that the Council may take the above mentioned action and intimate the Govt. , the position with regard to the membership of the Council by 8/5/1995. Yours faithfully, under SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA tel:3013960" "no DE-108-95/1275 Dated: the 31 July, 1995. To, Dr. Pradip Jayna, Orthodontic Centre (First Floor), M-75, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001. Sub: Notification of elected/nominated members by Universities/states to the Dental Council of India under Section 3 of the Dentists Act. 1948. Sir/madam, As you are aware, Dr. C. T. Mathew who was Member of the Dental Council of India, has filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court being CWP No. 4980/94. In the said writ petition Dr. Mathew has prayed to the Hon ble Court that the law laid down by Delhi High court in the case of Dr. Harcharan Singh vs. Medical Council of India in CWP No. 1003/90 shall also be applied in determining the tenure of a Member of the Dental Council of India. In the said writ petition Dr. Mathew has prayed to the Hon ble Court that the law laid down by Delhi High court in the case of Dr. Harcharan Singh vs. Medical Council of India in CWP No. 1003/90 shall also be applied in determining the tenure of a Member of the Dental Council of India. In the case of Dr. Harcharan Singh (supra) the Hon ble Delhi High Court has given the judgment to the effect that a member of the Medical council whose tenure of five years expires and he fails to seek renomination/ re-election within next three months of the expiry of the 5 years period then his name shall be removed from the list of members of Medical Council of India. Dr. Mathew has also sought the same relief from Delhi High Court against the members of the Dental Council of India. During the pendency of the above mentioned writ petition and on the query by theDental Council of India the Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare after consulting the Law Department of the Govt. of India has issued two letters bearing No. V-12013/8/94-PMS dated 8. 5. 95 and No. V. 12025/18/94-DMS dt. 2. 2. 95 whereby the Central Government has directed the Council that the necessary action is to be initiated in respect of the membership of the Council in the following manner: (i) Names of those persons who have completed their terms and more than 3 months have lapsed should be deleted from the list of members. (ii) In case where nominations have been made by State Govt. and there is no State Register the names of persons should be deleted from the list of members as such nomination are not legally valid. (iii) In those cases where doubts had been appeared on the process of elections or nomiantions, the Council may initiate the process of scrutiny and provide the Ministry with detailed information in respect of each case to take a decision regarding validity of such members. The Hon ble Delhi High Court by order dated 18. 5. 1995 in the writ petition filed by Mr. C T. Mathew has passed the following orders: "we make it clear that the pending writ petition will not come in the way of the authority concerned for taking any action as per law. The Hon ble Delhi High Court by order dated 18. 5. 1995 in the writ petition filed by Mr. C T. Mathew has passed the following orders: "we make it clear that the pending writ petition will not come in the way of the authority concerned for taking any action as per law. " An exercise was undertaken to scrutinise the list of Members of Dental Council of India about their nomination and election and to find out the names of the Members whose tenure of five years has expired and have also failed to obtain re-election/re-nomination within a period of three months immediate after the expiry of five years. It has been found that your name is also one of those members. Yourtenureoffiveyearsexpiredon19. 10. 1987. The period of three months after expiry of above mentioned five years has also expired on 18. 01. 1988. I, therefore, in accordance with the direction of the Central Government and the order dated 10. 5. 95 passed by the Delhi High Court hereby inform you that you are no more a member of the Dental Council of India unless and until you obtain a re-election/re- nomination from your respective constituency. Yours faithfully, sd\- (A. L. Migani) Secretary Dental Council of India. CC to :- Prof. (Dr.) N. Sridhar Shetty, MDS, Acting President, Dental Council of India, Mangalore. " "dental COUNCIL OF INDIA E. C. /council Meeting E. C. Suppl. ltem No. 20 (XIV) Dec. , 1994/new Delhi. Council Suppl. ltem No. 72 (XIV) Notification of the Elected/nominated members to the Dental Council of India - regarding - _____________________________________________ (Secretary s Note) The Govt. of India, Ministry of Health and F. W. (Deptt. of health), New Delhi, vide their letter No. V. 12013/8/94-PMS dated 24/11/1994 (copy attached) have stated that details of the Members elected/nominated after 1-11-1994 by the States/universities etc. under Section 3 of the Dentists Act, 