JUDGMENT : N.NAGARESH, J. Petitioners in both these writ petitions are students who have joined the Course of Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) in Colleges in the year 2015 and 2016. The writ petitions have been filed for orders directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to write the examination and to allow them to continue the Course. The parties and exhibits are referred to in this judgment as they are described/marked in W.P.(C) No.44086/2024. 2. The petitioners state that they joined the Course of BDS in their respective Colleges in the year 2015 and 2016. Though their Course period is over, they are yet to clear certain examinations/papers. According to the 3 rd respondent-Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS), “any student who does not clear the BDS Course in all the subjects within a period of nine years, including one year compulsory rotatory paid internship from the date of admission shall be discharged from the Course”. The University issued Ext.P1 Examination Notification dated 23.11.2024 declaring to commence the BDS Examinations on 06.01.2025. However, the petitioners are not allowed to apply for the examinations as notified by Exts.P1 and P2. The petitioners were informed that since they got admission for the Course in the year 2015 and 2016, they have completed the Course duration and they will be discharged from the Course. They will not be allowed to further write the examination, in view of the guidelines issued by the 2 nd respondent-Dental Council of India (DCI). 3. The petitioners state that their Batch is the most affected Batch due to the 2018 and 2019 Kerala floods and the Covid-19 pandemic which affected their regular Classes and examinations. The 3 rd respondent-University has allowed students who are registered in the academic year 2010, 2011 and 2012 to complete the Course by giving them time till 31.12.2024. The University has also given mercy chance after the Course duration. 4. As per the Regulations of the DCI, the Course duration is four years and one year internship. However, the Course duration prescribed by the 3 rd respondent-University is 4½ years plus one year internship. Those petitioners belonging to the 2016 Batch have completed only eight years. The students of 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2014 Batches are still continuing the Course, whereas students of 2015 and 2016 Batches are not allowed to write the examination. 5. However, the Course duration prescribed by the 3 rd respondent-University is 4½ years plus one year internship. Those petitioners belonging to the 2016 Batch have completed only eight years. The students of 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2014 Batches are still continuing the Course, whereas students of 2015 and 2016 Batches are not allowed to write the examination. 5. The Course duration (excluding internship) under the DCI Scheme was four years and a candidate had to pass the entire Course in eight years and then one year internship. This is evident from Ext.P6 clarification dated 19.01.2016 issued by the 2 nd respondent. Thus, a candidate gets double the duration of the Course to pass the entire Course. Under the examination Scheme of the University, the duration of the Course itself is 4½ years. This situation prevails only in Kerala. In Kerala, the Course duration is nine years plus one year internship. Therefore, the petitioners should be permitted to clear the Course within ten years. However, the University has issued Ex.P7 order dated 18.12.2015 wherein it has been declared that “the total duration of the Course shall be nine years excluding internship”. Subsequently, Ext.P7 order was modified and the University issued Ext.P8 order dated 26.04.2017 wherein the period of nine years excluding internship mentioned in Ext.P7 has been modified as, “nine years including internship”. 6. The petitioners state that Ext.P8 has been issued based on Ext.P10 DCI Regulations, 2007. Exts.P7, P8 and P10 are discriminatory. The 3 rd respondent-University cannot oust the students who have not passed the examinations without giving them a proper opportunity to write the examinations and continue the Course. The students who have taken admission in 2015 and 2016 have not completed nine years duration as stated by the respondents. When the BDS students across the country are given double the duration of the Course to complete the Course, denying the same to students of Kerala alone is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 7. The 2 nd respondent-DCI resisted the writ petitions. The 2 nd respondent stated that as per the BDS Course (7 th Amendment) Regulations, any student who does not clear the BDS Course in all the subjects within a period of nine years, including one year compulsory rotatory paid internship from the date of admission shall be discharged from the Course. The 2 nd respondent-DCI resisted the writ petitions. The 2 nd respondent stated that as per the BDS Course (7 th Amendment) Regulations, any student who does not clear the BDS Course in all the subjects within a period of nine years, including one year compulsory rotatory paid internship from the date of admission shall be discharged from the Course. Ext.P10 Regulations have been issued under Section 20 of the Dentists Act , 1948. 8. The 2 nd respondent submitted that a learned Single Judge of this Court in the judgment dated 17.12.2016 in W.P.