Rama Dental Hospital and Research Centre vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.—This petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 25/27th August, 2009 Annexure -36 to the writ petition passed by the Respondent No. 1-Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, intimating the Petitioner that the admission capacity of the students for the session 2006-07 onwards has been redetermined in terms of the MDS Regulations 1983, Dental Council of India Regulations, 1983 and 2006 and the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993. Further the impugned communication also prohibits the Petitioner - institution from admitting any students in the MDS Course in various specialities for their Academic Session 2009-10. A further direction has been issued to the College to submit the scheme of two specialities, namely, Conservative Dentistry and Oral Pathology.

A further mandamus has been prayed for to allow the Petitioner - college to enroll fresh candidates in the M.D.S. Course against 47 seats for all the aforesaid Academic Sessions and to allow the College to conduct practical examinations and other examinations in the terms prayed for.

It is essentially a challenge to the recommendations of the Dental Council as accepted by the Central Government and the matter has been contested by the Council by filing a counter affidavit.

The matter had been heard earlier whereupon the judgment was reserved. Before delivering, certain developments were brought to the notice of the Court through an application dated 19.5.2007 whereupon a short rehearing took place on 25.5.2011. Certain orders passed on 30.12.2010 calling upon the Petitioner to furnish an undertaking and instructions have been issued by the Government to the Council for taking exams. The said developments are only consequential and have no bearing presently so as to detain the matter any longer.

The dispute raised is with regard to the permission by the Respondent No. 1. fixing the admission capacity in various subjects/specialities Courses of Master in Dental Surgery in the College namely Rama Dental College, Hospital and Research Centre, Kanpur Nagar. The background of this litigation is that the Institution was already running a 100 seat capacity of course in Bachelor of Dental Surgery for which permission had been granted on 14th February, 2003. The Institution moved an application on 20.11.2003 to the Respondent No. 1. to grant permission to run the Masters Course of M.D.S. in 9 specialities. According to the Petitioner the application was moved for the said specialities with 9 seats in each speciality. The Petitioner was called upon to tender more information upon which a revised application was moved on 28.2.2004. This application was for running the said courses under the self financing scheme. The award of degree has to be made by a University and the institution has to get self affiliated to a University for that purpose. It has also to seek an essentiality certificate from the State Government for running the said courses.

An "affiliation certificate" of the University (not an affiliation by the State Government for the courses in dispute) was extended on 20th May, 2004 and the essentiality certificate was issued by the State Government on 25th May, 2004. The said Essntiality Certificate and the affiliation conditions clearly prescribed that the same shall be subject to the maximum number of seats made available for admission under the regulations prescribed by the Dental Council of India. The said letters also refer to an earlier certificate dated 24.11.2003.

The Respondent No. 1. rejected the proposal made by the Petitioner vide order dated 30th May, 2004. A writ petition No. 44905 of 2005 was filed before this Court in which a direction was issued to decide the claim of the Petitioner. A fresh inspection was carried out on 26.8.2005 and a permission was accordingly granted to the Petitioner for the session 2006-07 on 31.10.2005.

It appears that some fresh inspection was carried out on 9th January, 2006 and on the basis thereof the Government of India suspended its earlier permission dated 31.10.2005 vide order dated 25.1.2006. This action was assailed in writ petition No. 26363 of 2006. During the pendency of this petition the report of the inspection was sent to the Government of India on 30.4.2006 that there were deficiencies in relation to 3 specialities where the teachers/faculties were not available in accordance with the norms. These three specialities of Conservative Dentistry, Periodontics and Oral Pathology. The Government of India accordingly after having received the report refused to grant permission vide order dated 12th May, 2006.

The College wrote a letter on 18th May, 2006 alleging that the deficiencies had already been removed and teachers had already been appointed and therefore the permission granted to the institution for all the 47 seats as per the earlier permission dated 31.10.2005. The Respondent No. 1. passed orders on 20.5.2006 allowing only 18 seats in all in six specialities to the Petitioner - institution for admission in 2006-07.

On 23rd May, 2006 writ petition No. 26363 of 2006 came up for hearing and the same was disposed of with a direction to the Respondent No. 1. to pass fresh order in the light of the request made by the Petitioner - institution on 18.5.2006. The said judgment is quoted herein under:

Hon''ble Bharati Sapru, J.

The Petitioner states that the Petitioner has fulfilled the criteria prescribed by the Respondent to run M.D.S. Course in 9 subjects. However, by the communication dated 20th of May, 2006, the Respondent has only allowed the Petitioner to run the courses in 6 subjects and has granted only 18 seats to the Petitioner. The Petitioner states that in this communication dated 20th of May, 2006, the Respondents have not taken into account the representation made by the Petitioner dated 18th of May, 2006 by which they had supplied all the necessary information regarding their fulfilling of necessary criteria and as per the letter dated 18th of May, 2006, the Petitioner claims that the Petitioner should have been granted at least 47 seats in nine subjects.

Since Respondents have already cleared 18 seats. I direct the Respondents to examine the letter of the Petitioner dated 18.5.06 and afford them an opportunity of hearing on or before 30th of May, 2006 and take a decision with regard to the other three subjects and the remaining seats. I direct the Respondents to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the representation made by the Petitioner dated 18.5.06 by 30th of May, 2006.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be given to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner on payment of usual charges within 24 hours. Copy of this order may be given to the Union of India also free of costs.

