Patna High Court - Orders
Mithila Minority Dental College And ... vs The Union Of India on 30 April, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Sinha
Bench: Alok Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4654 of 2026
======================================================
Mithila Minority Dental College and Hospital
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India & Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ali Muqtadir Ahmad, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Adv
Mr. Mohit Agarwal, Adv
Mr. Vikash Wasna, Adv
Ms. Twinkle Kumari, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026Re: I.A. No. 1 of 2026 Heard the parties.
2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the petitioner by way of clarificatory amendment of existing paragraph 27 of the main writ application. Earlier, in paragraph 27 of the writ application, the petitioner had stated that the petitioner institute had installed the biometric attendance system in 2021 within the college premises and hospital. However, in paragraph 28 of the writ application, the petitioner had stated that the biometric system was installed by the Dental Council of India. This had given rise to an ambiguity, as a result of which the petitioner has filed the present interlocutory application clarifying the factual position that, by way of Advertisement No. 22.8.2019 (Annexure P/27), a "Request for Proposal" was Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 2/13 issued by the Dental Council of India. The system was to be developed, implemented, and operated through a designated external agency, i.e., the "successful bidder" or "system integrator", in terms of the scope of work under the "Request for Proposal" (Annexure P/27). The successful bidder, namely "Mantra", was given the work of installing and maintaining the biometric system. To establish this point, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner referred to Annexure 10 of the writ application, which shows that it is the agency of the Dental Council of India, namely "Mantra", which has installed the biometric system and was/is responsible for its maintenance and repair.
3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-Dental Council of India did not have much to say on the factual aspect of the agency of the DCI having installed the biometric system pursuant to "Request for Proposal" floated by DCI. Consequently, this interlocutory application is allowed, and the existing paragraph No. 27 of the writ application is directed to be substituted with the amended paragraph reproduced in paragraph 8 of this interlocutory application. The substituted paragraph 27 shall be treated as part of the main writ application for all purposes.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 3/13
4. The petitioner is permitted to carry out the consequential amendment/correction in the writ petition within four weeks from today. The office is directed to ensure that the necessary correction, as ordered above, is carried out by the petitioner in the writ application.
C.W.J.C. No. 4654 of 2026
5. When this writ application was taken up on 23.04.2026, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner had advanced arguments on merits as well as for grant of interim relief, as prayed for in paragraph 1 (vi) of the writ application. However, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Dental Council of India had opposed the prayer by contending that at least one week's time be granted to the Dental Council of India to file a counter affidavit, and thereafter the matter be taken up for considering the prayer for grant of interim relief on the next date.
6. Accepting the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Dental Council of India and the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India, this Court, on 23.04.2026, had adjourned the matter to 30.04.2026 (today) and had granted opportunity to the respondents to file their counter affidavits in the meantime.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 4/13
7. Despite the opportunity granted, the respondent Dental Council of India and the Union of India have not filed their respective counter affidavits, thereby leaving no option for the Court but to hear the petitioner on the issue of grant of interim relief today.
INTERIM RELIEF:
8. The petitioner, Mithila Minority Dental College and Hospital, Darbhanga, is an unaided private minority institution established in the year 1989 by a registered society. The institution is permanently affiliated to Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga, and is duly recognized by the Central Government, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Upon recommendations of the Dental Council of India, the statutory regulatory body governing dental education, the petitioner was granted permission to conduct the BDS course in 1997 and, thereafter, various MDS courses from the academic session 2016-17.
9. It is the case of the petitioner that the institution is situated in the Mithilanchal region of North Bihar, a geographically remote and flood-prone area, and has, despite such constraints, consistently maintained the requisite infrastructure, faculty, clinical material, and academic standards Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 5/13 as prescribed under the governing regulatory framework. The petitioner presently conducts the BDS course with an approved intake of 60 students and MDS courses in multiple recognized specialties with duly sanctioned intake capacity.