1948, to the Dental Council of india should be sent to the Ministry for Notification so as (to) enable the such members to exercise the rights and powers conferred on the member of the Dental Council of India under the Act. In this connection, it is submitted that the Govt. under Section 3 of the Dentists Act, 1948, to the Dental Council of india should be sent to the Ministry for Notification so as (to) enable the such members to exercise the rights and powers conferred on the member of the Dental Council of India under the Act. In this connection, it is submitted that the Govt. of India, ministry of Health and F. W. , New Delhi, vide their letter No. V. 12013/ 2/90-PMS dated 3/7/1990 had informed this office as under :- "i am directed to refer to your letter No. DE-108-89/4694 dated the 19th January, 1989, on the subject noted above and to say that Prof. P. K. Kakkar, Professor, ENT, Maulana Azad Medical College, New delhi, may be invited to the meetings by the Council. It is also requested that all concerned may be informed that there is no need to notify the namnes of members in the Gazette of India their election/nomination on the Council as per the advice of Ministry of law and Justice (Deptt. of Legal Affairs)" It may also be added that the Govt. of India, Ministry of health and F. W. , New Delhi, vide their letter No. F. 6-2/52-MI dated 16/2/1953 had given their clarification on the subject matter as under "i am directed to say that persons who have been declared elected by the Returning Officer in accordance with regulation 17 of the dental Council (Election) Regulations, 1952, are entitled to attend the meeting of the Council irrespective of the fact whether their elections has or has not been notified in the official gazette. 2. The election of Dr. N. N. Kapadia as a member of the Dental council of India from Uttar Pradesh will be notified by the Government of India on receipt from the Government of Uttar Pradesh. " With the above, the letter dated 24/11/1994 referred to above from the Ministry of Health and F. W. , New Delhi, is placed before the E. C. /council for its consideration. Sd/- (A. L. Miglani) Secretary Ends: As above. Dental Council of India. " ( 9 ). Mr. " With the above, the letter dated 24/11/1994 referred to above from the Ministry of Health and F. W. , New Delhi, is placed before the E. C. /council for its consideration. Sd/- (A. L. Miglani) Secretary Ends: As above. Dental Council of India. " ( 9 ). Mr. Vikas Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners (CWP No. 3021/95), submitted that the Acting President, the third respondent, had no right to fix the Dental Council meeting at Bangalore and that in the meeting of the Dental Council held on 13/14 December 1994 he was authorised merely to take decision only on legal matters, but that he had been acting in contravention of the decisions of the Dental Council and taking decisions in other matters as well for which he was not authorised. In any case, Mr. Vikas Singh, said that since draft minutes had been objected to and unless these minutes were corrected the Acting President could not be said to have been empowered to take any action. Mr. Vikas Singh said that various members of the Dental Council had either been wrongfully excluded or included in the Dental Council in contravention of the provisions of section 3 of the Act by adoping wrong analogy with reference to some provisions under the Indian Medical Council Act. It was submitted that unless the names of the members either nominated or elected were notified by the Central Government they could not be said to have become members of the Dental Council. He said that the Secretary, Dental Councilof India s note of December 1994 which we have reproduced above was irrelevant and was against the provisions of the Act and the Regulations. ( 10 ). Mr. S. P. Kalra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (CWP No. 3023/ 95), submitted that the communications dated 2 February 1995 and 8 May 1995 issued by the Central Government and that dated 31 July 1995 issued by the Secretary, Dental Council of India, drawing authority from the above two communications, were not legal. He said Pradip Jayna continued to be the member of the Dental Council. ( 11 ). We may note that the stand taken by the Dental Council of India as reflected in the letter dated 31 July 1995 is reversal of its earlier stand taken in the writ petition (CWP No. 4980/94) filed by Dr. C. T. Mathew. In that petition Dr. ( 11 ). We may note that the stand taken by the Dental Council of India as reflected in the letter dated 31 July 1995 is reversal of its earlier stand taken in the writ petition (CWP No. 4980/94) filed by Dr. C. T. Mathew. In that petition Dr. Mathew had sought a declaration that respondents 4 to 19 ceased to be the members of the Dental Council of India and reliance was placed on a Bench decision of this Court in Dr. Harcharan Singh and others v. Medical Council of India, CWP No. 1003/90 decided on 21 November 1990. In that judgment this Court had