(C) No.180/2016 has held that the 7 th Amendment to BDS Course Regulations, 2015 is a substitution and would relate back to 2007. A Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Jasleen Kaur v. State of Punjab and others [ CWP No.17801/2024 ] has upheld the 7 th Amendment. The 2 nd respondent further submitted that challenge to any subordinate legislation is limited to (1) that it is ultravires of the parent Act, (2) that it is opposed to fundamental rights or (3) it is opposed to other plenary laws. In the matters of academic standards, court should not interfere and interpret the Rules and such matters should be left to the experts in the field. 9. The 2 nd respondent further urged that in Preethi Sreevasthava v. State of MP [ (1999) 7 SCC 120 ], a larger Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the Universities have to be guided by the standards prescribed by the Medical Council and must shape their programs accordingly. The Apex Court held that the Scheme of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 does not give an option to the Universities to follow or not follow the standards laid down by the Indian Medical Council. 10. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the DCI, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the 1 st respondent-State of Kerala. At the time of final hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are confining prosecution of the writ petitions for petitioners who have obtained admissions to the BDS Course in the year 2015. The legal questions raised in respect of other writ petitioners may be left open. At the time of final hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are confining prosecution of the writ petitions for petitioners who have obtained admissions to the BDS Course in the year 2015. The legal questions raised in respect of other writ petitioners may be left open. I am therefore confining the adjudication only in respect of those petitioners in both the writ petitions who have obtained admission in the year 2015. 11. When these writ petitions came up for admission on 17.12.2024, this Court passed an interim order directing the 3 rd respondent to permit the petitioners to appear for the examinations pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 provisionally, subject to the outcome of the writ petitions. 12. The petitioners joined the BDS Course in various affiliated Dental Colleges under the 3 rd respondent- University in the year 2015 and 2016. In view of the Regulations of the 3 rd respondent-University, their course duration is 4½ years and one year internship. In all other Dental Colleges in India which are affiliated to other Universities, the course duration is four years plus one year internship. 13. As per Ext.P10 BDS Course Regulations, 2007, any student, who does not clear the BDS Course in all the subjects within a period of nine years, including one year compulsory rotatory paid internship from the date of admission, shall be discharged from the Course. A reading of Ext.P10 would show that the period nine years is arrived at doubling the Course period and adding the one year internship period. 14. But, in Kerala, under the Scheme of Examination of the 3 rd respondent-KUHS, the duration of the Course itself is 4½ years. The petitioners would urge that if the students of Kerala are to be kept at par with the students outside Kerala, the total period within which they should clear the Course should be ten years (9+1) and not nine years. The KUHS issued Ext.P7 order dated 18.12.2015 declaring that the total duration of the Course shall be nine years “excluding internship”. But, soon thereafter, the University issued Ext.P8 order dated 26.04.2017 modifying Ext.P7 and stating that the duration will be nine years “including internship”. 15. The KUHS issued Ext.P7 order dated 18.12.2015 declaring that the total duration of the Course shall be nine years “excluding internship”. But, soon thereafter, the University issued Ext.P8 order dated 26.04.2017 modifying Ext.P7 and stating that the duration will be nine years “including internship”. 15. Going by the Scheme of the Dental Council of India Act, the Universities have to be guided by the standards prescribed by the Dental Council and the Universities are bound to fix their Course programs accordingly. The Universities have to follow the standards laid down by the Dental Council of India. The standards prescribed by the Dental Council of India are therefore mandatory. In that view of the matter, the duration of the BDS Course should be nine years including one year compulsory rotatory paid internship as prescribed in Ext.P10 Dental Council of India Regulations, 2007. 16. However, in the present case, it has to be kept in mind that the petitioners joined the BDS Course in the year 2015. The Course is a 4½ year Course. It was during this period that large scale floods hit Kerala in the year 2018 and 2019. The ensuing year found outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and consequential lockdowns. There was substantial disruption in conducting classes and examinations during the said period. Taking into consideration the afore facts and also taking into consideration the fact that BDS is a 4½ year Course in Kerala as against the four year Course in other Universities, I am of the firm view that the petitioners, who are admitted to the BDS Course in the year 2015, shall be given a chance to write examinations pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 Notifications as an exceptional case. The writ petitions are therefore disposed of directing that petitioners 26, 28, 29, 31 to 36, 37, 39 to 41, 44, 45, 47 to 49, 52 to 54, 56 to 59, 61, 78, 80, 83, 85 to 87, 110 to 112 in W.P.(C) No.44086/2024 and petitioners 1 to 3 and 6 in W.P.(C) No.44754/2024, who have already permitted to appear in the examination by the interim orders of this Court, shall be treated as continuing the Course and having appeared in the examinations regularly. The results of the examinations shall be declared officially.