Dated: 23.5.06

This Court passed a stay order on 15th June, 2006 which is to the following effect:

Heard Sri M.D. Singh, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri R.P. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for Union of India, Respondents and 2.

As an interim measure, the effect and operation of the impugned orders dated 25.1.2006 annexure-18, 20.5.2006 annexure 28 and 30.5.2006, annexure 31. passed by Respondent No. 1. and 2. shall remain suspended. The Petitioner shall be permitted to admit 47 students in 9 specialities of M.D.S. Course in academic session 2006-07 and the Respondents are restrained to raise any objection in this regard.

The said interim order was assailed by the Respondent No. 1. in appeal before a Division Bench of this Court and the aforesaid interim order dated 15.6.2006 was set aside with a direction to the learned single Judge to decide the matter again afresh on giving reasons. The order dated 3rd November, 2006 passed in Special Appeal Defective No. 695 of 2006 is quoted herein under:

Hon''ble Ajoy Nath Ray, C.J.

Hon''ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

On the basis of the impugned order dated the 15th of June, 2006 passed by an Hon''ble Single Judge of this Court during vacation, 47 students are alleged already to have been admitted to the Rama Dental College. This is the submission made on behalf of the Respondents. The Appellants, Central Government are aggrieved by the interim order. It is significant that the Dental Council of India is not a party to the writ petition, but they assuredly should be, since the matter of grant for new courses is heavily, if not solely dependent upon recognition recommended by the said Council.

We find that the impugned order is a very short one, and does not contain any reasons. It is essential that some reasons, however basis or however short, be given even while passing an interim order. This prevents the order from being criticized as arbitrary, and also gives the Court of appeal essential information as to what was uppermost in the mind of the first Court in the first place.

An order becomes legally infirm, if it is supposed to contain reasons and yet it does not. On the basis of this legal infirmity, the impugned order under appeal is set aside. Although we have heard parties at some length, yet we have not entered into the merits of the case in any final way, and we are not in a position to make any pronouncement in that regard.

As such, the impugned order under appeal is set aside. Our order and observations are without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in further proceedings, wherever those might be. The matter will now be heard out by the Hon''ble Single Judge having jurisdiction in the matter either for shaping further interim orders or finally disposing of the writ petition, as the case might be. The Respondent-writ Petitioner has undertaken to join the Dental Council of India as a party to the writ petition, and cause service to be effected on them with all papers and orders including the present order, within a week from the date hereof.

The appeal is thus, allowed and disposed of in these terms without any order as to costs.

However, the Hon''ble single Judge will decide all matters including the question of the fate of the students, who have been already admitted; if necessary, the students might also be added as parties to the writ petition, if any prayer to that effect is made on behalf of any party, or if the Hon''ble Single Judge thinks that to be necessary. Directions for affidavits might be prayed for in the course below and the Hon''ble single Judge will, needless to say, be the master of the procedure in his Lordship''s own Court. If the Union of India, or the Dental Council of India is found to be hesitant in filing pleadings again needless to mention, the writ Petitioner will be at liberty to press for ex-parte decision of the writ petition, or any interim application.

It appears that the Dental Council of India preferred a SLP against the stay order dated 15.6.2006 as it had been passed during vacations. The said SLP was dismissed as infructuous in view of the order passed by the Division Bench on 3.11.2006 quoted herein above. Another appeal was preferred by the Dental Council of India against the order in Division Bench dated 3.11.2006 on the ground that the order had been passed without hearing the Dental Council. This special leave to appeal numbered as Civil Appeal No. 1319 of 2007 was disposed of on 9th March, 2007 setting aside the order of the Division Bench dated 3.11.2006. The judgment of the Apex Court is reproduced herein under:

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

We have heard counsel for the Appellant as also the counsel for the Respondents on caveat.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Division bench of the High Court of Allahabad in Special Appeal No. 695 of 2006 pm 03rd November 2006 whereby the special appeal has been decided without assigning any reasons.

Counsel for both the parties agree that the matter be remitted back to the Division Bench for consideration. Ordered accordingly.

Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the students who have already been admitted on the basis of the interim order of the learned Single Judge, should not be allowed to continue their studies. The Appellant would be at liberty to urge this point before the Division Bench. The Respondent college will furnish details of the students admitted to various course and the Appellant will take steps to implead them and they will also be heard before a decision is taken in the matter. The Division Bench of the High Court is requested to dispose of the matter at an early date.

The appeal is allowed accordingly and the impugned order is set aside.

A perusal of the said judgment would indicate that a plea had been raised that the students for the session 2006-07 who had been admitted by the College should not be allowed to continue to pursue their studies which point was left open to be urged before the Division Bench. Instead of remitting the entire matter before the learned Single Judge the apex court directed the Division Bench to hear out the matter itself.

