Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sarawgi Charitable Trust, Sgnr vs Union Of India & Anr on 24 May, 2013
Author: Sangeet Lodha
Bench: Sangeet Lodha
SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
ORDER
SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) Dated:- 24th May, 2013.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. P.P.Choudhary, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Manoj Bhandari, for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravi Bhansali, for the respondents.
Reportable
1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned validity of order dated 6.8.12 passed by the Government of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare(Dental Education Section), rejecting the application preferred by the petitioner seeking permission for starting of MDS Course in various specialties applied for, from the Academic Session 2013-14. It is further prayed that the respondents may be directed to consider the petitioner's application for starting the MDS Course and grant permission to run MDS Course in the 7 specialties applied for with 6 seats each from the Academic Session 2013-14.
2. The petitioner-Sarawgi Charitable Trust, Sri Ganganagar ( for short "the trust" hereinafter) registered under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 with the aim and object to open and maintain educational, professional, medical/dental, schools of SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 2 Nursing, Pharmacy, Para Medical and other technical institutions for the benefit of suffering humanity and needy people, applied for establishment of a Dental College at Sri Ganganagar in the name of Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College & Research Centre("the College" hereinafter). Pursuant thereto, Medical & Health Department, Government of India vide an order dated 3.10.06 permitted the petitioner-trust to establish the College. The College established by the petitioner-trust started BDS Course from the Academic Session 2008-09 and the final academic session of four years' Course of its first batch was completed in the Academic Session 2011-12. As per Regulation 11 of the Dental Council of India (Establishment of New Dental Colleges, Opening of New or Higher Course of Study or Training and Increase of Admission Capacity in Dental Colleges) Regulations, 2006 ("Regulations,2006") framed by Dental Council of India("the Council") in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 10A read with Section 20 of Dentist Act, 1948 with the previous approval of the Central Government, admissions of the next batches cannot be made by the Dental College unless the permission granted to establish a Dental College under Regulation 10 is renewed by the Central Government in terms of Regulation 11. The time schedule for processing of application and grant of admission to the students SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 3 in the Dental Colleges as well as requirement of teaching faculty has been mentioned in the schedule annexed to the Regulations, 2006. Proviso to Regulation 11 mandates that the process of renewal of permission will not be applicable after the completion of phased expansion of infrastructure facilities and teaching faculty as per the norms laid down by the Council and the first batch of the students take the final year examinations. The application for renewal of permission is required to be submitted to the Council with a copy to the Central Government, six months prior to the current academic session and the final order on the recommendations made by the Council is required to be granted by the Central Government by 15th of July of each year. The petitioner's College is affiliated with Rajasthan University of Health Sciences ("the University"). According to the petitioner, due to delay in holding examinations by the University of the final academic session i.e. the theory examination of BDS final year, which started from 24.8.12 could be completed on 14.9.12 and thereafter, the practical examinations were held from 17.9.12 to 26.9.12.
3. The pending consideration of the application for renewal submitted by the petitioner in terms of Regulation 11, on 4.5.12, the petitioner's College applied for permission to start MDS Course in the 7 specialties viz. (i) Prosthodontics and Crown & SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 4 Bridge (ii) Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics (iii) Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery (iv) Periodontology (v) Orthodontics & Dental Orthopedics (vi) Oral Pathology and Microbiology (vii) Paedodontics & Preventive Dentistry in Form 2 prescribed by the Regulations, 2006 for the purpose of grant of permission of the Central Government for starting higher courses including Post Graduate Degree/Diploma. However, vide communication dated 24.5.12 issued by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare ( Dental Education Section), Government of India, the College was informed that after initial scrutiny of the application, it is found that its application is lacking in qualifying criteria as prescribed in Regulations, 2006 inasmuch as, the requisite documents in respect of recognition of the BDS Degree of the College, Essentiality Certificate issued by the State Government concerned and Consent of University affiliation from the concerned University valid for entire duration of course were not attached with the application form. The College was asked to furnish the requisite documents provided its BDS Degree of the College is recognized latest by 31.7.12, which was the last date for forwarding the complete proposal/application to the Council for Academic Session 2013-14. The petitioner's College furnished the requisite documents i.e. Essentiality Certificate issued by the State Government and the Consent of Affiliation SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 5 issued by the University, vide communication dated 27.7.12. The College claimed relaxation regarding recognition of BDS Degree which was delayed on account of delay in holding BDS final year examination by the University. However, vide communication dated 6.8.12, the College was informed by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (Dental Education Section), Government of India that its application for starting MDS Course in the applied specialties do not meet the qualifying criteria of Regulation 13(a) of Regulations,2006 i.e. recognition of the qualification of BDS granted to the students of the College and therefore, it is not feasible to process its application for starting of BDS Course in the applied specialties from Academic Session 2013-14. Later, BDS Degree of the petitioner's College was recognized by the Council w.e.f. 21.9.12 vide communication dated 17.1.13. On the recognition being granted as aforesaid, the petitioner's College vide representation dated 21.1.13, requested the Government of India for reconsideration of its original application for starting MDS Course in the applied specialties but to no avail. Hence, this petition.
