Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 445 (JK)

Waqar Ahmad Wani v. Union of India

2014-10-31

HASNAIN MASSODI

body2014
JUDGMENT : Hasnain Massodi, J.:- 1. Petitioner passed 10+2 examination from Jammu & Kashmir Board of School Education in the year 1996. He was in 2001, granted admission in de’ Montmorency College of Dentistry University of Health Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan in Bachelor of Dental Surgery (B.D.S. for short) Course under Admission of Foreign Students (Replacement) under Pakistan Technical Assistance Programme-Session (2000-2001). Petitioner completed his BDS Course in the year 2007 and was granted B.D.S. Degree by University of Health Sciences, Lahore on 2.6.2008. Petitioner approached Dental Council of India for permanent registration on 16.7.2009. He was vide communication dated 11.9.2009 informed that his request for Permanent Registration was not acceptable on the ground that in terms of Dental Council of India (in short D.C.I.) Screening Test Regulations 2009, he was to qualify Screening Test Examination to get registered with the Dental Council of India. 2. Petitioner through medium of instant petition seeks quashment of communications Nos. DE-109-2013/6780 dated 21.08.2013 and No. DE-147B(106)2013/8071 dated 16.09.2013 whereby his request for permanent registration has been disposed of with the suggestion to appear in D.C.I. Screening Test Examination. He further seeks a writ of mandamus commanding D.C.I. to register him without insisting on his qualifying D.C.I. Screening Test Examination as also an interim direction enabling him to compete in selection process initiated by the State Government to fill up vacancies of Dental Surgeons in Health Department of State Government. 3. Petitioner’s case is that he through e-mail dated 18.02.2008 requested D.C.I. for his permanent registration and that on consideration of his request the Executive Committee of D.C.I. in its meeting held on 31.08.2008 taking into account the recommendation made by the Sub Committee on 06.08.2008 decided to register the petitioner and asked him to submit his documents. Petitioner in this regard places reliance on communication (e-mail) No. DE-34 (78) - 2008 (Annexure-G to the petition). It is pleaded that once the Executive Committee decided to register the petitioner and only a few formalities were to be completed, it cannot turn around and deny registration on the ground that the petitioner has to qualify D.C.I. Screening Test Examination. Petitioner in this regard places reliance on communication (e-mail) No. DE-34 (78) - 2008 (Annexure-G to the petition). It is pleaded that once the Executive Committee decided to register the petitioner and only a few formalities were to be completed, it cannot turn around and deny registration on the ground that the petitioner has to qualify D.C.I. Screening Test Examination. Petitioner maintains that after vide e-mail reply No. 34(78) - 2008 petitioner was asked to submit proof of being an Indian citizen and a certificate from Indian Commission in Islamabad indicating that he was in Pakistan throughout duration of course, it was not open to respondents to deny him permanent registration. Petitioner’s case is that D.C.I. Screening Test Regulation 2009 dated 13.08.2009 were not attracted in his case in as much as petitioner completed B.D.S. course much before the Regulations came into force and approached D.C.I. for registration on 18.02.2008 i.e., about eight months prior to notification of D.C.I. Regulations 2009. 4. Respondents in their reply admit that petitioner completed B.D.S. from de’ Montmorency College of Dentistry University of Health Sciences Lahore, Pakistan in 2007 and received B.D.S. Degree on 02.06.2008. They however, maintain that as the B.D.S. degree obtained by the petitioner is not recognised by D.C.I. he has to qualify Screening Test Examination in terms of Regulation 4, D.C.I. Screening Test Regulations 2009. Respondents in this behalf seek to draw support from proviso to Regulation 4, D.C.I. Screening Test Regulation. It is pleaded that petitioner on 11.07.2013 applied for the Screening Test Examination to be held in September-October 2013 in prescribed format and deposited fee, and subsequently on 29.07.2013 requested for exemption from the Screening Test Examination. It is further pleaded that the petitioner was informed vide letter dated 7.10.2013 that his case was considered in meeting of D.C.I. Executive Committee held on 4.10.2013 and rejected. It is stated that petitioner instead of taking the test, addressed letter dated 19.11.2013 wherein he reiterated his request for registration without undergoing qualifying test. 5. It is pleaded that the D.C.I. even in its communication dated 11.09.2009 addressed in connection with recognition of petitioner’s degree, informed the petitioner that D.C.I. Screening Test Regulations 2009 where in offing and petitioner was required to qualify the Screening Test. Petitioner is said to have deposited Rs. 50,000/- fee and Rs. 5. It is pleaded that the D.C.I. even in its communication dated 11.09.2009 addressed in connection with recognition of petitioner’s degree, informed the petitioner that D.C.I. Screening Test Regulations 2009 where in offing and petitioner was required to qualify the Screening Test. Petitioner is said to have deposited Rs. 50,000/- fee and Rs. 1000/- as cost of the application Form, where after his application was processed and petitioner informed accordingly. Respondents insist that petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the case law on the subject reproduced in their reply, does not deserves any indulgence and the writ petition deserve to be dismissed. 