JUDGMENT S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA, J. :- As in both the writ petitions, common order contained in letter dated 8.4.1997 is under challenge and common prayer for recognition/affiliation of Buddhist Mission Dental College and Hospital, Patna (College for short) has been made, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. While writ petition C.W.J.C. no. 2298/97 has been preferred by Vishwa Buddhist Parishad alongwith the college, the other writ petition C.W.J.C. no. 4491/97 has been preferred by the students of the college. 3. According to the petitioners, the college was established by petitioner no. 1, Vishwa Buddhist Parish ad (Buddhist Parishad for short) in the year 1989. On such establishment, it sought for recognition/affiliation from respondent-Dental Council of India (Dental Council for short) by letter dated 28.7.89. After certain correspondences, the Dental Council by their letter dated 21.8.1989 intimated the Buddhist Parishad that no Dental College can be permitted to establish without permission or NOC of the concerned State Government and affiliation or NOC of the concerned University. The petitioner-Buddhist Parish ad then requested to grant such permission, irrespective of recognition/affiliation/NOC of the concerned State Government/University. They referred a decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Dental College and Institute of Technology at Pondicherry being C.W.J.C. no. 589/91, disposed of on 12.3.91, in this respect. The Buddhist Parishad by letter dated 12.11.92 requested the Dental Council to communicate programme for inspection of the college. In the meantime, the respondents me out with Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993 giving effect from August 17, 1992. By the said amended Act, while certain conditions were further laid down for Dental Institutions to be established after 1.6.1992, such conditions were not laid down with respect to the institutions established prior to 1.6.1992. The petitioner-Dental College earlier moved before this Court in C.W.J.C. no. 7766/93 with similar prayer to take steps for grant of recognition/affiliation to the Dental Council. In the said case, this court relying on decisions in the case of Sarju Dental College (1993 (2) P.L.J.R. 610) and (1993 (2) P.L.J.R. 641) as also the case of Dr. S.M. Naqui Emam Dental College (1994(1) P.L.J.R. 626), held that unless proper inspection of the institution is made by the Dental Council as also approval of the Central Government is granted, no Dental College can be granted recognition/affiliation by the appropriate authorities. S.M. Naqui Emam Dental College (1994(1) P.L.J.R. 626), held that unless proper inspection of the institution is made by the Dental Council as also approval of the Central Government is granted, no Dental College can be granted recognition/affiliation by the appropriate authorities. Said writ petition of petitioner-Dental College was disposed of on 31.3.95 directing the Dental Council to carry out inspection of the petitioner Institution without further delay. Other respondents were also directed to take appropriate decision in the light of inspection report within a specific period. The petitioner-Dental College was inspected by a team of Dental Council on 17/18th June, 1995 and submitted report on 27th June, 1995 (Annexure-7) with specific finding that the petitioner-Dental College fulfils all the norms prescribed by the Dental Council. However, it pointed out that no formal notification has been issued by the Government to start such College, nor any University has affiliated the college. It further observed that although 66 students have been admitted from the session 1991-92, none of them have appeared for first B.D.S. University examination. The Dental Council thereafter asked the Principal of the College to remit a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as inspection fee, which was paid by the petitioner by Demand Draft in July, 1995 along with letter dated 28.7.95. However, the Dental Council kept the matter pending on the ground that the case of the petitioner was sub-judice before the High Court, though there was no such case pending. The petitioner College brought to the notice of the Dental Council that no case was pending in any Court and to take a decision and to communicate the same. Thereafter they received a letter from Government of India dated 1.9.96. By the said letter, the Government of India ordered to issue a letter of intent to the petitioner-Buddhist Parish ad under Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993 to start the B.D.S. course (with 40 admission) from 1995-96 session subject to fulfilment of certain conditions mentioned therein, including permission of State Government and affiliation of the concerned University. It appears that the petitioner-Buddhist Parishad and the Dental College thereafter took necessary step in terms with the letter dated 1.3.1996 and requested the State of Bihar to grant necessary permission by its letter dated 14.3.1996 followed by reminder. It appears that the petitioner-Buddhist Parishad and the Dental College thereafter took necessary step in terms with the letter dated 1.3.1996 and requested the State of Bihar to grant necessary permission by its letter dated 14.3.1996 followed by reminder. The Vice-Chancellor of Magadh University was also approached by the petitioner on 14.3.1996 to expedite the matter relating to grant of affiliation so that the students may appear in the ensuing examination. The Chancellor's decision was also communicated on 22.5.1996, by which the Magadh University was asked to take necessary step to grant affiliation to the petitioner's Dental College. The Inspector of the College of Magadh University by letter dated 6.8.1996 asked the petitioner to obtain the permission of the State Government first. In the meantime, the Dental Council by letter dated 3.6.1996 intimated the Government of India that the College authorities are liable to deposit a sum of Rs. 2 lacs as application fees to the Dental Council. Subsequently, by letter dated 11.7.96, the Government of India asked the petitioner-Buddhist Parishad to deposit certificate from the State Government, affiliation from the concerned University and performance Bank guarantee for Rs. 75 lacs. It was reiterated by Government of India's letter dated 30.10.96. 