Partly allowed

Tatyasaheb Kore Dental College and Research Centre v. 1.UNION of India, and Ors.

Education And Admissions – Quashing of administrative orders – Recognition for post-graduate courses

Bombay HC19 Oct 2010WP/4238/2010

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay quashed communications rejecting the petitioner's application for renewal of permission to admit students to post-graduate courses. After verifying that requisite faculty and infrastructure were available, the court directed the authorities to proceed to grant permission as per the Dental Council of India norms. The petition was disposed of with specific directions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned communications dated 22 April 2010, 30 March 2010, and 18 March 2010 are quashed and set aside. The Government of India and the Dental Council of India shall proceed to grant permission i

Tatyasaheb Kore Dental College and Research Centre… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2010)

wp4238-10

upa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 4238 OF 2010

¶7

Tatyasaheb Kore Dental College & Research Center ).. Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

Union of India and others ).. Respondents

¶10

Mr. Sandeep R. Waghmare for the Petitioner. Mr. Y.R. Mishra for Respondent No.1. Mr. P.M. Havnur for Respondent No.2. Mr. A.I. Patel, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondent No.3.

¶11

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. AND DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. TUESDAY , OCTOBER 19, 2010

¶12

P. C. :

¶13

The petitioner runs Dental college which was granted recognition by the Dental Council of India for running post-graduate courses in Prosthodontics and Orthodontics. By the impugned communications, Government of India on the basis of the recommendations of the Dental Council of India decided to reject the petitioner’s application for renewal of the permission to admit students to the above courses.

¶14

For the detailed reasons given in the ad-interim order dated 26 May 2010, this Court granted ad-interim stay permitting the petitioner

wp4238-10

upa

to admit students to the above courses after noticing that the grounds on which the permission was being denied were not valid as the concerned faculty members were available to teach the students in the concerned disciplines.

¶19

At the last hearing on 6 October 2010, we had noted that in spite of detailed reasons given by this Court in the ad-interim order dated 26 May 2010, Dental Council of India had not filed any affidavit indicating that either of the two objections still survives. However, the learned counsel for the Dental Council of India stated that it was necessary to verify that after the ad-interim order dated 26 May 2010, Dr.Jadhav and Dr.Sangeeta Golwalkar continue to be faculty members for the concerned subjects in the petitioner college.

¶20

At the hearing today, learned counsel for the Dental Council of India has placed on record report dated 14 October 2010 indicating that the requisite faculty is available for both the subjects and that infrastructure, equipments, library and clinical materials are also available as per the Dental Council of India norms.

¶21

The report further indicates that the petitioner college has already admitted students in the first M.D.S. course in the department of Orthodontics and also students in the first year and the second year M.D.S. course in Prosthodontics.

wp4238-10

upa

In view of the above, nothing further survives in the petition and the impugned communications dated 22 April 2010 and 30 March 2010 issued by the Government of India and the communication dated 18 March 2010 issued by the Dental Council of India are quashed and set aside. The Government of India and the Dental Council of India shall proceed to take necessary steps for granting permission in light of the report dated 14 October 2010.

¶26

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶27

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶28

DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.

Tatyasaheb Kore Dental College and Research Centre v. 1.UNION of India, and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tatyasaheb Kore Dental College and Research Centre v. 1.UNION of India, and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Appasaheb Ramchandra Jadhav and Ors. Vs State of Maharasthra and Ors.

Maruti Ambaji Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Eknath Rama Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

M/S. R.J. Construction and Ors. Vs Premji Hirji Shah and Ors.

Aristo Realty Developers Ltd. Anr. Vs Slum Rehabilitation Authority and 3 Ors.

Aristo Realty Developers Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.