Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 985 (PAT)

Dental College & Hospital v. State Of Bihar

2000-08-10

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2000
Judgment 1. Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. The case is being disposed of at this stage. 3. This application has been preferred by petitionerDental College and Hospital, Rambag, Purnia for direction on the Respondents to hold inspection of the College and Hospital and thereby to grant recognition of the Institution, as required under Dentist Act, 1948. 4. The claim of the petitioner is that the College, in question, was established prior to 1st June, 1992 and thereby the provision of Amended Act, 1993 is not applicable. 5. Grievance has been made that the Union of India while taken up the matter, issued the impugned letter dated 21st October, 1997, without taking into consideration the fact that the Institution was established prior to 1st June, 1992 and thereby, there was no necessity to obtain any Essentiality Certificate issued by the State Government. 6. The Dental Council of India has appeared and filed counter affidavit. They have mainly relied on the objection raised by the Union of India, vide letter dated 21st October, 1997. According to the counsel for the D.C.I., the question of inspection does not arise-till the matter is referred by the Union of India to the D.C.I. 7. From the impugned letter dated 21st October, 1997, I find that certain more information has been sought for by the Union of India from the College authorities and they have asked to do certain formalities, like registration of land in the name of Trust on ownership basis, etc. 8. However, according to the counsel for the petitioner, infirmities whatever were shown have now been rectified, except Essentiality Certificate by the State, which is not required to be filed in the present case. 9. In the facts and circumstances, I remit the matter to the Union of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Department of Health), New Delhi with liberty to petitioner to file representation before the competent authority along with a copy of this order. They will give the specific month/date on which the College was established and may enclose relevant evidence in their support to show that the College was established prior to 1st June, 1992, including the letter of B.N.Mandal University, Madhepura dated 29th June, 1992 and letter of Health Department, State of Bihar bearing No. 348(26) dt. 15th September, 1999. 10. They will give the specific month/date on which the College was established and may enclose relevant evidence in their support to show that the College was established prior to 1st June, 1992, including the letter of B.N.Mandal University, Madhepura dated 29th June, 1992 and letter of Health Department, State of Bihar bearing No. 348(26) dt. 15th September, 1999. 10. They will also make it clear as to whether they have rectified all the infirmities, as mentioned at clauses (3) to (10) of the letter dated 21st October, 1997 or not. 11. On receipt of such representation, the competent authority of Govt, of India, Department of Health will decide the question as to whether the Institution, in question, was established prior to 1st June, 1992 or not. 12. If the decision goes in favour of petitioner and held that it was established prior to 1st June, 1992, they will act in terms with the original Dentist Act, 1948 and will not ask for Essentiality Certificate, as sought for at clause (i) of the letter dated 21st October, 1997 and refer the matter to the D.C.I. for necessary inspection and report. 13. On the other hand, if it is held that the College was established after 1st June, 1992, they will give reason for the same and ask the petitioner to fulfil the conditions in terms with Amended Act, 1993 by depositing the Essentiality Certificate of the State Govt. and the University affiliation. 14. A decision, in this respect, be taken and communicated to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. 15. However, if adverse decision is communicated, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the same before appropriate forum/court of competent jurisdiction. 16. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.