AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon''ble Shri Satish K Agnihotri, J.
(Review petition under Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC)
(Review petition under Rules 87 and 90 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules, 2007)
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Chhattisgarh Dental College & Research Institute, Rajnandgaon, who was the respondent No. 4 & 5 in writ petition, being W.P.(C) No. 6100 of 2011 (V.K. Sinha v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Others) (for short "the respondent college"), has preferred the review petition No. 03 of 2012 on three grounds viz; firstly; the respondent herein (for short "the writ petitioner") had stated wrong facts that his daughter was admitted in another college, whereras, the daughter of the writ petitioner is still pursuing her studies in the respondent college. Secondly; application for grant of migration certificate has to be approved by the Dental Council of India (for short "the D.C.I.") as well as other authorities, if an application is filed within a period of one month of passing the first professional Bachelor of Dental Surgery examination (for short "B.D.S. examination") and thirdly; since the payment was made by the writ petitioner himself, it is wrong to say that the educational expenditure were borne by the grand mother of Ku. Swati Sinha.
The writ petitioner has also preferred a review petition, being review petition No. 77 of 2012, after three months of filing of review petition No. 03 of 2012 by the respondent college, submitting that the fact stated at the time of hearing of the writ petition was not correct to the effect that the petitioner''s daughter was admitted to local college at Bilaspur.
In view of the above, both the review petitions i.e. review petition No. 77 of 2012 and review petition No. 03 of 2012 are being considered together and decided by a common order.
The fact that the daughter of the writ petitioner was admitted to other college is not found correct. Even the learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that at the time of hearing of the writ petition wrong facts were stated, thus correct facts may be incorporated. The fact remains that the daughter of the writ petitioner still not admitted to B.D.S. course in any other college other than the respondent college. Migration of a student from one dental college to other dental college is governed by the migration rules of Dental Council Regulations, 2007.
Migration Rules reads as under:
IV. Migration :
(1) Migration from one dental college to another is not a right of a student. However, migration of students from one dental college to another dental college in India may be considered by the Dental Council of India. Only in exceptional cases on extreme compassionate grounds, provided the following criteria are fulfilled. Routine migrations on other ground shall not be allowed.
(2) Both the colleges, i.e. one at which the student is studying at present and one to which migration is sought, are recognized by the Dental Council of India.
(3) The applicant candidate should have passed first professional BDS examination.
(4) The applicant candidate submits his application for migration, complete in all respects, to all authorities concerned within a period of one month of passing (declaration of results) the first professional Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) examination.
(5) The applicant candidate must submit an affidavit stating that he/she will pursue 240 days of prescribed study before appearing at IInd professional Bachelor or Dental Surgery (BDS) examination at the transferee dental college, which should be duly certified by the Registrar of the concerned University in which he/she is seeking transfer. The transfer will be applicable only after receipt of the affidavit.
On perusal of the migration rules, which are clear and unambiguous, it is manifest that an application for migration can be made only after having passed the first professional B.D.S. examination and secondly, the application must be made within a period of one month of passing (declaration of results) of the first professional BDS examination. The issue of grant of migration certificate has to be considered by the D.C.I. wherein the D.C.I. has discretion to consider the case in extreme compassionate grounds also, which may be pleaded by a candidate.
The respondent college, despite service had chosen not to appear in W.P.(C) No. 6100 of 2011 thus, initially they did not participate in the proceedings to bring into notice any facts, which they are trying to bring into the notice of the Court by way of review petition. The D.C.I. (respondent No. 3 in writ petition) had also not chosen to appear in the writ Court to put forward its case, despite service of notice.
In view of the aforestated facts and circumstances of the case, the authorities including the D.C.I. are directed to consider the case of the daughter of the writ petitioner on the basis of application, if the same was filed within a period of one month from the date of declaration of the result. The respondent college is further directed to send the application to the D.C.I. with all the requisite information so that the D.C.I. may take decision in accordance with law as early as possible and thereafter, the respondents in the writ petition are directed to consider granting no objection certificate, if all the requirements for grant of no objection certificate is complete. The order dated 14-12-2011 passed in WP (C) No. 6100 of 2011 is accordingly reviewed and set aside by the instant order passed in Review Petitions No.3 & 77 of 2012. Accordingly, both the Review Petitions No.3 & 77 of 2012 stand allowed to the extent indicated above. No order asto costs.