6. I have gone though the pleadings and record available on the file. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. There is no disagreement between the parties that a candidate with B.D.S. Degree to his credit from a Dental College, not recognized by Dental Council of India (D.C.I.) Regulations is to appear in Screening Test Examination to get registered with Dental Council of India. It is also not in dispute that B.D.S. Degree to petitioner’s credit from de’ Montmorency College of Dentistry University of Health Sciences Lahore, Pakistan is not recognized by Dental Council of India. Petitioner claims a right to get registered with Dental Council of India without appearing in Screening Test Examination in question, firstly on the ground that he earned B.D.S. Degree much before Dental Council Regulations, 2009 came into force. He next basis claim on the decision said to have been taken by Dental Council of India on the recognition of its Executive Committee to accord registration to him without undergoing the test. Neither of the grounds urged is of any helpful to the petitioner. 8. Though the petitioner obtained B.D.S. Degree on 2nd June, 2008 and the Dental Council of India’s Screening Test Examination came into force in 2009, yet the date of getting the degree is of no relevance in the present controversy. The crucial date is the date when consideration is accorded by Dental Council of India to the registration of B.D.S. degree holder. In the present case such consideration was accorded much after the Dental Council of India’s Regulations, 2009 came into force. 9. The crucial date is the date when consideration is accorded by Dental Council of India to the registration of B.D.S. degree holder. In the present case such consideration was accorded much after the Dental Council of India’s Regulations, 2009 came into force. 9. Viewed thus petitioner cannot insist on non-applicability of aforementioned Regulations to his case on the ground that he got B.D.S. degree in 2008, i.e., before the Regulations came into force. 10. The plea that communication No. DE 34(78)-2008 is to be taken to have clinched the issue of petitioner’s registration with Dental Council of India and that the Council cannot reopen the issue is equally meritless. Even if, it is accepted, that the Executive Committee, Dental Council of India recommended petitioners registration that he was asked to submit some documents to take process to its logical end, still the process undertaken would be of no consequence in absence of a formal registration order. It is nobody’s case that the process if any, initiated with petitioner’s e-mail communication dated 18.02.2008, culminated in his registration with Dental Council of India. In the said background Dental Council of India cannot be said to have reopened a concluded issue by informing petitioner vide communication, impugned in the petition, that he was required to appear in Examination Test in terms of Dental Council of India’s Regulations, 2009. 11. The above discussion apart, petitioner on receipt of the communication in question, appears to have realized that to get registration with Dental Council of India he was to appear in the aforementioned Examination Test. He accordingly deposited examination fee of Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 1000/- as cost of application Form with the respondent Council. He without availing opportunity resorted litigation over his so-called right to get registration with DCI without complying with requirements of DCI’s Examination Test. The right course for the petitioner was to appear in the Examination Test and justify his registration with DCI. In any case, a candidate with B.D.S. degree to his credit is not expected to avoid taking a Test that is designed to assess whether he is competent to enter a profession of utmost importance for health of general public. Even a candidate who can genuinely seek exemption from Test would not be put to any harm or inconvenience, by appearing in the Test. 12. For the reasons discussed, I don’t find any merit in the petition. Even a candidate who can genuinely seek exemption from Test would not be put to any harm or inconvenience, by appearing in the Test. 12. For the reasons discussed, I don’t find any merit in the petition. Petition is accordingly dismissed along with connected CMP. Interim direction, if any, shall also stand vacated.