4. The grievance of the Petitioner Buddhist Parishad and Dental College are of two fold. According to them, they are not liable to be guided by Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993, the College having established in the year 1989, prior to 1.6.92 and thus the prior affiliation by concerned University, prior permission of the State Government and deposition of two lacs application fee and Bank guarantee of Rs. 75 lacs are not applicable in their case. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the action was discriminatory as petitioner's institution has been treated in different manner than the other institution, including Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Institute. 5. From the counter-affidavits filed in one or other case, the stand taken by the respondents can be summarised as follows: According to the Dental Council, the petitioner's Dental College having not granted permission from the State Government and affiliation from the University cannot be treated to be an institution established prior to 1.6.1992. Therefore, in their case, Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993 is applicable and not the earlier provision. 6. The stand of the respondent-State of Bihar is similar. Therefore, in their case, Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993 is applicable and not the earlier provision. 6. The stand of the respondent-State of Bihar is similar. Giving reference to Clause-3 of the Establishment of New Dental College Regulation, 1993 stated that the grant of certificate of the State Government is essential. Reference of Bihar Medical Institution (Control and Regulation) Act, 1981 (Act 23 of 1982) was also made and it was submitted that no Medical Institution can be opened in the State of Bihar without permission of the State Government. According to the counsel for the Magadh University, under the provision of Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 they can grant affiliation to any institution only when State Government grant permission for the same. 7. From the pleading made by the parties, while one of the question to be determined is whether the institution in question was established prior to 1.6.92, the other question to be determined is whether permission to establish an institution by the State of Bihar and affiliation by a University is a per-requisite condition for approval of institution by the Dental Council of India or not. In this context, I will discuss the second question before determining the first question relating to establishment of the institution in question. 8. Admittedly, the Dental Council of India is the regulatory body under the Dentists Act for regulating the profession of Dentists in the country. It has made regulation for the conduct of B.D.S. course by various colleges/institutions. Such regulation provide for physical requirements of a Dental College, maintenance of minimum educational standard for the degree of Bachelor of Dentists, the staffing pattern and the like. This Court in the case of Darbhanga Dental College vs. State of Bihar and others ( 1996 (2) P.L.J.R. 200 ) held that the requirement of recognition of an institution and the University to grant certificates of Dental qualification is mandatory. It further held that the institutions established prior to 1.6.1992 are not guided by Amending Act, 1993. It further held that, even a minority institution required to be recognised by the Dental Council of India under the Dentists Act. It further held that the institutions established prior to 1.6.1992 are not guided by Amending Act, 1993. It further held that, even a minority institution required to be recognised by the Dental Council of India under the Dentists Act. Admittedly, there was no provision made prior to Amending Act, 1993 laying down prerequisite condition of permission/essentiality certificate regarding the desirability and feasibility of proposed Dental College by the respective State Government or the Union Territory administration for the purpose of grant of recognition/permission by the Dental Council of India and Central Government. No such requirement of affiliation by a University for such Dental College was laid down as prerequisite condition for recognition/permission by the Dental Council of India/Central Government. It is only when the New Regulation known as "Establishment of New Dental Colleges Regulations, 1993" framed after Amending Act, 1993, the provision of pre-requisite condition of permission/essentiality certificate regarding the desirability and feasibility from the respective State Government/Union Territory Administration and affiliation by the University concerned was laid own under Regulation 3 of 1993 Regulations. 9. From bare perusal of Regulation 3 of 1993 Regulations aforesaid, it will be evident that the pre-requisite condition of permission by the State Government and affiliation by a University was laid down with respect to 'Proposed Dental College' even the said regulation does not stipulate any such pre-requisite condition with respect to Dental College already 'established'. 10. Almost similar matter fell for consideration before Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Civil Writ no. 589/91 (Annexure-4) relating to one Dr. Alexander Educational Foundation for permitting it to start B.D.S. Course at the premises of Pant Institute of Technology. The said Division Bench of Delhi High Court by its judgment dated 12.3.1991 held that the Dentists Act is promulgated with a view to constitute the Council so that the Dental Council as an Expert body may lay down uniform standard of education throughout the country and recommend dental qualification to be awarded by the institution or the University. The Dental Council only requires to satisfy itself about the educational facilities, in connection with the Dental qualifications. The Government of India is required to grant permission only where the Dental Council of India satisfies itself through the inspection or other-wise regarding the teaching staff, equipment, minimum requirements as laid down by the Council and approved by the Central Government. The Dental Council only requires to satisfy itself about the educational facilities, in connection with the Dental qualifications. The Government of India is required to grant permission only where the Dental Council of India satisfies itself through the inspection or other-wise regarding the teaching staff, equipment, minimum requirements as laid down by the Council and approved by the Central Government. It further held that the Dental Council has nothing to do with the affiliation or prior permission of the State Government. 