4. This court on 11.02.13, while considering the prayer of the petitioner for grant of interim relief, after due consideration of the rival submissions of the parties while disposing of the stay petition, passed an interim order in the following terms:-
SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 6 "By way of this interim order, without expressing any final opinion on the matter and finally deciding the present writ petition, it is considered expedient to direct that the concerned Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to forward the petitioner's application along with the certificate issued by the respondent No.1, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of India, New Delhi, to the Dental Council of India immediately and the Dental Council of India is directed to undertake the necessary procedure for consideration of the application of the petitioner on merits for Academic Session 2013-14 for making necessary recommendations back to the Central Government before 28th February,2013. It is made clear that the aforesaid directions will not create any equity in favour of the petitioner institution and the interim direction of considering of the petitioner's application on merits will, however, remain subject to the final decision of this writ petition."
5. Aggrieved by the interim order passed as aforesaid, the respondents preferred a Special Appeal before the Division Bench of this court. The Division Bench declined to interfere with the interim order passed as aforesaid observing that having regard to the spectrum of debate outlined and the time schedule involved, it would be appropriate that writ proceedings are decided expeditiously. Aggrieved thereby, a Special Leave Petition preferred by the respondents before the Hon'ble Supreme Court also stands dismissed vide order dated 10.5.13 passed in SLP (Civil ) No.17962/2013.
6. However, as informed by the counsel for the respondents despite the interim directions being issued by this court, the respondents could not undertake the procedure for consideration of the application of the petitioner on merits for grant of SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 7 permission to run MDS Course in the applied specialties for Academic Session 2013-14.
7. Mr. P.P.Choudhary, Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner contended that the decision of the Government of India in rejecting the application of the petitioner seeking permission for starting MDS Course in the specialties applied for, when the matter with regard to grant of recognition to the Degree of BDS Course awarded by Rajasthan University of Health Sciences to the students of the petitioner's College was still pending consideration before the Council itself and the petitioner had also sought relaxation of the requirement of producing the certificate, is absolutely illegal and arbitrary. Learned counsel submitted that as per Regulation 12, the application seeking permission of the Central Government for starting MDS Course was to be submitted in format of application in Form 2 prescribed by the Regulations, 2006, which does not provide for the Certificate of Recognition being attached with the application form. Learned counsel submitted that the list of enclosures as mentioned in Form 2, does not include the Certificate of Recognition of degree of BDS Course and therefore, pending consideration of the matter with regard to the grant of recognition with the Council, the Government of India could not have refused to further process the petitioner's application SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 8 seeking permission for starting higher course of study. Learned counsel submitted that it is true that the recognition of the dental qualification awarded to the students of the Dental College pursuing the BDS Course is one of the qualifying criteria as laid down by Regulation 13 of the Regulations, 2006 but then, the question with regard to the recognition of the qualification was relevant at the time of actual consideration of the application for grant of permission to run MDS Course and not prior to that and therefore, the application preferred by the petitioner could not have been refused to be processed only for the reason that the application submitted was not accompanied by the requisite certificate in this regard. Learned counsel submitted that despite directions being issued by this court by way of interim order and the Special Appeal and SLP, assailing the interim order having been dismissed, the respondents did not undertake the necessary procedure for consideration of the petitioner's application on merits, which amount to wilful disobedience of the order passed by this court. Learned counsel submitted