interpreted the provisiions of clauses (1), (2) and (6) of section 7 of the Indian Medical Council Act holding that a member of the Medical Council of India shall cease to be its member after the expiry of a period of five years and three months. A Special Leave Petition was filed against this judgment in the Supreme Court [slp (C) No. 2165/91] which was disposed of by order dated August 1, 1991, holding that it had become infructuous as fresh elections had already been taken place. While dismissing the Special Leave Petition as infructuous the court also observed that it would "leave all the contentions open". In subsequent decision a Bench of this Court in Dr. S. N. Deshmukh v. Medical Council of India, 1991 (47) DLT472, expressed reservation on the correctness of decision in Dr. Harcharan Singh s case. In any case, judgment in Dr. Harcharan Singh s case proceeded on the basis that under sub-section (6) of section 7 of the Indian Medical Council Act when term of five years was about to expire a successor might be nominated or elected at any time within three months before the said term expired. Therefore, the court was of the view that the maximum period for which a member could continue would be five years three months as he could not continue as member indefinitely. Provision like sub-section (6) of section 7 we do not find in section 6 of the Act. To say that provision of sub-section (6) of section 7 of the Medical Council Act could be incorporated by ana logy under the Act, appears to us rather incongruous. Provision like sub-section (6) of section 7 we do not find in section 6 of the Act. To say that provision of sub-section (6) of section 7 of the Medical Council Act could be incorporated by ana logy under the Act, appears to us rather incongruous. Sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Act is quite explicit that a person elected or nomianted as member shall hold office for a term of five years from the date of his election or nomination or until his successor has been duly elected or nominated, whichever is longer. We do not think any argument is needed to the contrary for us to hold that a member would continue until his successor is either nominated or elected. As a matter of fact, on a legal opinion obtained earlier from Mr. R. L. Kohli, Advocate, Supreme Court, the Dental Council in as counter-affidavit in writ petition filed by Dr. C. T. Mathew clearly took the stand that provision like that in section 7 of the Indian Medical Council Act did not exist in the Dentists Act, 1948, and that members nominated or elected as provided in section 3 of the Act would hold office for a period of five years or until their successor was nominated or elected. The reversal of the stand of the Dental Council in the present case has been on account of the communications dated 2 February 1995 and 8 May 1995. We have no hesitation in setting aside the aforesaid two communications from the Central Government. The result of this wold be that the following persons shall continue to be members of the Dental Council of India and they would continue to be so till their successors are either nominated or elected in terms of section 3 of the Act:-In this view of the matter Dr. C. P. Govila would continue to be the member of the Executive Committee till the expiry of his term as per section 9 of the Act. ( 12 ). Clause (e) of section 3 of the Act provides for nomination of one member to represent each State and that nomination is done by the Government of that State from amongst persons registered either in a medical register or a dental register of the State. ( 12 ). Clause (e) of section 3 of the Act provides for nomination of one member to represent each State and that nomination is done by the Government of that State from amongst persons registered either in a medical register or a dental register of the State. It is not disputed that as respect the States of Manipur, Tripura and Nagaland no medical register or dental register is maintained. It was submitted that the three persons, namely, Dr. Y. Iboyaima Singh, Dr. Utpal Bhattacharjee, and Dr. T. Murry, who have been nominated as members of the Dental Council in terms of clause (e) of section 3 aforesaid respectively from the States of Manipur, Tripura and Nagaland, could not remain on the Dental Council and their names, therefore, will have to be deleted in view of communication dated 8 May 1995 of the Central Government. Since these three persons are not before us we will pass no order and it will be upto the Dental Council to act on the aforesaid communication of the Central Government. It was, however, stated before us that their names had already been deleted. ( 13 ). Under regulation 3 (1) of the Regualtions, meetings of the Dental Council are ordinarily to be held at New Delhi or at a place decided by the Council when it is in session and if the Council fails to decide during its session then by the Executive Committee. This is a statutory duty imposed upon the Dental Council and it cannot abdicate its