ORDER : H.G. Ramesh, J. 1. In these writ petitions presented on 29th June 2015, the petitioners (two colleges & nine students) are challenging disapproval of admissions of nine students to the B.D.S. course (commencing from 2014-2015) by Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences ('the University'). The University has disapproved the admissions on the ground that the colleges had not furnished rankings (rank cards) of the nine students in competitive entrance examination. The impugned communications of the University are dtd. 17.03.2015 and 23.02.2015. 2. Sri Madhusudan R. Naik, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, it is not necessary for the students to obtain a rank in competitive entrance examination for admission to a Dental College in Karnataka against the 'unfilled seats' as per para E (viii) of the Consensual Agreement dtd. 22.03.2014 at Annexure-B entered into between Government of Karnataka and Private Medical & Dental Colleges in Karnataka for the academic year 2014-15. In support of his contention, he relied on three judgments of this Court which are produced as annexures to the writ petitions. The first one is a judgment dtd. 03.04.2014 rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. Nos.51937-51938/2013 and the other two are Division Bench judgments of this Court, both dtd. 21.11.2014, rendered in W.P. Nos. 105751-105771/2014 and in W.P. Nos. 105772-105833/2014. Learned Senior Counsel also referred to the judgments of the Supreme Court in P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra [ (2005) 6 SCC 537 ] and in Rajan Purohit v. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences [ (2012) 10 SCC 770 ]. 3. On the contrary, Sri N.K. Ramesh, learned Counsel appearing for the University submitted that, as the nine students have not fulfilled the criteria laid down in Regulation II of the Dental Council of India Revised BDS Course Regulations, 2007 ('the Regulations') for selection to the BDS course, their admission to the BDS Course is rightly disapproved by the University. He placed reliance on a judgment dtd. 2.9.2014 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos. 203221 & 203289-203309/2014, wherein this Court has upheld the decision of the University disapproving the admissions on the ground that rankings of the students in competitive entrance examination were not furnished. He placed reliance on a judgment dtd. 2.9.2014 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos. 203221 & 203289-203309/2014, wherein this Court has upheld the decision of the University disapproving the admissions on the ground that rankings of the students in competitive entrance examination were not furnished. He also relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh [ 2012 (7) SCC 433 ] and specifically referred to para 46 thereof. He submitted that the three judgments of this Court relied on by the learned Senior Counsel were rendered on the facts of those cases and no law is laid down in the said cases. 4. In view of the above rival contentions, the question that requires determination in these writ petitions is as to whether the petitioner-Dental Colleges were justified in law in admitting the nine students without their obtaining any rank in competitive entrance examination. To put in other words, whether a student must obtain a rank in competitive entrance examination to apply for admission to BDS course in any Dental College in Karnataka? 5. To examine the above question, it is necessary to extract Regulation II of the Dental Council of India Revised BDS Course Regulations, 2007 which reads as follows: "II. SELECTION OF STUDENTS : The selection of students to dental college shall be based solely on merit of the candidate and for determining merit, the following criteria shall be adopted uniformly throughout the country: 1. In states having only one Dental College and one university board/examining body conducting the qualifying examination, the marks obtained at such qualifying examination may be taken into consideration; 2. In states, having more than one university/board/examining body conducting the qualifying examination (or where there are more than one dental college under the administrative control of one authority), a competitive entrance examination should be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation as there may be variation of standards at qualifying examinations conducted by different agencies; 3. Where there are more than one college in a state and only one university/board conducting the qualifying examination, then a joint selection board be constituted for all the colleges; 4. A competitive entrance examination is absolutely necessary in the cases of institutions of All India character; 5. Where there are more than one college in a state and only one university/board conducting the qualifying examination, then a joint selection board be constituted for all the colleges; 4. A competitive entrance examination is absolutely necessary in the cases of institutions of All India character; 5. Procedure for selection to B.D.S course shall be as follows:-- i. In case of admission on the basis of qualifying examination under clause (1) based on merit, candidate for admission to BDS course must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology & English individually and must have obtained a minimum of 50% marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology at the qualifying examination. In respect of candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes or Other Backward Classes, the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry and Biology taken together in qualifying examination be 40% instead of 50% as above and must have passing marks in English. ii. In case of admission on the basis of competitive entrance examination under clause (2) to (4) of this regulation, a candidate must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English individually and must have obtained a minimum