In the meantime, it appears that the College had applied for affiliation before the State Government which had been granted under the provisions of Section 37(2) of the U.P. State Universities Act on 29.12.2006 affiliating the institution to the Agra University. The said affiliation also spelled out certain conditions relating to the 47 seats for which affiliation had been granted. However certain deficiencies had been pointed out by he Inspecting Team in the report dated 31.2.2005 which was directed to the rectified. Needless to mention that the affiliation was under Form - B (Prapatra -Ba) which connotes the existence of certain deficiencies. The University issued a letter on 19.2.2007 as a follow up action to the said grant of affiliation.

The Respondent No. 1. Government of India granted permission to the Petitioner afresh on 30.3.2007 in the six specialities with only 17 seats in all for the session 2007-08. The Petitioner - institution assailed the aforesaid order in writ petition No. 19464 of 2007 in which the following order was passed on 23.5.2007:

Hon''ble Arun Tandon, J.

Since under the orders of Hon''ble Supreme Court the matter with regard to the orders of MCI dated 20.5.2006 whereby the total intake permitted in the Institution has been reduced from 47 to 18 for the M.D.S. Course, is already engaging the attention of the Division Bench, it would be appropriate that hearing of the writ petition may await the decision to be passed by the Division Bench in terms of the order of Hon''ble Supreme Court.

List on 9.7.2007.

The fate of students admitted in excess of 17 in respect of academic session 2007-08, permitted by MCI shall be decided by this Court on 9.7.2007.

In the meantime as noted above the dispute of the session 2006-07 had already been remanded by the apex court before the Division Bench. This subsequent dispute of the session 2007-08 was also resumed by the Division Bench and all the matters relating to both session that is 2006-07 and 2007-08 were decided by two separate Judgments of the same date. The judgment dated 16.12.2008 in the case relating to 2006-07 is as follows:

Heard Shri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Alok Kumar Yadav for the Petitioner. Mr. Ajai Bhanot appears for Respondent No. 1. and Sri V.B. Upadhyay, Senior Advocate with Shri Pankaj Naqvi for Respondents 2. and 3.

The Petitioner herein is a Dental College situated at Kanpur. It runs the BDS Course for 100 students. It is also permitted to run the Master''s Course (MDS). The dispute in this writ petition is about the number of seats to be permitted for Master''s Course for the academic year 2006-07. The Respondents have permitted 18 students to be admitted to certain specialities for the Master''s Course. The Petitioner College is aggrieved by that and, therefore, filed this writ petition claiming larger number of seats.

The learned Judge, who heard this matter, passed an interim order on 15th June, 2006 permitting the Petitioner College to admit 47 students in 9 specialities for this academic year 2006-07 and the Respondents were restrained from raising any objection in this regard as per that order.

It is not disputed that the number of students actually admitted is 41. We may note at this stage that it had been informed to us by both the parties that the MDS Course runs for three calendar years and there is one composite examination at the end of this period. As far as these students are concerned, their examination is likely to be held some times at the end of the academic year 2008-09, which would be in May or June of 2009.

The order passed by the learned single Judge was challenged by filing Special Appeal (Defective) No. 695 of 2006. The order passed by the learned Single Judge was set aside by a Division Bench of this Court on 3rd November, 2006. The Dental Council of India, in short ''DCI'' challenged this order by filing Civil Appeal No. 1319 of 2007 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 4870 of 2007), before the Apex Court and the Apex Court, by its order dated 9th March, 2007 allowed the appeal and remitted back the Special Appeal to the Division Bench for its consideration. This was by consent of the parties before the Apex Court, i.e. DCI and the Petitioner herein - Rama Dental College.

As stated above, the Apex Court allowed the appeal and the impugned order passed by the Division Bench was set aside. As a result thereof, the order passed by the learned Single Judge has revived. When the Special Appeal was listed before the Division Bench to which one of us (H.L. Gokhle, CJ.) was a Member on 8th April, 2008 the counsel for all the parties requested that the writ petition itself be withdrawn and be heard by the Division Bench and the order was passed accordingly and that is how this writ petition is being heard by this Bench. In pursuance to the order passed by the Apex Court, students have also been heard. They are represented by Mr. P.S. Baghel.

Inasmuch as the dispute in this petition is basically about the number of seats which should be permitted for MDS Course, we were of the view that it would be better that an inspection be carried out once again. This was because it is a matter of factual determination and beyond the limit of the Court, as the writ Court has its own limitation to go into factual aspects. We also noted that as far as this very batch of 2006-07 is concerned, another Writ Petition No. 26363 of 2006 was decided by a learned Jude of this Court on 23rd May, 2006 in which directions were issued to the Respondents to examine the letter dated 18th May, 2006 sent by the Petitioner and take a decision with regard to other three subjects and remaining seats. The Court had directed the Respondents to pass a reasoned and speaking order. The Respondents decided the matter by the order dated 30th May, 2006 which is under challenge in this petition.

We are of the view, as stated earlier, that it would be better that a fresh inspection is carried out Mr. Naqvi, learned Counsel assisting Mr. Upadhyay for the Respondents has taken instructions from the DCI and the Secretary, DCI has sent him a letter of consent dated 14th October, 2008, which states in paragraph 2. as follows:

In this connection the undersigned is directed to say that the DCI will have no objection to conduct fresh inspection for ascertaining the availability of teaching faculty for starting MDS Courses in various specialities in the Rama Dental College, Kanpur, including the availability of clinical material and other infrastructural facilities as per DCI norms for the academic session 2006-07 as was then available by deputing the DCI inspectors speciality-wise.

