Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 813 (MP)

Sir Aurobindo College Dentistry v. Union of India

2016-09-14

D.K.PALIWAL, P.K.JAISWAL

body2016
ORDER Jaiswal, J. -- 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashment of the impugned orders/communications dated 14.8.2014 (Annexure P-1), 9.12.2014 (Annexure P-2) and show cause notice dated 12.10.2015 (Annexure P-3), issued by the respondent No.2, Dental Council of India, on the ground that though there was no seat of MDS Course of Conservative Dentistry under State Quota, the DME allotted one seat of MDS Conservative Dentistry to one Deepak Singh Kirar through the counselling dated 9.6.2014 to 16.6.2014, and accordingly, in compliance to the order passed by the Director, Medical Education, Bhopal, the 4th seat had to be given admission under the State Quota. 2. The petitioner–institute is unaided Private Professional Dental College established in the year 2006. The admission in Private Medical and Dental Colleges in the State are regulated through Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Viniyaman Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007 (hereinafter referred as ‘The Adhiniyam’) and exercising its power conferred under section 4(1) and (2) of the Adhiniyam. The State Government has constituted Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (hereinafter referred as ‘AFRC’) for the supervision and guidance of the admission process and for the fixation of the fees to be charged for a candidate seeking admission for the Private Professional Education Institutions. 3. In compliance of the order passed by the Constitutional Bench of the apex Court in the case of Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka [ AIR 2003 SC 3724 ], an association has been registered with the name of “Association of Private Dental and Medical Colleges of Madhya Pradesh (APDMC)” to conduct a Common Entrance Test for admission to management quota seats of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh. 4. 4. The apex Court vide its order dated 27.5.2009, passed in I.A. No.4060/2009 (arising out of SLP No.13111/2009), has directed to fill the seats of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of M.P. in a ratio of 50:50 between the State and Management after excluding 15% NRI Seats (which have to be filed by the management), through PRE-PG (Entrance Exam Conducted by the Central/State Government) and DMAT (Entrance Exam Conducted by the APDMC) for this purpose, and in accordance with the same first NRI quota seats were decided by the college and thereafter, the remaining seats were distributed in a ratio of 50:50 between the State and Management Quota. 5. In the year 2014, the apex Court vide order dated 11.4.2014 (I.A. No.71/72) in Civil Appeal No.4060/2009, directed to continue the same arrangement, which was in vogue from year 2009. 6. In the year 2014, All India PRE-P.G. Entrance Examination was conducted on 25.1.2014 and thereafter counselling was conducted from 25.3.2014 to 13.3.2014 and vide allotment letter dated 29.3.2014, one student Deepak Singh Kirar, was allotted MDS Conservative Dentistry Course for the petitioner–College through State quota. As per directives of the apex Court, the said distribution was done by the State of M.P. and the same was published on 27.3.2014 vide (Annexure R-3/1). As per Annexure R-2/2, filed by Dental Council of India, the petitioner – College was permitted to take admission in MDS course including Conservative Dentistry Course with intake capacity of 3 seats, which was subsequently renewed by the Government of India for the academic year 2014–15. In this letter, the Government of India very categorically stated that in case, any admissions are made in violation of the condition, such admission would be treated as irregular and action under section 10B of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993 would be initiated. 7. The petitioner vide its letter dated 19.4.2014 has mentioned that the one seat in the MDS Conservative Dentistry Course from the State quota, but later has issued correction. 8. On 28.5.2014, the Dental Council of India issued a circular to all Dental Colleges of the country to furnish the MDS students admitted in the college during the academic year 2014-15. The petitioner vide letter dated 5.7.2014 (Annexure R-2/4) informed the DCI that there was no seat of MDS to Conservative Dentistry under the said quota. 8. On 28.5.2014, the Dental Council of India issued a circular to all Dental Colleges of the country to furnish the MDS students admitted in the college during the academic year 2014-15. The petitioner vide letter dated 5.7.2014 (Annexure R-2/4) informed the DCI that there was no seat of MDS to Conservative Dentistry under the said quota. The DME allotted one seat in MDS Conservative Dentistry to one student through counselling dated 9.6.2014 to 16.6.2014 and accordingly, fourth student was also given admission under the State quota in MDS course and now there are four candidates in the MDS Conservative Dentistry against the permitted three seats by respondent No.1–Union of India (letter dated 15.4.2014 Annexure R-2/2) for the academic year 2014-15. On 27.9.2014, the petitioner–Dental College furnished the list of students admitted by them in MDS Course in the academic session 2014-15. 9. The DCI vide its letter dated 14.8.2014, directed the petitioner Dentistry–college to discharge one student admitted in excess in MDS Conservative Specialty of Conservative Dentistry Course for the academic session 2014-15, as the Government of India vide letter dated 15.4.2014, have granted its permission to admit only 3 students in the MDS Course, failing which Section 10B of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993 shall be attracted. 