of 50% marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the qualifying examination and in addition must have come in the merit list prepared as a result of such competitive entrance examination by securing not less than 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology taken together in the competitive examination. In respect of candidates belonging of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes or any other categories notified by the Government the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry and Biology taken together in qualifying examination and competitive entrance examination be 40% instead of 50 % as stated above: Provided that a candidate who has appeared in the qualifying examination the result of which has not been declared, he may be provisionally permitted to take up the competitive entrance examination and in case of selection for admission to the BDS course, he shall not be admitted to that course until he fulfils the eligibility criteria as per above regulations." (Emphasis supplied) 6. As per Regulation II(5)(ii) extracted above, no Dental college governed by clause (2) or clause (3) or clause (4) of Regulation II shall admit a student without his/her obtaining a rank in competitive entrance examination. As per Regulation II(5)(ii) extracted above, no Dental college governed by clause (2) or clause (3) or clause (4) of Regulation II shall admit a student without his/her obtaining a rank in competitive entrance examination. Clause (2) of Regulation II applies to Dental colleges in Karnataka as there is more than one body in Karnataka conducting the qualifying examination namely, Department of Pre-University Education, Central Board of Secondary Education, Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations etc. Hence, a rank in competitive entrance examination is a condition precedent to apply for admission to BDS course in any Dental College in Karnataka. 7. It is also relevant to extract para 46 of the judgment in Priya Gupta's case [(2012) 7 SCC 733] wherein certain directions in rem have been issued by the Supreme Court in the matter of selection of students for admission to Dental and Medical courses: "46. Keeping in view the contemptuous conduct of the relevant stakeholders, their cannonade on the rule of merit compels us to state, with precision and simplistically, the action that is necessary to ameliorate the process of selection. Thus, we issue the following directions in rem for their strict compliance, without demur and default, by all concerned: 46.1. The commencement of new courses or increases in seats of existing courses of MBBS/BDS are to be approved/recognised by the Government of India by 15th July of each calendar year for the relevant academic sessions of that year. 46.2. The Medical Council of India shall, immediately thereafter, issue appropriate directions and ensure the implementation and commencement of admission process within one week thereafter. 46.3. After 15th July of each year, neither the Union of India nor the Medical or Dental Council of India shall issue any recognition or approval for the current academic year. If any such approval is granted after 15th July of any year, it shall only be operative for the next academic year and not in the current academic year. Once the sanction/approval is granted on or before 15th July of the relevant year, the name of that college and all seats shall be included in both the first and the second counseling, in accordance with the Rules. 46.4. Once the sanction/approval is granted on or before 15th July of the relevant year, the name of that college and all seats shall be included in both the first and the second counseling, in accordance with the Rules. 46.4. Any medical or dental college, or seats thereof, to which the recognition/approval is issued subsequent to 15th July of the respective year shall not be included in the counseling to be conducted by the authority concerned and that college would have no right to make admissions in the current academic year against such seats. 46.5. The admission to the medical or dental colleges shall be granted only through the respective entrance tests conducted by the competitive authority in the State or the body of the private colleges. These two are the methods of selection and grant of admission to these courses. However, where there is a single Board conducting the State examination and there is a single medical college, then in terms of Clause 5.1 of the Medical Council of India Eligibility Certificate Regulations, 2002 the admission can be given on the basis of 10+2 exam marks, strictly in order of merit. 46.6. All admissions through any of the stated selection processes have to be effected only after due publicity and in consonance with the directions issued by this Court. We vehemently deprecate the practice of giving admissions on 30th September of the academic year. In fact, that is the date by which, in exceptional circumstances, a candidate duly selected as per the prescribed selection process is to join the academic course of MBBS/BDS. Under the directions of this Court, second counseling should be the final counseling, as this Court has already held in the Neelu Arora v. Union of India and third counseling is not contemplated or permitted under the entire process of selection/grant of admission to these professional courses. 46.7. If any seats remain vacant or are surrendered from all-India quota, they should positively be allotted and admission granted strictly as per the merit by 15th September of the relevant year and not by holding an extended counselling. The remaining time will be limited to the filling up of the vacant seats resulting from exceptional circumstances or surrender of seats. All candidates should join the academic courses by 30th September of the academic year. 46.8. The remaining time will be limited to the filling up of the vacant seats resulting from exceptional circumstances or surrender of seats. All candidates should join the academic courses by 30th September of the academic year. 46.8. No college may grant admissions without duly advertising the vacancies available and by publicising the same through the internet, newspaper, on the notice board of the respective feeder schools and colleges, etc. Every effort has to be made by all concerned to ensure that the admissions are given on merit and after due publicity and not in a manner which is ex facie arbitrary and casts the shadow of favouritism. 