that it is only on account of fortuitous circumstances that the inspection was not carried out and the recognition to the Degree of BDS awarded to the students of the petitioner's College was not granted before the date fixed by the Schedule for forwarding the application by the Central Government to the Council for SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 9 technical scrutiny. Learned counsel submitted that admittedly, the application seeking permission to run the MDS Course was submitted by the petitioner well in advance i.e. in the month of May,2012 and the requisite certificates except the Certificate of Recognition, which was not required to be attached with the application, were submitted before 31.7.12 and therefore, the respondents were under an obligation to process the petitioner's application for further scrutiny. Learned counsel submitted that the Certificate of Recognition of BDS Course run by the petitioner's College was granted by the Council w.e.f. 21.9.12, however, the notification in this regard was issued by the Government of India as late as on 17.1.13 and therefore, even otherwise, the petitioner could not have produced the said certificate before the scheduled date. Learned counsel emphasised that there being no requirement under the Regulations,2006 of producing the certificate recognizing BDS degree awarded to the students of petitioner's College alongwith the application form, it was required to be forwarded for further scrutiny and it could have been rejected, if it was not complete in all respect upto 31.3.2013, the last date fixed for issue of letter of intent. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner cannot be made to suffer on account of just fortuitous circumstances without there being any fault on its part. Accordingly, it is SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 10 submitted that the respondents deserves to be directed to consider the petitioner's application seeking permission for starting MDS Course in the specialties applied for, for the Academic Session 2013-14 on merits and pending consideration of the application, the petitioner's College deserves to be included for the purpose of the allotment of students for admission to the said course for the Academic Session 2013-14.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that admittedly, as per the Regulation 13, the recognition of Dental qualification granted to the students of the Dental College applying for starting a new or higher course of study or training in Dental subjects is the condition precedent and therefore, the rejection of the application of the petitioner on account of lacking in said eligibility criteria cannot be faulted with. Learned counsel submitted that the recognition of the qualification granted to the students of the Dental college is condition precedent for granting permission to run higher courses of study and therefore, the question of forwarding the petitioner's application for further scrutiny unless, the eligibility criteria is fulfilled does not arise. Learned counsel submitted that the time schedule prescribed for receipt of application for establishment of new Dental Colleges, opening of higher course of study and increase of admission capacity etc. under the SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 11 Regulations,2006, has to be strictly adhered to and therefore, at such a belated stage, the petitioner's application for permission to run the MDS Course in the specialties applied for, could not have been processed and considered by the respondents. In support the contention, learned counsel has relied upon decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Medical Council of India vs. Madhu Singh", (2002) 7 SCC 258, "Mridul Dhar vs. Union of India", (2005)2 SCC 65 and "Priya Gupta vs. State of Chattisgarh & Ors.", (2012) 7 SCC, 433. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents had no intention whatsoever to flout the interim directions issued by this court, however, due to paucity of time, the inspection could not be carried out within the time as directed by this court and consequently, further necessary procedure could not be undertaken for consideration of the petitioner's application on merits for making recommendations to the Central Government before the cut off date i.e. 28.2.13. Learned counsel submitted that as per the time schedule, the academic session has already commenced on 2.5.13 and the process for admission shall stand completed on 31.5.13 by granting admission to the students against vacancies arising due to any reason and therefore, at this belated stage, the question of allotment of the students to the petitioner institution to pursue the MDS Course, does not arise.
SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 12 Lastly, it is submitted that the decision of the respondents being in conformity with the Regulations framed and the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding strict adherence to the time schedule, the same does not suffer from any illegality or vice of arbitrariness so as to warrant interference by this court in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
10. Indisputably, the matters with regard to establishment of new Dental Colleges, opening of higher course of studies and increase of admission capacity in Dental Colleges are governed by Regulations, 2006. As per Regulation 12, for starting a new or higher course or training in Dental subjects including Post Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses, subject to Regulation 13, the College is required to apply to the Central Government by submitting a Scheme in this regard in Form 2 as annexed to the Regulations,2006, for obtaining its permission in conformity with the relevant Regulations of the Council. Regulation 13 prescribes qualifying criteria which is required to be fulfilled by a dental college applying for starting a new or higher course of study or training in dental subjects. Since the controversy involved rolls around Regulation 13, the same may be beneficially quoted:
SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 13 " Qualifying Criteria.-
A dental college shall qualify for starting a new or higher course of study or training in dental subjects, the following conditions are fulfilled:-
(a) the dental qualification granted to the students of the dental college is recognised for running BDS course and conforms to the norms laid down by it;
(b) the certificate regarding desirability and feasibility for starting a new or higher course of study or training at the dental college has been obtained by the college from the State Government or the Union territory administration, as the case may be;
( c) letter of University's permission, valid for the entire duration of the course, for starting such course or training at the dental college has been obtained by it from the University to which it is affiliated;
(d) the dental college has the full complement of staff, equipments and other infrastructure facilities prescribed for under-graduate training programme and also fulfils additional requirements in respect of funds or allocation of finances, staff and other infrastructure facilities as per the norms prescribed by the Council and approved by the Central Government under Section 20 of the Act in the M.D.S. Regulations, 1983 and P.G. Diploma Regulations, 1983, as amended from time to time.
(e) selection of candidates for post-graduate degree and post-graduate diploma courses will be made strictly on the basis of academic merit."
11. It is common ground between the parties that in terms of clause (a) of Regulation 13, a dental college shall not qualify for starting a new or higher course of studies unless the dental qualification granted to the students of the dental college is recognized for running BDS Course and conforms to the norms SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 14 laid down. It is pertinent to note that besides other eligibility condition, one of the eligibility condition prescribed for permission being granted to a dental college for starting a new or higher course of study in terms of clause 13(d) is that the dental college fulfills the requirement with regard to staff, equipments, other infrastructure facilities prescribed for under Graduate Training Programme and also fulfills additional requirement in respect of the funds or allocation of finances, staff and other infrastructure facilities as per the norms prescribed by the Council and approved by the Central Government under Section 20 of the Act in the MDS Regulations, 1983 and PG Diploma Regulations, 1983 as amended from time to time. On being asked by the court, it is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the question of the fulfilling the qualifying criteria as mentioned in clause 13(d) , cannot be insisted upon at the time of the submission of the application in Form 2 seeking permission for starting a new course or higher course inasmuch as, verification of the requirement in terms of clause 13(d) is possible only at the later stage when inspection is carried by the Council for that purpose. In this view of the matter, it is not the case of the respondents that the application preferred seeking permission cannot be put to further process of scrutiny unless and until, the qualifying criteria prescribed under SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 15 the Regulation 13 is fulfilled by the Dental College applying for the permission, in its entirety at the initial stage. Further, a perusal of the Form 2 prescribed by the Regulations,2006 reveals that it gives the list of enclosures to be accompanied by the application form which also does not include the requirement of Certificate of Recognition being accompanied with application form. That apart, even the various columns prescribed in the form does not include the requirement of giving the details of Certificate recognizing the Degree of BDS awarded to students of dental college concerned. In this view of the matter, in considered opinion of this court, the Central Government was not justified in refusing to forward the application of the petitioner to the Dental Council of India for technical scrutiny, for want of such certificate moreso when, the matter with regard to recognition was pending consideration of the Council itself.
12. At this stage, it will be appropriate to refer to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the counsel appearing for the respondents.
13. In Medical Council of India's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that if any student is admitted after commencement of the course, it would be against the intended objects of fixing a time schedule. The court directed that no variation of the schedule so far as admissions are concerned SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 16 shall be allowed and even if seats are unfilled that cannot be a ground for making mid-session admissions.
In Mridul Dhar's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while emphasizing the strict adherence to the time schedule for grant of admission to Post Graduate Courses, further directed that the time schedule for establishment of new College or to increase in intake in existing College, shall be adhered to strictly by all concerned.
Recently in Priya Gupta's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed:
"45. The maxim boni judicis est causas litium dirimere places an obligation upon the Court to ensure that it resolves the causes of litigation in the country. Thus, the need of the hour is that binding dicta be prescribed and statutory regulations be enforced, so that all concerned are mandatorily required to implement the time schedule in its true spirit and substance. It is difficult and not even advisable to keep some windows open to meet particular situation of exception, as it may pose impediments to the smooth implementation of laws and defeat the very object of the scheme. These schedules have been prescribed upon serious consideration by all concerned. They are to be applied stricto sensu and cannot be moulded to suit the convenience of some economic or other interest of any institution, especially in a matter that is bound to result in compromise of the abovestated principles."