function and authorise either the president or any other person to fix the venue or the date of the next meeting of the Dental council. Mr. Maninder Sing^, learned counsel for Dental Council of India, said that it had been the consistent practice of the Dental Council, and this he said with reference to various minutes of earlier meetings of the Dental Council that decision to select the places and the dates for the Dental Council meetings had invariably been left to the President. That would appear to be so, but any practice continuous it may be, cannot be held to be legal in the face of the statutory provisions. That would appear to be so, but any practice continuous it may be, cannot be held to be legal in the face of the statutory provisions. In any case the Dental Council meeting cannot now be hald at Bengalore on the dates fixed in view of our holding that 12 members aforementioned do not cease to be the members of the Dental Council and notices of the meeting were not issued to them and now notices will also have to go to them. ( 14 ). Under the Regulations (28 to 31) relating to the meeting of the Dental Council the minutes of the meeting of the Dental Council after confirmation are to be authenticated by the President. The minutes of the meeting of 13/14 December 1994 were to be submitted to the President within ten days of the meeting and attested by him and these had to be sent to each member within 30 days of the meeting. This was not done and the minutes were circulated to members only in March 1995. Two members raised objections to these minutes and that was on 17/ 18 April 1995 which was within 30 days of the despatch of the minutes by the Secretary of the Dental council. Their objections were two fold : (1) the Acting President was not authorised to decide on urgent matters and that he was authorised only to take decision on legal matters; and (2) that the Acting President was not authorised to decide the venue of the next meeting of the Dental Council. The Regulations require that if there is any objection regarding the correctness of the minutes then objections together with the minutes as recorded and attested are to be placed before the next meeting of the Dental Council for confirmation which would decide the correctness of the records of the meeting. Mr. Maninder Singh said that the objections raised by the two members were not true. Whatever may be the worth of the objections these had to be considered in the meeting of the Dental Council and only then the minutes of the meeting of 13/14 December 1994 could be confirmed. It was then submitted that meeting of the Dental Council had to be called in any case to consider these objections and that the Acting Pesident was right in calling for the meeting of the Dental Council. It was then submitted that meeting of the Dental Council had to be called in any case to consider these objections and that the Acting Pesident was right in calling for the meeting of the Dental Council. The objection is not to the calling of the meeting by the Acting President but his choosing the venue. If the meeting of the Dental Council is held at Bangalore in terms of the draft minutes, the objection to the correctness of that part of the minutes would have become infructuous. That could never be the intention of the regulations relating to the minutes of the Dental Council. In support of his submission that the meeting of the Dental Council of 13/14 December 1994 did authorise him to decide the venue and the date of the next meeting of the Council, the third respondent filed his own affidavit and that of two other dentists Dr. B. P. Singh and Dr. R. P. Singh. This would certainly be a contentious matter as to whether the Acting President was so authorised or not and that has to be decided in the next meeting of the Dental council. An application (C. M. No. 5230/95) has been by the first petitioner for taking action against Dr. R. P. Singh in having filed his affidavit as it is stated that Dr. R. P. Singh did not attend the meeting of the Dental Council on 14 December 1994 when he said decision was taken to authorise the Acting President to decide the venue and date of the next meeting. We do not think we should enter into this controversy. Dr. R. P. Singh appeared before us and said that he was present in the meeting of 14 December 1994 itself and that his affidavit was not false as alleged by the first petitioner. We do not find any merit in the application (C. M. No. 5230/95) and would reject the same. ( 15 ). We would, therefore, hold that the Acting President, the third respondent, could not fix the venue for the next meeting of the Dental Council of India at Bangalore unless the minutes of the meeting of 13/14 December 1994 authorising him to decide the venue were confirmed after deciding its correctness in view of the objections raised by two of its members. ( 16 ). As noted above, the Dental Council is a statutory body. ( 16 ). As noted above, the Dental Council is a statutory body. Could it be said that any member