10. It is further stated that since the initial grant of permission, the petitioner-institute has been subjected to periodic inspections by the Dental Council of India in terms of the statutory scheme under Section 10A of the Dentists Act, 1948 and the Postgraduate Dental Education Regulations, 2000, and upon such inspections, permissions have been regularly renewed for successive academic sessions, including grant of additional postgraduate seats and introduction of new specialties from time to time.
According to the petitioner, even for the academic session 2025-26, the Central Government, on the recommendation of the Dental Council of India, had granted renewal of permission, including for increased intake in certain MDS specialties, after being satisfied with the infrastructure, faculty, and other regulatory compliances of the institution.
11. The grievance of the petitioner arises out of the impugned communications/recommendations dated 27.01.2026 (Annexures P/15 to P/18), whereby adverse action has been Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 6/13 taken in relation to continuation/renewal of certain MDS courses for the academic session 2026-27. It is the specific case of the petitioner that one of the grounds for such adverse action relates to alleged deficiencies in the biometric attendance system under the Online Faculty and Staff Attendance Monitoring System (OFSAMS). The petitioner asserts that the biometric system, though installed in the year 2021 in compliance with regulatory requirements, had been suffering from persistent technical malfunctions, which were repeatedly brought to the notice of the Dental Council of India through various communications from the year 2022 onwards, requesting necessary rectification and technical intervention. Despite such intimation, the technical defects were not duly addressed, and the petitioner cannot be penalized for faults attributable to the system itself, which was/is installed by the agency appointed by Dental Council of India.
12. It is further submitted that during the period when the petitioner-institute had requested the respondent authorities to suitably reschedule the visit of the OFSAMS technical team for enrolment and updation of biometric records of faculty members and postgraduate students, the institution was simultaneously undergoing multiple statutory inspections Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 7/13 conducted by expert inspectors of the Dental Council of India itself between 2021 to 2025.
13. The grievance of the petitioner crystallizes from the impugned communications/recommendations dated 27.01.2026 (Annexures P/15 to P/18), pertaining to different MDS departments, wherein a common finding has been recorded by the Executive Committee of the Dental Council of India recommending to the Central Government not to renew permission for the third year of MDS courses, including increased seats in the respective specialties for the academic session 2026-27. The said recommendation is primarily founded on the allegation that despite multiple opportunities, the petitioner-institute failed to rectify deficiencies in the biometric attendance system and had purposefully not ensured its proper functioning, and further that no postgraduate students had been registered in the biometric system for the last three years.
The petitioner disputes the said findings and asserts that the alleged deficiencies are attributable to persistent technical malfunction in the biometric system, which had been repeatedly brought to the notice of the respondent authorities, and therefore the impugned action, based substantially on such grounds, is arbitrary and unsustainable.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 8/13
14. Learned senior counsel appearing for Dental Council of India opposes the prayer for grant of interim relief. He, however, submitted that if the Court was inclined to grant the interim relief as prayed for by the petitioner, then it should be confined to only existing students studying in the college and the petitioner should not take fresh admissions in light of the impugned communications/recommendations dated 27.01.2026 (Annexure P/15-P/18).
15. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court proceeds to consider the prayer for grant of interim relief. At the outset, it is made clear that the observations recorded hereinafter are prima facie in nature, confined only to the consideration of interim relief and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.
16. A perusal of the impugned communications/ recommendations dated 27.01.2026 (Annexures P/15 to P/18) would indicate that, though they pertain to different MDS departments, the reasoning assigned therein is identical in substance, with only the names of the respective departments being different. The common basis for recommending non- renewal of permission for the third year of MDS courses for the Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 9/13 academic session 2026-27 is the alleged failure of the petitioner-institution to rectify deficiencies in the biometric attendance system, coupled with an observation that the institution had "purposefully" not got the machine rectified by furnishing unsatisfactory reasons.
