High Court Jharkhand High Court

Hazaribagh College Of Dental S vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 March, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Hazaribagh College Of Dental S vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 March, 2011
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                W. P. (C) No. 3798 of 2010
                            ---

           Hazaribagh College of Dental Science and Hospital
           Demotand, Hazaribagh                     ...     ...              Petitioner
                                     Versus
           Union of India and others                      ...     ...        Respondents
                              ---


           CORAM        : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. K. MERATHIA
                              ---
           For the Petitioner              : M/s. Delip Jerath, Advocate,
                                             Amit Sinha & Neeta Krishna, Advocate
           For the Respondent No. 1        : Mr. Md. Mokhtar Khan, ASGI
           For the Dental Council of India : Mr. R. C. Mohanty, Advocate

                               ---

7. 16.03.2011

: Mr. Jereth, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the inspection was to be done within 15 March to 15 May for the
academic session 2010-11, but it was done on 1st June 2010 when
there were holidays, and therefore, only 23 faculties out of 90 were
found. He further submitted that when regular inspection was done in
April 2010, 83 faculties were found out of 90. He further submitted that
if petitioner is given a chance, it will satisfy the Dental Council of India
(‘D.C.I.’ in short) that they had adequate number of faculties for
teaching the students; and that the students, were admitted in
accordance with the rules and regulations and have completed their
course properly.

Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the D.C.I. on
the other hand submitted that the regular inspection was done in April
2010 i.e. within the said period. The petitioner was asked to
comply/rectify the deficiencies, but it was not done, and then a follow-
up inspection was done on 01.06.2010. He further submitted that
intimation about the holidays was not sent to D.C.I. by the petitioner.

In reply, Mr. Jerath submitted that petitioner was inspected
for the preceding three years and the holidays as per the University
prospectus were known to D.C.I.; and that the petitioner rectified the
deficiencies pointed out in their inspection held in April.

Be that as it may. Keeping in view that 85 students have
been admitted under the order of this Court, D.C.I. is permitted to hold
an inspection/inquiry. If it is satisfied that during the academic session
-2-
2010-11, there were adequate number of faculties; and that the
admission have been done as per the rules and regulation and the
petitioner had rectified all the deficiencies; and the students have
completed their course properly, it may allow the students to appear in
the examination for the 2010-11 sessions through the petitioner’s
college.

The petitioner and all concern will cooperate in such
inspection/inquiry, failing which D.C.I. may pass ex-parte order. It is
expected that such process will be completed as early as possible and
preferably within three weeks from today.

It is made clear that this order is being passed in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, and therefore, it will not
be treated as precedence.

With these observations and directions, this writ petition is
disposed of.

(R. K. Merathia, J.)

R. Shekhar Cp 2