46.9. The admissions to all government colleges have to be on merit obtained in the entrance examination conducted by the nominated authority, while in the case of private colleges, the colleges should choose their option by 30th April of the relevant year, as to whether they wish to grant admission on the basis of the merit obtained in the test conducted by the nominated State authority or they wish to follow the merit list/rank obtained by the candidates in the competitive examination collectively held by the nominated agency for the private colleges. The option exercised by 30th April shall not be subject to change. This choice should also be given by the colleges which are anticipating grant of recognition, in compliance with the date specified in these directions." (Emphasis supplied) 8. The Supreme Court in Priya Gupta at para 46.5 states that admission to Medical or Dental colleges shall be granted only through respective entrance tests conducted by the competent authority in the State or the body of private colleges. The second part in para 46.5 does not apply to Karnataka as there is more than one body in Karnataka conducting the qualifying examination. Paras 46.7 & 46.8 of Priya Gupta deal with filling of vacant seats, wherein it is stated that admissions to such seats shall also be based on merit. Para 47.6 says that unfilled seats from all quotas shall be filled on the basis of merit obtained in competitive entrance test. In Karnataka, entrance test conducted by the State is called 'CET' and the entrance test conducted by the body of private colleges is called 'COMEDK'. 9. Para 47.6 says that unfilled seats from all quotas shall be filled on the basis of merit obtained in competitive entrance test. In Karnataka, entrance test conducted by the State is called 'CET' and the entrance test conducted by the body of private colleges is called 'COMEDK'. 9. The petitioner-Colleges are bound by the Regulations, and the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta's case, and therefore the Consensual Agreement dtd. 22.03.2014 at Annexure-B cannot override the criteria laid down in the Regulations for selection of students to Dental course (BDS) or the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta's case. I am of opinion that in view of Regulation II extracted above, and the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta's case, the petitioner-colleges should not have admitted the nine students without their rankings in competitive entrance examination. 10. Now, let me refer to the three judgments of this Court cited by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in support of the writ petitions. Two of the said judgments were rendered by a Division Bench. The Division Bench, in both the judgments, after referring to the judgment of the learned single Judge in Miss Srinija Dasari, which is also relied on by the learned Senior Counsel, has clarified that the order was applicable only to the petitioner-colleges therein for the academic year 2013-14. More importantly, the effect of Regulation II of the Regulations extracted above has not been considered in any of the aforesaid three judgments cited by the learned Senior Counsel. In my opinion, the three judgments of this Court relied on by the learned Senior Counsel were rendered on the facts of those cases relating to the academic year referred to therein and cannot be construed as having laid down the law for selection of students to BDS course. The law relating to selection of students for admission to Dental and Medical courses is laid down by the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta's case which is extracted above. 11. In my opinion, the University is right in disapproving admissions of the nine students on the ground that their rankings in competitive entrance examination were not furnished. The law relating to selection of students for admission to Dental and Medical courses is laid down by the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta's case which is extracted above. 11. In my opinion, the University is right in disapproving admissions of the nine students on the ground that their rankings in competitive entrance examination were not furnished. As stated above, clause (2) of Regulation II is applicable to Dental colleges in Karnataka, and therefore, a ranking in competitive entrance examination is a must as per Regulation II(5)(ii) for admission to Dental course (BDS) in Karnataka. In other words, a rank in competitive entrance examination is a condition precedent to apply for admission to BDS course in any Dental college in Karnataka. 12. In view of the above, the writ petitions are devoid of merit and are accordingly dismissed. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the University communicated its decision belatedly i.e. during February and March 2015, by which time, the nine students had almost completed I year of the B.D.S. Course, while, as per the Regulations, the University should have communicated its decision before 31st December, 2014. This submission will not advance the case of the petitioners as the petitioner-colleges should not have admitted the students contrary to the Regulation extracted above. At any rate, this can't be a ground to direct approval of the clearly illegal admissions made by the petitioner-colleges in violation of the Revised BDS Course Regulations, 2007 and the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Priya Gupta's case. Petitions dismissed.