Mr. Upadhyay on the instructions of Mr. Naqvi has stated that the inspection will be carried out at the earliest and an outer side by middle of November. 2008.

Here, we may record that a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner placing on record the number of teachers that the Petitioner College claims to be having from the academic year 2006-07 onwards. Mr. Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner will make available its records in this behalf, which will include - (1) contract of appointment and appointment letters of the teachers concerned, (2) their joining reports, (3) attendance register and the name of students attached to each of the teachers, (4) salary register and document showing deduction of tax, and (5) addresses of residence of the teachers concerned. It will also produce other documents, if required.

Needless to say that it will be, of course, open to the DCI to seek information that is necessary for the purpose of their enquiry.

The Central Government is expected to take its decision in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the report of the DCI.

Status quo with respect to students who have been admitted to the MDS Course for the academic year 2006-07 will continue until the determination is made.

As the main controversy in this petition is with respect to number of seats that should be permitted to the Petitioner College, in our view, this order takes care of the dispute that is raised in this petition.

The petition stands disposed of.

The judgment for the session 2007-08 in writ petition No. 19464 of 2007 is as follows:

Heard Shri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate with Dr. Alok Kumar Yadav for the Petitioner. Mr. Ajai Bhanot appears for Respondent No. 1. and Shri V.B. Upadhyay, Senior Advocate with Shri Pankaj Naqvi for Respondents 2. and 3.

The Petitioner herein is a Dental College situated at Kanpur. The dispute in this writ petition is about the number of students to be admitted to the Master''s Course (MDS) for academic year 2007-08. In this connection, the Government of India had raised certain queries by its letter/order dated 30th March, 2007 (Annexure 44 to the writ petition). The Government of India sought compliance report in respect of certain observations. That letter/order has been challenged by filing this writ petition.

The writ petition was otherwise to be heard by a Single Judge. However, the learned Single Judge by order dated 11th April, 2008, directed that the petition be placed before the Chief Justice for consideration. This is because, as recorded by the learned Judge, Writ Petition No. 32058 of 2006 concerning academic year 2006-2007 was to be heard by a Division Bench. In view of that order passed by the learned Single Judge on 11th April, 2008, this writ petition has also been withdrawn and placed before the present Division Bench.

In an order passed today in Writ Petition No. 32058 of 2006, it is recorded that the Dental Council of India, in short DCI, is to carry out inspection once again for the academic year 2006-07. That is to be carried out on an outer side preferably by mid of November, 2008. Inasmuch as the present petition seeks to challenge the letter/order dated 30th March, 2007 with respect to certain compliance including reducing the number of seats from 18 to 17, we are of the view that it would be better that the Petitioner College submits its compliance report to the Central Government as well as the DCI at the earliest. It will be for the DCI and on its report for the Central Government to take necessary decision after receiving compliance from the Petitioner College. We expect them to take necessary decisions in accordance with law at the earliest.

Accordingly, as per the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench the interim order dated 15.6.2006 had revived but in order to finally determine the issue a fresh inspection was directed to be carried out for both the sessions and orders were directed to be passed by the Central Government after calling for a report from the Dental Council of India.

The Division Bench judgment aforesaid was brought to the notice of the Government of India as well as the Dental Council of India. The Dental Council of India appears to have conducted an inspection on 3.11.2008 whereafter a representation was filed by the Petitioner - institution on 6.11.2008 against the inspection having been carried out without any prior intimation and raising further objections. The Government of India on 3rd December, 2008 issued a notice to the Petitioner - institution calling upon it to furnish the information in this regard, to which a reply was submitted on 8.12.2008 by the Petitioner - institution. The Government of India issued a letter on 17th March, 2009 after considering the said representation and the recommendations of the Dental Council of India passed an order accepting the admission capacity of 18 seats for the session 2006-07. In effect the request of the Petitioner for 47 seats had been rejected with a further direction that the Dental College is free to apply fresh for a grant of permission in the remaining three specialities of Periodontics, Conservative Dentistry and Oral Pathology. The recommendations of the Dental Council of India which had been taken into account dated 16.12.2008 in detail gives the deficiencies pointed out therein. The said is quoted herein below:

DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA (CONSTITUTED UNDER THE DENTISTA ACT 1948)

SPEED POST

No. DE-15 (76)-2008/A-7058

Dated the 16th December, 2008

To,

The Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, (Deptt. Of Health-DE Section), Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi-110 011

Sub: Determination of initial admission capacity in MDS Course at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-07 in pursuance of order dated 16.10.2008 passed by Double Bench of the Hon''ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in WP No. 32058 of 2006.

Sir,

I am directed to refer to your endorsement letter No. V. 120127/44/2003-DE dated 3.12.2008 addressed to the Principal, Rama Dental College, Kanpur thereby advising them to make available the requisite papers in original within 3 days direct to the Dental Council of India and requesting the Coucil to furnish its reconsidered recommendations after determining the initial speciality wise admission capacity to commensurate with the acceptable teaching faculty in accordance with the MDS Course Regulations applicable for the academic session 2006-07 so that the Central Government may take final decision in order to comply with the order of the Hon''ble High Court.