10. The DCI also issued a letter to the petitioner–Dental College to clarify as to why they admitted 3 students in the MDS course in the academic session 2014-15, after the cut off date, i.e., 5.8.2014 fixed by the apex Court in I.A. No.18/2014 in Writ Petition (C) No.433/2014 for the academic session 2014-15, which is gross violation of the time schedule fixed by the apex Court, within 8 days from the issue of the letter. 11. The petitioner – Dental College submitted the chart of distribution of seats filled through all India PREPG 2014 to respondent No.4 on 19.4.2014 (Annexure P-8). As per letter Annexure P-8, the distribution of seats appended along with the said letter, out of 3 seats of Conservative Dentistry and Endodnotic of the petitioner–college two seats have to be filled up through DMAT and one by the Government. On 22.4.2014, vide Annexure P-9, again distribution of seats was given by the petitioner-Dentistry College stating therein that out of 3 Conservative dentarian Endodnotic seats, two is to be filled by NRI quota and one by DMAT. On 22.4.2014, vide Annexure P-9, again distribution of seats was given by the petitioner-Dentistry College stating therein that out of 3 Conservative dentarian Endodnotic seats, two is to be filled by NRI quota and one by DMAT. As per this document, no State quota seat in the subject of Conservative Dentistry and Endodnotic. The DMAT 2014 conducted by APDMC (respondent No.6) took place in the month of April 2014 and on the basis of merit of this exam, through counselling dated 4th and 5th May, 2014, all the three seats of the petitioner–college were allotted to the students and admissions were given by the petitioner/Dental College. 12. As per averments made in the writ petition, the Director of Medical Education allotted one seat of MDS to one Deepak Singh Kirar, through the counselling dated 9.6.2014 to 16.6.2014. The petitioner–college on coming to know about it vide letter dated 13.6.2014 apprised of the situation to the DMAT and requested to provide guidance, but he did not provide any guidance and insisted that admission is going to be cancelled who has been allotted seat to the student under quota in MDS Conservative Dentistry. 13. The Executive Committee of the DCI in its meeting held on 17.11.2014, considering the AFRC letter dated 9.10.2014, thereby, forwarding three clarifications on the matter of excess admission made by the petitioner–College in Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15 and decided as under : “The college authorities be directed to discharge one student admitted in excess in MDS course in the specialty of Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15 at Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, Indore against GOI’s letter No.V12017/57/2011-DE dated 15.4.2014 for permission to admit only 3 students in the specialty of Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15, under intimation to Dental Council of India failing which the Council shall take necessary action against the college as per Dentists Act, 1948 as amended from time to time and its regulations made thereunder.” 14. On 19.1.2015, the DCI again directed the petitioner-Dentistry College to discharge one student admitted excess in the department of Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15, within 10 days from the date of issuance of the letter. On 19.1.2015, the DCI again directed the petitioner-Dentistry College to discharge one student admitted excess in the department of Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15, within 10 days from the date of issuance of the letter. The DCI vide letter dated 24.2.2014 directed the following : “The Director, Medical Education, Government of Madhya Pradesh be requested to identify the student admitted in excess in MDS Course in the specialty of Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15 at Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, Indore and issue necessary directions to the college authorities of Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, Indore to discharge on student, immediately, from the specialty of Conservative Dentistry, as identified/decided by the DME, under intimation to Dental Council of India, failing which the Council shall take necessary action against the college as per Dentists Act, 1948 as amended from time to time and its regulations made there-under.” 15. The DCI again vide letter dated 19.3.2015 and 29.6.2015 directed the respondent No.4, Director of Medical Education to identify students admitted in excess in MDS College specially in Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15 and issued necessary direction to the dentistry college for discharging the student immediately. The DCI informed the decision of the Executive Committee of DCI in its meeting held on 27.8.2015 and directed the following : “The request of O.S.D./Secretary, Secretariat, Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) to regularize one admission made in excess of the sanctioned intake in MDS course of Conservative Dentistry in the session 2014- 15 at Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry and P.G. Institute, Indore cannot be considered, and the college authorities be directed to discharge the student admitted in excess in Conservative Dentistry for the academic session 2014-15, within 21 days positively, under intimate to DCI, failing which the Council shall initiate the process of withdrawal of recognition of degrees in respect of BDS and MDS students of Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry and P.G. Institute, Indore.” 16. Due to interim order passed by this court, no coercive action has been taken by the DCI and Union of India. 17. Due to interim order passed by this court, no coercive action has been taken by the DCI and Union of India. 