either nominated or elected has to be duly notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette and till that is done it cannot be said that any member has been so elected or nominated? A procedure is prescribed under the Dental Council (Election) Regulations which we have mentioned above. If we refer to regulation 19 of these Regulations which fall in Chapter II relating to elections to the Dental Council under clause (a) of section 3 the publication of the result in the Official Gazette is provided therein. So far regulation 19 is concerned, the same relates to election of members by the Council under clause (a) of section 3 which relates to a registered dentist possessing a recognised dental qualification elected by the dentists registered in Part A of each State Register. In such election publication of the result in the Official Gazette has been provided for. Similar provision has, however, not been enacted with regard to election/selection in respect of clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) of section 3. Our attention has been drawn to a document wherein the Central Government has taken a stand that in such cases also a Gazette notification has to be issued and that even if such Gazette notification is not issued, members so nominated may be allowed to attend the meeting. In the absence of any specific regulation provided for in the Regulations unlike in a case of clause (a) requiring such publication of the results of nomination and/or election under clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e), we cannot hold that there is a statutory requirement for publication of Gazette notification notifying such nomination and that till such notification is published, the nomination shall not take effect and the nominated members in law do not become members of the Council, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In our opinion, to hold that in such cases of nomination also publication of Gazette notification is mandatory before they could be considered as members would amount to adding provisions in the Regulations by us which we are not competent to do. In our opinion, to hold that in such cases of nomination also publication of Gazette notification is mandatory before they could be considered as members would amount to adding provisions in the Regulations by us which we are not competent to do. Besides, to deprive such members only, nominated and/or elected as required under the Regulations to act as members of the Council till such notification is published would also amount to depriving them from exercising their right as members of Council without proper authority and sanction of law. We, therefore, hold that no Gazette notification is necessary under the Regulations for a person nominated/elected under the provisions of clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) of section 3 and that they could act as members immediately on their nomination/election. In the light of the aforesaid view that we have taken the members who have been nominated under clauses (c), (d) and (e) of section 3 of the Act would continue to be members of the Council even if in their case no notification is issued by the Central Government and published in the Gazette. In our view, in such cases a notification by the Council shall be sufficient. ( 17 ). As regards other issues raised by the petitioners that the Acting President Sandeep Tak VS. All India Institute of Medical Sciences 1079 could not constitute a sub-committee and could not take decision even on urgent matters, we will not like to enter into that controversy at this stage. It was submitted before us by Mr. Maninder Singh that sub-committees were constituted in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court. We will, however, hope that the Acting President will avoid taking decisions on the matters which could await till the next meeting of the Dental Council. ( 18 ). Accordingly, we will allow these petitions. The decision of the Acting President, the third respondent, to hold the meeting of the Dental Council at Bangalore is set aside. Dr. Pradip Jayna and others, whose names have been mentioned above, shall continue to be the members of the Dental Council of India till their successors are nominated or so elected and Dr. C. P. Govila, a member of the Executive Committee as well till expiry of his term under section 9 of the Dentists Act, 1948. Dr. Pradip Jayna and others, whose names have been mentioned above, shall continue to be the members of the Dental Council of India till their successors are nominated or so elected and Dr. C. P. Govila, a member of the Executive Committee as well till expiry of his term under section 9 of the Dentists Act, 1948. A direction is issued to the Acting President to hold the meeting of the Dental Council of India at Delhi without any loss of time and after giving 40 days notice as required under Regulation 5 of the Regulations. Petitions are allowed in these terms. There will be no order as to costs. Rule is made absolute.