In this connection, I am directed to state that the college authorities have vide their letter No. RDC/DCI/2008/939 dated 5/8.12.2008 submitted the documents as asked by GOI in its letter dated 3.12.2008 and after scrutinizing the said documents and taking into consideration of earlier decision of the Executive Committee of the Council, the reconsidered recommendations of the Council are as under:

That the Government of India be apprised that the following eligibility criteria was considered for starting MDS Courses at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007 as per MDS Course Regulations 1983:

Recruitment of Teaching Faculty

For Starting with three seats in any speciality, the following teaching staff are required as per MDS Course Regulations:

(i) Professor & HOD -1

(ii) Readers -2. (One for PG studies and one for teaching under graduate students.)

(iii) Lecturer -1.

No department can start PG course without Professor & HOD with 10 years teaching experience after PG as per DCI Regulations.

He must have teaching experience of 10 years of which 5 years should be as Reader/Senior Lecturer/Assistant Professor. (Where a Department is headed by an Assistant Professor/Reader/Senior Lecturer with the requisite qualification and experience as recommended for the Professor, he may be permitted to start postgraduate studies in the subject provided he fulfils all the requirements as laid down by the Dental Council of India).

Any other requirement in terms of infrastructural facilities, equipment, hostel facilities, etc. as per the DCI norms.

Oral Medicine & Radiology

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Oral Medicine at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 13.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3 (three) MDS seats in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Anil Kriplani -Professor & HOD

Dr. Thimmarasa -Associate Professor

Dr. Ravi Raj J. -Reader

Dr. S. Jayadev -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Parvathi Devi Professor & HOD

She joined on 25.9.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted

Dr. N.S. Yadav Director & Professor

He left the institution before the inspection of 2006-2007 hence not accepted.

Dr. Vishal Mehrotra Sr. Lecturer

He joinder on 25.9.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accpeted.

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November, 2008:

During the Inspection the following teachers were absent

(i) Dr. Parvathi, Prof. & HOD

(ii) Dr. Anil Kripalani, Professor

No. letter from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra was produced to Inspectors to confirm the four students admitted in the session 2006-2007.

The academic program is reflected in the log book and to out dismay all the log books were provided to us totally unsigned by both Guide & Head of Department.

There was a deficiency in training in area of clinical postings in hospital and that no teaching skill training was given.

The seminars and journal club number was inadequate for a general level of MDS training.

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery.

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery at Rama Dental College, Kapur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 13.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 4 (four) MDS seats in the department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Natasha Zaidi -Professor & HOD

Dr. Sunil Kumar Gupta -Professor

3 Dr. Shiva Shakara -Reader

4 Dr. G.B. Vinit -Reader

5 Dr. Om Prakash -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

<

Dr. D.V. Eswar Professor

He was not accepted since he was visiting from Bangalore

Dr. M.J. Ramakris hnan

He joined on 9.5.2007 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted

Dr. Lakshmi Gandi Professor

She joined on 29.1.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted

Dr. Jayavelu Professor

He joined on 11.7.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted

Dr. Sonal Mishra Sr. Lecturer

She joined on 2.1.2007 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted

Dr. Hemant Bajpai'' Sr. Lecturer

She joined on 14.6.2007 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The minor OT was very dirty and dust was settled on the dental chair and scrub area indicating that it was not being used.

6 students are enrolled out of which Naveen Kr. Verma, Pranav Prasar and Manish Dev were absent on the day of Inspection.

The records of these students being enrolled by University was not provided by college inspite of repeated requests.

The students have not done any exercise work on models prior to starting clinical work.

There was no records of basic sciences seminars of students and its supervision by the faculty.

There was no schedule of departmental seminars and journal club by PG students and very few seminars of journal club have been presented since beginning of course in 2006.

Out of 6 PG students 1. student did not submitted his library thesis as yet even almost after 3 years of starting of MDS.

Log book of student work was absent and their was no supervision of their work by the faculty.

Hard/soft copies of seminars of journal club were not available with PG students.

Dr. Natasha Zaidi, Professor was absent on day of Inspection. She left the college in June 2007 as the college attendance records.

Dr. S.K. Gupta, Professor came late on day of Inspection at middle of Inspection. From 2006 till date he has done only 13 major OT cases and he is possibly not coming regularly to the college and appears to be visiting faculty.

Dr. Shishakara, Reader left the college in November, 2006.

Dr. M.J. Ramakrishnan, Professor was absent on day of Inspection and no leave application was provided. He joined the college in June 2007 and has done more than 39 major OT cases. He appears to be visiting faculty from Chennai.

Dr. Jayavelu., Professor was absent on the day of Inspection. He has done only 4 major OT cases and appeared to be visiting from Chennai.

Dr. Laxmi Gandi was absent on day of Inspection and appears to be visting from Guntur and has not done any cases in major OT.

