Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Subharati K.K.B. Charitable Trsut Thru' Its President & Anr. v. Union Of India Thru' Under Secy. Min. Of Health & Family W. - WRIT - C No. 25449 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 15184 (1 September 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


       Court No.17

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.25449 of 2006

Subharati K.K.B. Charitable Trust and another Vs. Union of India

and others


Hon'ble V.C. Misra, J.

Heard Sri R.N. Singh Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anurag Khanna, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri Shamim Ahmad learned counsel for the respondent no.1-Union of India, Sri Anjanai Kumar Mishra learned counsel for the Dental Council of India-respondent no.2, Sri Neeraj Tripathi learned counsel for the Chancellor-respondent no.3 and Sri Anil Tiwari learned counsel appearing for Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra-respondent no.4 at length.

Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. On the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed off finally at this stage in terms of the Rules of the Court.

The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner no.1 is a registered trust and has established a Subharati Dental College-petitioner no.2 with the permission from the Central Government for starting BDS Course in the academic session 1996, which has been granted permanent affiliation with Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University (hereinafter referred to as the ''University') with effect from August 2003 for running the BDS Course. The petitioner No.2-College applied to the U.P. Government for issuing essentiality certificate for starting the MDS Course, which was granted by the U.P. Government vide its letter dated 21.4.2004.

On the request of the petitioners the University granted permission to the petitioners' College to start the MDS Course in 9 specialties on the recommendation of the Dental Council of India. The Central Government also granted permission to start the MDS Course in the petitioner No.2-College vide permission dated 21.5.2004. However, subsequently the Council conducted the inspection in the College of the petitioners for granting recommendation to the Central Government for renewal of permission to run the MDS Course for the academic session 2005-06 and some deficiencies were pointed out by the Council. However, the permission for renewal was not granted by the Central Government for running the course of MDS during the academic session 2005-06. The petitioners being aggrieved filed a writ petition before this Court, wherein the refusal by the Union of India was stayed by the Court and the students were allowed to complete the academic session 2005-06. The Registrar of the University vide its letter dated 20.11.2005 communicated the order of withdrawl of the affiliation issued by the University vide its order dated 5.4.2005 granted affiliation for MDS Course for this year and affiliation was withdrawn by the University as intimated by the Registrar vide letter dated 20.11.2005 (annexure-28 to the writ petition). Subsequently, the petitioners again applied for the renewal of the permission to run the course of MDS for the present session 2006-07 but the Council did not in its turn make any inspection. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.

After hearing the parties on several occasions, an order dated 17.5.2006 was passed by this Court directing the Council to inspect the petitioners' Dental College and furnish its report within one week to the respondent no.1 for the purpose of renewal of the MDS Course for the academic session 2006-07 so that further action may be taken by the respondent no.1 at the earliest. This very interim order was challenged by the respondents in special appeal wherein the said order dated 17.5.2006 was upheld and the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 25.5.2006. The Government of India has as per letter dated 19.5.2006 mentioned that permission granted to start a new or higher course of study of training which would be valid for the entire duration of the course of the first batch of the students who appear in the final examination occurring w.e.f. 2006-07, a Dental College once permitted to start MDS Course in any discipline would be entitled to admit further batches of the students in that discipline automatically, unless the permission has been specifically suspended. In compliance of both the said orders, the DCI inspectors conducted inspection of the Dental College on 27.5.2006 for the renewal of the permission of the MDS Course for the academic session 2006-07. The executive committee of the Council considered the Joint Inspection Report of the Council's Inspectors and, after discussion and deliberation, they forwarded its report dated 29.5.2006, a copy of which has been placed by Sri Anjani Kumar Mishra learned counsel for the Dental Council of India, which is taken on record. Vide letter dated 29th May 2006 addressed to the petitioners-college with reference to the permission granted by it vide letter dated 21.5.2004 and letter dated 19.5.2006 the College was required to maintain the norms and regulations as indicated in its letter dated 13.5.2004. Copies of letters dated 19.5.2006 and 31.5.2006 have been filed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit in support of the Listing Application No.169904 of 2006.

At present the grievance of the petitioners is that the Vice Chancellor of the University has to get the institute inspected in accordance with the provisions of the Universities Act and place the same before the executive council so that the same may be placed before the Chancellor and necessary orders may be passed but it is delaying the matter. However, a statement has been made by Sri Anurag Khanna learned counsel for the petitioners on instruction from the petitioners that the University has constituted an inspection panel for the purpose of inspecting the premises of the petitioner No.2-College today, i.e., 1.9.2006. This fact could not be denied by the learned counsel for the University for want of knowledge and information.

Looking into the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in case, inspection panel has been constituted as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners then it is desirable that the University should get the inspection done and complete the formalities at the earliest and forward its report to the Chancellor within a period of two weeks from today for according necessary direction in this respect so that the Dental College is not put to any further difficulty and the students of the MDS Course may also not suffer.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed off finally. There will be no order as to costs.

September 1, 2006



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.