11. The petitioners have given reference of one B.R. Ambedker Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Patna to show the discrimination made by the Dental Council with the petitioners. The said Ambedkar Institute was established in the year 1991, without any permission from the State Government under Act, 23 of 1982. It deposited the inspection fee with the Magadh University in the year 1992 and intimated the Dental Council regarding the opening of the college in the year 1991. Government of India never made any request to Dental Council to inspect the said Ambedkar Institute. However, taking into note that the Ambedkar Institute was established in the year 1991 that is prior to 1.6.92, it was not asked to comply with any pre-requisite condition of permission by the State Government or affiliation by a University, in terms with 1993 Regulation and recommendation was made by the Dental Council on which Government of India gave clearance for grant of permission by the Dental Council by its letter dated 4.1.1996 with the following terms : "The Central Government has now decided that the said college may be treated as established before 1.6.92 and the permission may be accorded to the college by the Council. The college would now obtain necessary affiliation from the concerned University." 12. From the finding of his Court in the case of Darbhanga Dental College (supra), a Division Bench of Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Alexander Educational Foundation (supra) and the letter of Central Government relating to grant of permission in the case of Dr. Ambedkar Institute, it is clear that the pre-requisite condition of permission by State Government or affiliation by a University is not required for approval/permission of the Government of India/Dental Council of India for a college established. The second question is decided accordingly. Ambedkar Institute, it is clear that the pre-requisite condition of permission by State Government or affiliation by a University is not required for approval/permission of the Government of India/Dental Council of India for a college established. The second question is decided accordingly. So far as the first question relating to establishment of a Dental college is concerned, all the Dental Colleges as guided by Dentists Act do not necessarily fall within the ambit of Bihar Act 23 of 1982. It is for establishment of a medical institution in the State of Bihar the permission of State of Bihar is required under the Act 23 of 1982. Therefore, it is clear that no permission from State Government is required as pre-requisite condition for establishment of a medical institution under the provision of Dentists Act, except for the institutions proposed to be established after 1.6.92, who are guided by Amending Act, 1993. As in the present case of petitioner-Buddhist Parishad, the Buddhist Mission Dental College was established relating to which intimation was given to Dental Council of India replied by letter dated 21.8.89, for the purpose of grant of permission/recognition by the Dental Council/Government of India under the Dentists Act, the college in question is to be treated as an Institution established in the year 1989, that is much prior to 1.6.1992. If the aforesaid fact is not recognised then it will amount to make discrimination with the petitioner's institution as in the similar case of Dr. Ambedkar Institute, it was treated to be an institution established prior to 1.6.92. However, such grant of permission/recognition by the Dental Council/Government of India will not amount to automatic permission to establish the institution by the State Government or affiliation by the University, which is required to be obtained thereafter by the petitioner's institution from the State Government and the Magadh University. 13. However, such grant of permission/recognition by the Dental Council/Government of India will not amount to automatic permission to establish the institution by the State Government or affiliation by the University, which is required to be obtained thereafter by the petitioner's institution from the State Government and the Magadh University. 13. In view of the aforesaid finding the respondents are directed to ignore the letter of Government of India dated 1.3.1996 (Annexure-14); letter of Dental Council of India dated 3.6.1996 (Annexure-20); letter of Government of India dated 11.7.1996 (Annexure24); letter of Government of India dated 30.10.1996 (Annexure-33) with further direction to consider the case of the petitioners for permission/recognition by the Dental Council of India/Government of India in terms with Dentists Act, 1948 without taking into note the Amending Act, 1993, within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The respondent-State of Bihar is also directed to take step relating to grant of permission to the institution in question, in accordance with law taking into note the report made by the Dental Council of India and the decision that may be taken by the Government of India, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of decision. It is needless to say that if the petitioner's institution is granted permission/recognition by the Dental Council of India/Government of India and permission of establishment by the Government of Bihar, the Magadh University will take step for affiliation of the institution in question for which decision is to be communicated within a period of one month from the date of receipt of permission by the State Government. 14. The writ petition C.W.J.C. no. 2298/97 is allowed with the aforementioned observations and directions and the other writ petition C.W.J.C. no. 4491/97 also stands disposed.