Prosthodontics

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Prosthodontics at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive committee on 13.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3 (three) MDS seats in the department of Prosthodontics on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Rajshekar Sangur Professor

Dr. R.R. Singh Associate Professor

Dr. B. Laxmana Rao Associate Professor

Dr. Ravi Kumar Associate Professor

Dr. Pradeep Reader

Dr. Loknath Garhnayam Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Mirna Pradhan Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Tanu Mahajan Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Rajiv Raina Sr. Lecturer

He joined on 19.8.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Manoj Verma Professor

He joined on 15.10.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Naveen S. Yadav Reader

He left the Institution before Inspection hence not accepted

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Prosthodontics during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd and 4th November, 2008.

Dr. Tanu Mahaja, Sr. Lecturer has joinded Ram Dental college on 14.12.2004 and was upgraded to Reader on 14.12.2007. As per Regulations of DCI he does not qualify to be appointed Reader on 14.12.2007. Technically he is still Sr. Lecturer.

The college was permitted to admit 4 students in speciality of Prosthodontics for doing PG course but the department has taken 5 admissions in stead of 3 during the session 2006-2007.

As per patients attendance records maintained in the deptt. of Prosthodontics, most of the patients are being done by the lecturers and the registered PG and UG students. Many of the patients entered in the Patients'' Record Register do not have name of the Operator and simply written ''check up''. It seems senior faculty member are not attending too much patients as per work register.

It was noted that the average No. of journal clubs, seminars & specialized cases done by most of the PG students are rather inadequate. No implant, Prosthesis cases have been done. No contemporary restorations like laminates, veneers or all ceramic restorations have been done by the students. The first batch students have finished their theses and copies are present in the department but yet to be submitted to the University.

One of the MDS student Dr. Pawanjeet Singh Chawala who was initially registered under Asso. Professor Dr. Ravi Kumar in 2006-2007 and upon his leaving was shifted to Dr. R.R. Sing, Professor, who also left in Dec. 2007 and now this student is registered under Tanu Mahajan who is as per teaching experience is lecturer only and is technically not qualified to take up MDS students independently.

Similarly Dr. Ankit Mehrotra has been registered under Dr. Pradeep from the year 2006 onwards. Dr. Pradeep is qualified to be Reader and PG students cannot be allotted under Reader indepndently.

As per the protocal, the guide of a student can be changed only with prior permission of the University and has to be technically qualified which was not followed by the Institute. Also the letter from the University for registration of the students under each guide and the letter of approval of the PG guides is conspicuous in its absence.

The clinical material for 15 MDS students (5 each year) and 200 clinical students (BDS 3rd & final year) and interns is highly inadequate.

Bio medical waste management protocol is not being properly followed by the institute.

There are no nurses or trained paramedical staff who is aware of sterilization protocols.

The department has 34 basic dental chairs and 10 dental chairs I the PG section, which are also inadequate as per the students admitted by the institution.

No implant prosthesis cases have been done by the MDS students admitted in 2006-2007.

Ortodontics.

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Orthodontics at Ram Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 13.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommeded 3 (three) MDS seats in the department of Orthodontics on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal -Professor

Dr. Sujit Panda -Reader

Dr. Ashok Kumar -Reader

Dr. B.C. Chandra Shekhar -Reader

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. A.K. Mehrotra Professor

He was not accepted since he was not eligible to become Professor & HOD

Dr. Vinay Kumar Verma Reader

He joined on 1.9.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Shrish charan Srivastav a Sr. Lecturer

He joined on 10.6.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Orthodontics during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The college has 2. Professors, 2. Readers & 1. Sr. Lecturer in the department of Orthodontics:

(I) On the day of inspection Dr. Neeraj Agarwal, Professor & Dr. Sujit Panda, Reader were not present and they reached the department at 11:30 am.

(ii) Dr. Neeraj Agarwal, Professor has produced relieving from SPIDS, Lucknow. Since original was not shown authenticity of the documents may be verified.

(iii) Faculty strength as evident from their records that was physically verified is highly understaffed for the intake of 6 P Gs in the session 2006-2007.

(iv) No dental mechanic, hygienists & nursing staff were present in the department.

The college was permitted to admit 3 students in speciality of Orthodontics for doing PG course during the session 2006-2007 but the department has taken double number of candidates in total six instead of 3 (three) during the session 2006-2007. Documents verifying enrolment No. of these candidates from the University was not provided.

The department has filed to be of the required standard as per DCI norms in all aspects including infrastructure, academic, clinical output, teaching standards, clinical material & faculty strength.

(I) Total No. of patient on the day of inspection were 8 only whereas as per DCI norms 20 cases per day should report to the department for 3 seats (there is intake of 6 students).

(ii) On the day of inspection 6 out of 8 interns were absent. 2. had signed out of which one was absconding.

Detailed interaction with the PG students revealed that all the PG/''s were fully aware of the risk of being over admitted beyond DCI sanctioned. However, now each candidate now claims to be legitimate 3 and has presented records supporting this.

Periodontics

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Periodontics at Ram Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 30.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had returned the scheme/application of Rama Dental College, Kanpur for strating MDS Course in the speciality of Periodontics for the session 2006-2007 to the GOI for disapproval, due to the following reasons:

Dr. Hemalata Professor & HOD

She joined on 17.5.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. J. Mahesh Professor

He was not accepted since he was not eligible to become Professor & HOD as he did not have 10 years of teaching experience at that time

Dr. Shankar T Gokhale, Associate Professor

He joined on 8.5.2007 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Ira Gupta Sr. Lecturer

She joined on 18.6.2007 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority was accepted for the session 2006-2007:

Dr. Rosaiah -Professor

Dr. Ratna Bajpai -Reader

Dr. R.G. Shivamanjunath Reader

Dr. JiJoi John -Reader

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the decision taken by the Executive Committee of the Dental Council of India in the department of Periodontics during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November, 2008:

Dr. Ratna Bajpai, Reader and Dr. Shiva Manjunath, Reader had left the institution during 2008.