17. As per reply filed by the respondents 3 and 4/State, All India P.G. Entrance Examination was conducted on 25.1.2014 and thereafter, the counseling was conducted from 25.3.2014 to 30.3.2014 and vide allotment letter dated 29.3.2014, one student Deepak Singh Kirar was allotted admission in MDS Conservative Dentistry course in the petitioner–college through State quota. Annexure R-3/1 is the chart of seat distribution, i.e., the distribution of vacant seat as on 27.3.2014. As per Annexure R-3/1, in the petitioner–dentistry college one seat is reserved for State quota for Schedule Tribes candidate. The petitioner also vide its letter dated 19.4.2014 (Annexure P-8) has mentioned that one seat in MDS Conservative Dentistry course was from the State Quota, but later on issued correction in the list of distribution chart and without order from DME filled all the 3 seats under NRI / Management Quota. The allotment letter dated 23.9.2014 was issued in accordance with the distribution of vacant seat made by the Director of Medical Education on 27.3.2014. The counselling in the State quota seats by the respondents was done from the period 25.3.2014 to 30.3.2014, whereas, the counselling for the seat through MDS 2014 was conducted by APDMC, Bhopal from the period 9.6.2014 to 16.6.2014. 18. As per the directives of Hon’ble the Supreme Court, the seat distribution was done by the State and the same was published on 27.3.2014. Even petitioner/dentistry college itself vide its letter dated 19.4.2014 has mentioned that the one seat in MDS Course of Conservative Dentistry from the State Quota, but later has issued correction. As per the stand taken by the State, the counselling was made in accordance with the distribution of vacant seats made by the State/respondent on 27.3.2014. The State in its reply has stated that the counselling in the State Quota seat was done from 25.3.2014 to 30.3.2014 whereas, the counselling for the seats through DMAT, 2014 was conduced by APDMC, Bhopal. 19. The State in its reply has stated that the counselling in the State Quota seat was done from 25.3.2014 to 30.3.2014 whereas, the counselling for the seats through DMAT, 2014 was conduced by APDMC, Bhopal. 19. The respondent No.1–Union of India granted renewal to the petitioner – Dentistry college only on the condition that no irregular admission will be made by the Dental College and if Dental College violates any admission then under section 10B of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993, would be initiated and in the case in hand, the petitioner–College admittedly took one student in excess in MDS Conservative Speciality of Conservative Dentistry Course for the academic session 2014-15, which is irregular admission and the respondent No.2 DCI had only asked the Dentistry petitioner–College to discharge one excess admission. In spite of repeated reminders by the DCI to discharge one excess student the petitioner – dental college choose not to discharge one student and, therefore, proceedings has been initiated for derecognizing of the dental qualification under section 10B of the Dentist (Amendment) Act, 1993. 20. In the case of MCI v. Sarang and others, reported as (2001)8 SCC 427 , the apex Court observed that in the matters of academic standards, courts should not normally interfere or interpret the rules and such matters should be left to the experts in the field. 21. An ‘intake’ or admission capacity is fixed by the concerned authority, having regard to the facilities available. That is why the concerned authority makes local inspections to determine the facilities provided and available. Once an intake is fixed with reference to the available facilities and teaching and other staff it can be increased only after the institution provides correspondingly larger facilities and staff and satisfies the concerned authority about the need for such increase and its capacity to manage and train the increased intake. It cannot be gainsaid that the position of students admitted in excess of the permitted intake, is the same as the students of an unrecognised institution. Merely because an institution is permitted and recognised, the students admitted by such institution in excess of permitted intake cannot claim a better position or right either for regularisation or for grant of permission, as they are in no better position than the students of an unrecognised institution. Merely because an institution is permitted and recognised, the students admitted by such institution in excess of permitted intake cannot claim a better position or right either for regularisation or for grant of permission, as they are in no better position than the students of an unrecognised institution. The petitioner has not filed any document to prove that Director of Medical Education granted admission to Deepak Singh Kirar nor such was the stand of the Government of M.P. 22. Looking to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we cannot accept the contention of the petitioner–Dental College that they will keep seat vacant in the Special Conservative Dentistry in the next academic year 2015-16 against the sanctioned capacity of three seats that will be contrary to the permission granted by the Government of India. Taking into consideration the infrastructure, equipment, staff, the limit of the number of admissions is fixed by the DCI, this Court cannot disturb that balance between the capacity of the institution and the number of admissions, on “compassionate ground” and to issue a fiat to create additional seat, which amounts to a direction to violate section 10B of the Dentists Act. In the case of MCI v. Sarang and others (supra), Hon’ble the Supreme Court observed that in the matters of academic standards Court should not normally interfere or interpret the rules and such matters should be left to the experts in the field. 23. For these reasons and looking to the conduct of the petitioner–Dental College, no case is made out to quash the proceedings of the DCI. The petitioner–Dental College is the author of the situation. 24. In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no merit and substance in the writ petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.