17. The reasons cited in the impugned communications, inter alia, include instances such as faculty being on leave due to cold weather and transportation issues on 02.01.2024, celebration of institutional events 0n 25.01.2024, and attendance at personal ceremonies on 05.04.2025. Prima facie, this Court finds that such reasons, as recorded, do not appear to have a rational nexus when viewed in the broader factual context. It is further noteworthy that the instances relied upon by the respondent -Dental Council of India pertain to the years 2024 and 2025. However, the record indicates that for the academic session 2025-26, the Central Government, upon recommendation of the Dental Council of India, had already granted renewal of permission to the petitioner-institution for the academic session 2025-26, including for the second year of the MDS courses as indicated in Annexure P/4 and P/5. Prima facie, therefore, if the alleged deficiencies of the nature now relied upon were considered material, it is not readily apparent Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 10/13 as to how the petitioner was granted renewal of permission for the immediately preceding academic session 2025-26. The reliance on such past instances, without any clear intervening material of a serious or disqualifying nature, for denying renewal for the academic session 2026-27, raises a prima facie issue as to the reasonableness and consistency of the decision- making process.
18. Further, from the materials placed on record, including the averments made in the writ application, it further prima facie appears that the petitioner-institution had, from time to time, brought to the notice of the respondent-Dental Council of India the persistent technical malfunction of the biometric attendance system installed under the OFSAMS platform. Reference has been made to multiple communications addressed by the petitioner to the authorities of DCI from the year 2022 onwards which has been specifically referred in Paragraphs 28 and 29 of the writ application, requesting necessary rectification and technical intervention.
19. It has also been specifically pleaded that even in close proximity to the impugned action, the petitioner had, vide communications dated 05.01.2026 and 10.01.2026 (Annexure P/8 and P/9), requested the respondent authorities of DCI to Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 11/13 depute the technical team for repair, maintenance, and updation of the biometric system, as well as for enrolment of newly appointed faculty members and postgraduate students. Prima facie, therefore, it appears that the petitioner had not remained inactive, but had been consistently seeking remedial measures from the authorities concerned.
20. In this context, the contention of the petitioner that the biometric system was installed and maintained through an agency designated under the authority of the Dental Council of India assumes relevance. If the functioning and maintenance of such system substantially rests within the domain of the respondent- Dental Council of India or their designated agency, the attribution of fault solely upon the petitioner-institution, without adequately addressing the aspect of technical malfunction and responsibility for maintenance, prima facie gives rise to a debatable issue.
21. This Court is also mindful of the fact that the impugned action has direct bearing on the continuation of postgraduate dental courses and consequently affects not only the petitioner-institution but also the academic prospects and careers of the students enrolled or seeking enrolment. In such circumstances, the balance of convenience, prima facie, appears Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 12/13 to lean in favour of maintaining the status quo, existing prior to the impugned communications/recommendations dated 27.01.2026 (Annexure P/15-P/18) so as to avoid irreparable prejudice, pending adjudication of the writ petition.
22. The submission made by learned counsel for the DCI that in case the Court desires to grant interim relief, then it should be confined to existing students only and the petitioner should not take fresh admissions in light of the impugned communications/recommendations dated 27.01.2026, cannot be accepted, keeping in mind that the petitioner college is an unaided institution which has to exist on self finance, therefore, any restriction placed on fresh admission could prove to be fatal to its very existence.
23. In view of the aforesaid prima facie considerations, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner has been able to make out a case for grant of interim relief. Accordingly, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant interim relief to the petitioner, as prayed for in paragraph 1 (vi) of the writ application. It is, therefore, directed that the impugned communications/recommendations dated 27.01.2026 (Annexures P/15 to P/18) shall remain in abeyance and shall not Patna High Court CWJC No.4654 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 13/13 be given effect to in any manner prejudicial to the petitioner- institution or its students during the pendency of the writ application.
24. The respondents-Dental Council of India as well as the Union of India are granted four weeks' time from today to file their respective counter affidavits. A copy of the same shall be served upon learned counsel for the petitioner in advance. The petitioner shall have two weeks' thereafter to file rejoinder, if any.
25. Put up this case on 25.06.2026, retaining its position.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/-
U