At the time of inspection, the PG clinic of the department of Periodontics, only 10 dental chairs and units were available. Thus there is a deficiency of 08 dental chair. Other facilities like departmental library books, equipments, clinical teaching materials are not sufficient for 6 PG students.

One of the PG among the 6 students, Dr. Sanjeev Mishra has not done any pre-clinical works, seminars, library dissertation and clinical work during his tenure of work from the year 2006. Although, he has been allotted a thesis topic, the proof of submission of thesis proforma with names of guides and co-guides to the University is not there. He has not prepared his log book detailing his day to day clinical work and thus the proof of his supervision by the concerned faculty is also not available.

Conservative Dentistry.

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Conservative Dentistry at Ram Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 30.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had returned the scheme/application of Rama Dental College, Kanpur for strating MDS Course in the speciality of Conservative Dentistry for the session 2006-2007 due to the following reasons:

Dr. Pradhan Hegde Professor

He was not accepted since he was not eligible to become Professor & HOD as he did not have 10 years of teaching experience at that time

Dr. Abdul Hackeem Professor

He joined on 9.5.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Gagan Chaudhary Sr. Lecturer

He joined on 7.12.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Aruna K Sr. Lecturer

He joined on 3.6.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Abhinav Mishra Sr. Lecturer

He joined on 1.8.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority was accepted for the session 2006-2007:

Dr. Ramesh H.G. Reader

Dr. M.S. Sivakumarwaswamy Reader

Dr. S.J. Deshpande Reader

Dr. Sudhin Kurian Reader

Dr. Ashish Kumar Sawhney Reader

Dr. Kalyani Chaudhary Sr. Lecturer

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the decision taken by the Executive Committee of the Dental Council of India in the department of Conservative Dentistry during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November, 2008:

The clinical material and infrastructure in speciality is highly inadequate.

Bio medical waste management protocol is not followed.

The PG guide for the first batch (2006-2007) has been changed many times. As per the protocol, the guide of a student can changed only with prior permission of the University. But these guidelines were totally neglected by the college.

After evaluation of the papers available it is evident that Dr. Lavanya (Prof.) & Dr. Sudhim Kuria (Reader) are not coming to the department & surprisingly even their names are not mentioned in the faculty attendance register.

Dr. Ashish Kumar Sawhny was promoted as Reader on 15.6.2008 after completion of 3. years teaching. One PG students is allotted to him (2006-2007 batch). He has even signed their thesis. But as per DCI guidelines the minimum experience to be reader is 4 year. He should be treated as a senior Lecturer and not as Reader.

The work done by the students admitted in 2006-2007 is highly inadequate & the most possible reason seems to be the least involvement of the senior faculty members.

Pedodontics.

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Pedodontics at Ram Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 30.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 2. (two) MDS seats in the department of Pedodontics on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Anil Kohli -Professor & HOD

Dr. Mallikarjun -Associate Professors

Dr. Arvind Kumar -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2006/2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Ila Srinivasan Professor

She joined on 17,.5.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not accepted.

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Pedodontics during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November, 2008:

The students admitted to MDS Course in Pedodontics have not so far been confirmed/enrolled to the course by the concerned University.

The outline and synopsis and guide/Co-guide have not been approved by the concerned University. So far the approved syllabus of MDS in Pedodontics, academic calendar and schedule of examination approved by BDS Faculty, Medical/Dental Sciences are not available to the college.

There is no schedule of seminar, journal club, clinical posting or Inter departmental posting followed in the department of Pedodontics.

There is inadequacy of space in the department of Pedodontics in terms of lack of PG laboratory, research room, counselling room, Oral health education room and space for training children with special needs.

There is inadequacy of teaching material in Pedodontics.

The availability of the teaching faculty is not regular as expressed by PG students.

Oral Pathology.

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Oral Pathology at Ram Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 30.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had returned the scheme/application of Rama Dental College, Kanpur for strating MDS Course in the speciality of Oral Pathology for the session 2006-2007 due to the following reasons:

Dr. G.P. Rathod Professor & HOD

He joined on 6.10.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. S.M. Manjunath Reader

She joined on 12.9.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Priya Sahni Sr. Lecturer

She was not accepted since she resigned from the college

Dr. Prerana Singh Sr. Lecturer

She joined on 3.7.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Thanuja R. Sr. Lecturer

She joined on 3.7.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Gauri Mishra Sr. Lecturer

She joined on 17.4.2007 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by the college authority was accepted for the session 2006-2007:

Dr. Shantha Bharathan -Professor

Dr. Srinivas Kallianpur -Associate Professor

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Oral Pathology during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November, 2008:

The Guides and Professors in the department of Oral Pathology left since 2007 under whom the 2006 PG students were admitted.