14. Adverting to the facts of the present case, it is not in dispute that at the time of making the application by the petitioner in prescribed form seeking permission for starting MDS Course in various specialties,the matter with regard to grant of SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 17 recognition to the degree awarded to the students of the petitioner's College was pending consideration of the Council. As noticed above, the recognition applied for was granted by the Government of India to the degree awarded to the petitioner institution w.e.f. 21.9.12, however, the notification in this regard, was issued as late as on 17.1.13. Aggrieved by inaction of the respondents in not considering the application, the petitioner approached this court by way of present writ petition, wherein after hearing both the parties, while disposing of the stay petition, the interim order was passed by this court as aforesaid. It is a matter of record that in compliance of the interim order passed by this court as aforesaid, the Government of India immediately forwarded the application of the petitioner's College for necessary action to the Council vide communication dated 15.2.13. It is really surprising that while pursuing the remedy aggrieved by the interim order passed by this court, the respondent-Council persisting its obduracy did not take any steps to comply with the interim directions issued by this court, to carry out the inspection before the cut off date 28.2.13 and to undertake the necessary procedure for consideration of the application of the petitioner on merits for making necessary recommendations to the Central Government. The interim order was passed by the court on 11.2.13 and therefore, undoubtedly, SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 18 the sufficient time was available with the respondents to carry out the directions issued by the court as aforesaid. It is pertinent to note that the directions as aforesaid was issued by the court after due consideration of the submissions made on behalf of the counsel for the respondent-Council in terms that within short time, it would not be possible to complete the process of inspection which is required to be done before 28.2.13. As the recognition of degree of BDS Course run by the petitioner's College had already been granted vide notification dated 17.1.13 w.e.f. 21.9.12, which was delayed for no fault on the part of the petitioner, there was no impediment in respondent-Council considering the application of the petitioner for further process in terms of the directions issued by this court as aforesaid. Needless to say that had the inspection being carried out by the Council in terms of the directions issued by this court, the application of the petitioner's College could have been considered for grant of permission on merits within the time frame as prescribed by the Schedule attached to the Regulations,2006. It is true that generally the time schedule provided for has to be strictly adhered to but then, the said time schedule contains a relaxation clause in form of note 2, which provides that the time schedule indicated may be modified by the Central Government, for the reason to be recorded in writing, in respect of any class SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 19 or category of applications. Thus, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, where the respondents have rejected the application of the petitioner in arbitrary manner and did not even care to take the necessary steps to consider the application of the petitioner despite unequivocal directions being issued by this court, the petitioner cannot be non suited on the ground that the time schedule for dealing with the application and for issuing letter of permission, has come to an end. As a matter of fact, in the instant case, the persisting obduracy of the respondent- Council in not dealing with the application of the petitioner on merits, despite the directions issued by this court, is highly deplorable and cannot be countenanced by this court.
15. In view of the discussion above, the decision of the respondents in refusing to process the petitioner's application for further scrutiny and consideration on merits for grant of permission to run MDS Course in the specialties applied for, for the Academic Session 2013-14 is not sustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be quashed. However, the petitioner cannot be allotted the students for pursuing the MDS Course prior to consideration of its application and the permission being granted by the respondents to run the course inasmuch as, the students cannot be put in a situation wherein they will be in lurch if ultimately, the application preferred by the petitioner's College SARAWGI CHARITABLE TRUST, SRI GANGANAGAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.786/13) 20 seeking permission as aforesaid, is refused.
16. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The rejection of the application of the petitioner's College for starting MDS Course in the specialties applied for communicated vide communication dated 6.8.12 is quashed. The respondents are directed to do the needful and consider the application of the petitioner for grant of permission for starting MDS Course in the specialties applied for within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. Further, in the event of the petitioner's College being granted permission for starting the MDS Course in the specialties applied for, the appropriate steps shall be taken by the respondents for allotment of the students to the petitioner's College for admission in MDS course in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
(SANGEET LODHA),J.
Aditya/-