JUDGMENT : R. Devdas, J. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are students of Post Graduate Ayurveda Course and their prayer in common is to quash the impugned orders dated 9.4.2018, 16.03.2018 and 11.04.2018, while seeking a direction declaring that their admission to the Post Graduate Ayurveda Course, for the academic year 2017-18 is legal and valid and consequently, permit the petitioners to pursue their studies without interruption. Therefore, these matters were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners having successfully completed the undergraduate examination sought to pursue the post graduation in Ayurveda M.D. (Ayurveda) - Materia Medica and Pharmacology (Dravyaguna Vignana). It is the case of the petitioners that for the academic year 2016-17 and earlier academic years, admissions to 25% of the seats under 'Government Quota' were allotted through a State Level Entrance Test conducted by the Karnataka Examinations Authority (KEA). The remaining 75% of the seats under the 'Management Quota' were filled by the Final Merit Index calculated out of 100 marks based on written test conducted by the respective institutions. The said procedure were followed in terms of the Indian Medicine Central Council (Post Graduate Ayurveda Education) Regulations, 2012. 3. The Central Council of Indian Medicine, with the previous sanction of the Government of India, exercising powers under Section 36 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, in supercession of the earlier regulations, notified the Indian Medicine Central Council (Post Graduate Ayurveda Education) Regulations, 2016 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'Regulations, 2016'). As per Regulations, 2016, the eligibility criteria for the students to be admitted to the Post Graduate Ayurveda Course is provided in Regulation 8. As per Regulation 8, a student, to apply for post graduation course, should be holder of degree in BAMS course, possessing 50% marks in the entrance test conducted for admission; selection of candidates to be made on the basis of Final Merit Index calculated out of total of 100 marks, based on weightage of 80% of marks obtained in the Post Graduate Entrance Test and 20% weightage shall be given to the marks obtained in under graduate course. 4. The Central Government introduced National Level Entrance Test for admission to Post Graduate Ayurvedic courses, for the academic year 2017-18. 4. The Central Government introduced National Level Entrance Test for admission to Post Graduate Ayurvedic courses, for the academic year 2017-18. In this regard, the Central Government issued a communication dated 31.05.2017 to the All India Institute of Ayurveda, New Delhi to make preparation to conduct All India AYUSH Post Graduate Entrance Test (hereinafter referred to as 'AIA-PGET'). Pursuant to the said communication, the All India Institute of Ayurveda, New Delhi, issued a notification dated 21.06.2017 in the pubic domain, notifying that the entrance test for Post Graduate AYUSH Courses shall be conducted pan India in AIA-PGET, 2017. The registration for the entrance test of AIA-PGET, 2017 commenced on 27.06.2017 and closed on 15.07.2017. 5. The grievance of the petitioners is that there was short notice and the entrance test was conducted in the State of Karnataka, only at two centers, namely, Bengaluru and Hubballi. Admittedly, the petitioners have not taken the Entrance Test in AIA-PGET, 2017. The results of AIA-PGET, 2017 were announced on 25.08.2017. The petitioners, who were desirous of securing a seat for the Post Graduation Course, approached the respondent institutions. The petitioners were informed of the requirement of appearing in the AIA-PGET, 2017 and were promptly refused admission, since they have not taken the entrance exam. However, it appears that by a communication dated 04.09.2017, the Under Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH, informed the State Authorities that the criteria of 50% qualifying marks as specified in Regulation 8 (5) of the Regulation, 2016, for admission in Ayurveda stream has been waived off to ensure equality on qualifying criteria relating to cut off marks for admission as in the case of Homeopathy, Siddha and Unani streams. The communication dated 04.09.2017, was further clarified by a communication dated 05.09.2017 that the criteria of 50% of qualifying marks in the case of General Merit candidates, 45% in respect of OBC & 40% in respect of SC/ST/Regular Central or State Government Service candidates as mentioned in Sl.No.8(5) Mode of Admission of IMCC (Post Graduate Ayurveda Education) Regulations, 2016; 8(1)(f) Mode of Admission of IMCC (Post Graduate Unani Education) Regulations, 2016 and Sl.No.8(5) Mode of Admission of IMCC (Post Graduate Siddha Education) Regulations, 2016 respectively has been waived off for the academic session 2017-18. 6. 6. It is contended by the petitioner that in pursuance of the communications dated 04.09.2017 and 05.09.2017, the petitioners once again approached the respondent institutions seeking admission. It appears that the respondent institutions, on the premise that the requirement of appearing in the AIAPGET, 2017, has been waived off by the said communications, admitted the petitioners, taking only 20% of the marks secured by the petitioners in the under graduate examinations. On and around 20.11.2017, the petitioners were admitted to the PG courses. 7. The Government of India, having come to know of the admissions made by the respondent institutions, issued a communication dated 09.04.2018 to all the Universities affiliated to AYUSH directing the University to cancel the admissions of students admitted to institutions without having appeared in AIA-PGET, 2017 and the authorities were further directed not to permit the students to appear in the examinations. Pursuant to the said communication, the respondent Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (hereinafter referred to as 'University') seems to have communicated the same to the respective institutions, following which office orders were issued by the respective institutions discharging the petitioners from the college and post graduate courses. 8. The petitioners have therefore called in question the communication dated 09.04.2018 made by the Government of India and the Officer orders issued by the respective institutions, discharging the petitioners from PG courses. It is pertinent to note that the list of students whose admission was sought to be approved by the University were partially approved, while rejecting approval of some of the candidates, which included the petitioners herein. Therefore, the petitioners have also called in question the communication of the university made to the respective institutions, declining to approve admission of the petitioners. 