JUDGMENT : L. Narayana Swamy, J. 1. Petitioner No. 2-Farooquia Dental College and Hospital is constituted under the 1st petitioner-Rifa-Hul-Muslimeen Educational Trust. The 1st petitioner-Trust is registered by the Philanthropist and Educationist belonging to Muslim Minority, and it was being run on nonprofit basis by the Trustees and it was established for the purpose of providing Dental Education to the Muslim Minority. The 2nd petitioner-College is one such institution established by the 1st petitioner with an intention to impart Dental Education to the Muslim minority. 2. These petitions are filed seeking an order/direction or a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the orders at Annexures-A and A1 passed by the Respondent-Authorities and to direct them to permit the 2nd petitioner-college to make admission to BDS and MDS Courses for the Academic Year 2019-20 by withdrawing their orders at Annexures-A and A1. 3. It is case of the petitioner that, petitioner No. 2 is a Dental College and Hospital established 25 years ago and since 25 years, the 1st Petitioner-Trust is running the said institution without any hurdles. It is also case of the petitioner that, it has made an application for grant of recognition by the Dental Council of India (for short ‘DCI’) with intake capacity of 40 seats and being satisfied with fulfillment of all the conditions as per the norms of the DCI, it was pleased to grant recognition to the petitioner with an intake capacity of 40. The petitioner was also granted permission to start MDS Course in seven specialities. That being the situation, the petitioner filed an application to the 4th respondent-Rajiv Gandhi University to continue the affiliation for admission to MDS and BDS courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. Thereafter, the Inspection Team of DCI came to the college on the day of Bharath Bandh and after inspection, the Inspection Authority submitted a report to the DCI and in turn the DCI wrote a letter to Government of India on 31.01.2019 alleging various basic deficiencies in the college and recommended for withdrawal of recognition for both MDS and BDS Courses. On the basis of said Inspection Report, the Government of India issued a notice to the petitioner calling it for personal hearing. On the basis of said Inspection Report, the Government of India issued a notice to the petitioner calling it for personal hearing. Much before hearing, the petitioner has also submitted an elaborate letter denying contents of the said notice stating that the petitioner-College has all the infrastructure required and also stating that inspection carried out on the holiday due to Bharath Bandh and requesting to continue the recognition also for the Academic Year 2019-20. Without considering report of the petitioner, the Government of India sought for comments from the Government of Karnataka for initiating the process of withdrawal of recognition based on the report of the DCI. In the meanwhile, the 1st respondent- Government of India has also restricted the petitioner not to make any admission for BDS and MDS Courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. The petitioner also gave a detailed representation to the President of DCI stating that the inspection was made on the date of closure of the college due to Bharath Bandh, when all the staff are not present and requesting to continue the recognition. The petitioner has also made a representation to the Government of India to that effect, in the light of the recommendation made by the DCI in its letter dated 11.04.2019 and also to the other Respondent-Competent Authorities. It is grievance of the petitioner that, in spite of all its efforts, the 1st respondent-Government of India has not passed any order granting permission to the petitioner-College to make Admission for the Academic Year 2019-20. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. Perused the materials available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioner-College is in existence since 25 years and it has got the infrastructure up to the satisfaction of the DCI and the report submitted by the Inspection Team to the DCI-Authority is not based on full facts and picture, as the inspection was conducted on 18.02.2019, when the college was closed on account of Bharath Bandh and therefore, sufficient faculties were not there to render required information and it found certain lapses, and based on such lapses, it directed the petitioner-college not to make any admissions for the Academic Year 2019- 20, which is arbitrary and contrary to law. He further submits that the petitioner-College being established in 1992 it is the oldest Dental College in Karnatakia having very good reputation amongst the students and community for the last 25 years. He submits that, having regard to the infrastructure available, it has applied to the Central Government under Section 10-A of the Dental Council of India Act for starting MDS Course in seven specialities for the Academic Year 2014-15 and the same was approved. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for a direction or an order to the respondent-authorities to permit the petitioners to make admissions to the BDS and MDS courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. 6. Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 6 submits that, the inspection was made on 18.01.2019 and the inspection team has found lots of basic lapses even to run the college. He also took us through various instances said to be noted in the Inspection Report submitting that the petitioner himself has made representations and communications to the Government of India for permission. So when the petitioner is not in a position to pay salaries to the staff, obviously, it is not in a position to fulfill the conditions. He also submits that, neither Rajiv Gandhi University nor the Government of Karnataka has recommended to the Government of India to the effect that there are lapses and that have to be fulfilled for the purpose of granting permission. He also referred to a letter addressed by the 2nd respondent-Dental Council of India to the 2nd petitioner and also the communication of Government of Karnataka seeking opinion from Rajiv Gandhi University dated 01.04.2019 and stated that, the petitioner has mistaken that the said letter itself is a recommendation on behalf of the University or Government of Karnataka. Therefore, he submits that, in the said circumstances, the petitioner has not complied with the conditions and norms of the DCI for grant of permission sought for by it. 7. Sri. Shashikath, learned ASG appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 6 submits that, as long as there is non-compliance of the mandatory requirements of the Dental Council of India Act, it is impermissible to permit the petitioner-college to take admissions for BDS and MDS Courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. 8. 7. Sri. Shashikath, learned ASG appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 6 submits that, as long as there is non-compliance of the mandatory requirements of the Dental Council of India Act, it is impermissible to permit the petitioner-college to take admissions for BDS and MDS Courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. 8. The submissions of the learned counsels and the materials on record reveal that, on the basis of the inspection held on 08.01.2019 and on the basis of the report of the inspectors, the DCI wrote a letter to the Government of India on 31.01.2019 to initiate the process of withdrawal of the recognition to the 2nd petitioner on the ground that there are various deficiencies suppressing the fact that the 2nd petitioner college was closed on account of Bharath Bandh, on the order of the Deputy Commissioner, to that effect. Therefore, it is noticed that the basic lapses said to have been found during inspection itself are sufficient for the DCI to recommend not to give permission for admission. Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also observed in several judgments that, when basic lapses and financial crises are there in the medical colleges, which cannot produce full-fledged doctors and production and out come of half boiled or half fried doctors would certainly be injurious to the society and system of human health. 9. Therefore, in view of the above observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several decisions, at this stage, it is not permissible and justifiable for us to issue any such direction or order sought for by the petitioners to any of the Respondent-Authorities including the State of Karnataka and Rajiv Gandhi University, etc. 10. In the light of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in regard to the grant of affiliation or permission for admission of students to BDS and MDS to the petitioner-Dental College, we are of the opinion that, it is not permissible and justifiable for this court to issue any such direction or order either to any of the Respondent-Authorities regarding grant of permission to the petitioner-College to make admissions for BDS and MDS Courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioner has rectified all lapses and it made a representation to that effect to the DCI on 03.04.2019, but the same has not been considered. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioner has rectified all lapses and it made a representation to that effect to the DCI on 03.04.2019, but the same has not been considered. But, when once the lapses are found from the concerned Inspection Team on 08.01.2019, and thereafter, if those lapses are updated or it is satisfied to the DCI, then it is for the DCI to consider the representation of the petitioner and to pass orders to that effect. Therefore, at this stage, we feel it appropriate to direct the Respondent No. 1-Government of India and Respondent No. 2-DCI to consider the representation/ communication, if any, made by the petitioners. 12. We also hereby permit the petitioners to make one more representation to the concerned Respondent-Authorities with its prayer regarding grant of permission for admission of students to BDS and MDS Courses for the Academic Year 2019-20. At the same time, the concerned Respondent-Authorities are also directed to consider application/ representation filed or to be filed by the petitioners on the above issue, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than six months from today.