9. Learned counsel Sri Abhishek Malipatil and Sri Mohammed Tahir, appearing for the petitioners have raised the following contentions: (a) The Government of India, by the communications dated 04.09.2017 and 05.09.2017 have waived off the requirement of compliance of Regulation No.8(5) and therefore the requirement of appearing in the AIA PGET, 2017 was done away with; (b) The respondent institutions have given weightage to 20% of the marks secured by the petitioner in the under graduate examinations and therefore there is compliance of Regulation 8(5). (c) with respect to MBBS and BDS courses, where National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) was conducted by the Central Government for the academic year 2016-17, when several students were unable to take up the examination in the first round the Central Government conducted a second test, while the same benefit was not given in AIA-PGET, 2017. 10. Though several other grounds have been raised in the writ petitions, the learned counsels have rightly desisted from urging those grounds. The learned counsels, however, submitted that by virtue of interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioners have taken up the first year examination, but the results of the petitioners have not been announced. 11. The learned counsels placed reliance on an interim order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench at Dharwad, in W.P.No.107428-107432/2018 and connected matters, wherein, by order dated 13.11.2018, it was observed that prima facie, the Co-ordinate bench was of the opinion that it was unscientific to conduct a common test for all streams of AYUSH courses, for filling up of seats in the Post Graduate courses. It is suffice to notice that by the said interim order, the petitioners therein were permitted to take the examination, however, it was directed that the petitioners shall not claim any equity. The learned counsels also placed reliance on an Order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences vs. Bapuji Dental College and Hospital in SLA (C) No.2597-2610/2015. It is contended that the Hon'ble Supreme Court declined to interfere in the admission of the students, who had not appeared in the NEET examination. 12. Per contra, Smt. Birdy Aiyappa, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India would submit that in the matter of Priya Gupta vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2012) 7 SCC 433 and Ranjan Purohit vs. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, (2012) 10 SCC 770 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that admission to Medical and Dental Courses had to be done through competitive examinations only. It was held that students who had not appeared in any competitive entrance examinations should not be admitted to professional courses. It was held that students who had not appeared in any competitive entrance examinations should not be admitted to professional courses. More-over, it was submitted that the order of the Apex Court in the case of Bapuji Education Society (supra) was with respect to NEET examination and based on the facts and circumstances of those cases, which cannot be made applicable to the present set of facts. 13. Sri N.K.Ramesh, learned Counsel for the respondent University and Sri Lakshminarayana, learned Additional Government Advocate would support the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India. 14. Heard Sri Abhishek Malipatil and Sri Mohammad Tahir, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Birdy Aiyappa, Central Government Counsel for respondent No.1; Smt. Manasi Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.2; Sri N.K.Ramesh, learned Counsel for respondent No.3 and Sri Lakshminarayana, Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.4 and perused the writ papers. 15. Regulation 8(5) reads as follows: "8. Mode of admission- (1) ***** (2) ***** (3) ***** (4) ***** (5) the minimum eligibility marks of the entrance test for admission in the case of general candidates shall be fifty percent of the total marks, in the case of candidates belonging to the Schedule Castes, the Schedules Tribes and regular Central or State Government service candidate shall be forty percent and in the case of candidates belonging to the other Backward classes shall be forty five percent. 16. A plain reading of the provision and the communications dated 04.09.2017 and 05.09.2017, leaves no room of doubt that the waiver was only with respect to the requirement of minimum percentage of marks to be secured by the candidates in the entrance examination, as a threshold to qualify for admission. The communications dated 04.09.2017 and 05.09.2017 did not waive the requirement of candidates appearing in the entrance examination. To that extent, it is clear that the contentions of the petitioners in this regard is required to be brushed aside as mere specious plea. 17. More-Over, the AIA-PGET, 2017 is a single window entrance examination for admission to AYUSH MD/MS post graduate course of all AYUSH colleges/ institutions/University/Deemed University and no other entrance examination, either at State or Institutional Level shall be valid for admission to MD/MS courses in AYUSH stream, on introduction of AIA-PGET, 2017. 17. More-Over, the AIA-PGET, 2017 is a single window entrance examination for admission to AYUSH MD/MS post graduate course of all AYUSH colleges/ institutions/University/Deemed University and no other entrance examination, either at State or Institutional Level shall be valid for admission to MD/MS courses in AYUSH stream, on introduction of AIA-PGET, 2017. Therefore, the second contention of the petitioners that the respondent institutions have fulfilled the requirement of considering only 20% of the marks obtained by the petitioners in the under graduate examination, may not hold water. Appearing in the entrance examination is sine qua non for a candidate seeking admission to the post graduate course. The underlying reason for providing a common entrance test and the need for students, aspiring for admission, to undergo the common entrance test have been discussed elaborately in the case of Priya Gupta (supra). The ills of separate examinations being conducted by the State and professional colleges and universities have been discussed threadbare and the introduction of National Level Common Entrance Test have received approval at the hands of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Any diversion in this regard is highly deplorable. The respondent institutions could not have admitted the petitioners and were rightly refused admission, at the initial stage. However, the action of the respondent institutions in providing admissions to the petitioners on the premise of the communications dated 4.9.2017 and 5.9.2017, is per se illegal and unwarranted. 18. Reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Bapuji Dental College (supra) is also of no avail, since Their Lordships have directed that the order as well as the impugned order in the said matter are not to be treated as precedent in any other case. 19. Though the plight of the petitioner/students moves the heart of this Court, our conscious dictates that the prayer made by the petitioners cannot be acceded to. 20. In the light of the above, these writ petitions are devoid of merit and are therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.