The college was not gien permission to admit any PG student in the speciality of Oral Pathology by DCI, the college still admitted the following students:

2006-2007

(I) Dr. Shobhit Pradhan, (ii) Dr. Vidhi Dhakray, (iii) Dr. Prateek Khare

2007-2008

(I) Dr. Amrita Raj, (ii) Sarika Singh, (iii) Dr. Himanshu Mishra

2008-2009

(I) Dr. Swati Arora

The observation of the work done by the PG students of first batch (2006) (I) Dr. Shobhit Pradhan, (ii) Dr. Vidhi Dharkray & (iii) Dr. Prateek Khare are as under:

(I) Dr. Shobhit Pradha: The Progress of PG studies was found to be unsatisfactory. The student is not versed with staining, laboratory techniques and slide diagnoses. His basic Oral Pathology record book was not produced. Thesis work is lagging behind and was not submitted yet.

(II) Dr. Vidhi Dharkray: She has not completed her library dissertation yet. Thesis work is going on but the student was not able to give the details of her study. The study is not being done in the deptt. and she takes help from General Pathology faculty. Her basic knowledge of the subject is very poor and on verification of work done as per the daily PG curriculum, no supporting evidence 12.30 pm on the day of inspection.

(iii) Dr. Prateek Khare: His library dissertation was not present. He was unable to give details of his thesis topic as the work had not even started. Surprisingly the student was not even sure of his dissertation title. No pre-clinical or clinical work in the deptt. Had been done by him. He reported to the deptt. At 1:30 pm on 3.11.2008.

The infrastructure, facility & equipment in the department of Oral Pathology are as under:

(I) The department had only three dental chairs.

(ii) One Trinocular Microscope with digital Olympus camera was present.

(iii) Only one Binocular Microscope for all PG was present.

(iv) No. of biopsy on the day of inspection was only one.

(v) No. of patients reported to the deptt. for examination. There was inadequate clinical material in the department.

(vi) The laboratory was equipped with equipments of unknown/local make which did not appear to be in use.

(vii) No histopathology technician was present.

(viii) Seminar room which was on the floor above was locked and did not appear to be in use. Audio visual aids were not shown.

(ix) The department does not have any qualified technician.

Community Dentistry.

Since the final decision for starting MDS Course in the speciality of Orthodontics at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-2007, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 30.4.2006, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3. (three) MDS seats in the department of Community Dentistry on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. C.L. Dileep -Professor & HOD

Dr. Basvaraj -Associate Professors

Dr. Vrinda Saxena -Reader

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2006/2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Jayapraksh K Associate Professor

He joined on 20.7.2006 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Dr. Jyothi C. Associate Professor

He joined on 2.7.2008 i.e. after sending final recommendations of DCI hence not not accepted.

Therefore, after considering the recent inspection report and documents furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Community Dentistry during 2006-2007 has been justified.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November, 2008:

On the day of inspection Asso. Professor i.e. Dr. Jay Prakash and three tutors with BDS degree qualifications were present.

Dr. C.L. Dileep and Dr. Jyothi C., Asso. Professor were not present, their leave application were produced later on. As per attendance register Dr. Jyothi C was absenting from the college from 1.10.2008 and she has applied leave from 20.10.2008 to 13.11.2008. Dr. C.L. Dileep who was shown as Prof. & HOD during the session 2006-2007 was not eligible for the post of Professor as he was never promoted/served as Reader/Asstt. Professor/Asso. Professor. For the post of Professor one should have a minimum 3. years teaching experience as a lecturer after completing his MDS degree and 5 years as a Reader as per DCI norms. So, he can not be considered as a guide for PG degree course students.

Dr. Basavraj P., who was shown as a Reader in 2006-2007 not present on day of inspection. As per the statement of the Principal of the college he has resigned from the institution but no record was provided to us.

Dr. Vrinda Saxena who was shown as a Reader during inspection has resigned from this college in February 2006 and joined as reader in Peoples College of Dental Sciences, Bhopal on 10.4.2006 so she cannot be considered on the roll during the inspection for the session 2006-2007 for starting MDS course in the speciality of Community Dentistry in Ram Dental College, Kanpur.

As per records Dr. Vrinda Saxena was not present during the inspection in April, 2006 for starting MDS course in the speciality of Community Dentistry. There was a deficiency of One Professor and 2. Readers for the teaching/guiding of 4 PG students and 100 UG students as per DCI norms.

4 Dr. Jyothi C has joined very recently and she cannot be the guide and also can not sign the thesis of the students who were admitted during the session 2006-2007.

The college permitted to admit 3. students in speciality of Community Dentistry for doing PG course during the session 2006-2007 but they have admitted 4 students which is contrary to Govt. of India permission namely:

(I) Dr. Bahu Singh.

(ii) Dr. Bhuvandeep Gupta

(iii) Dr. Ankur Chaudhary

(iv) Dr. Rajat Bhargava

The number of dental chairs and units in PG clinics is inadequate as 3. batches have admitted. Number of chairs has to be increased.

The Executive Committee has perused the representation dated 6.11.2008 of the Ram Dental Collge, Kanpur addressed to Government of India and sent to DCI by Government of India vide its letter V.12017/44/2003-DE dated 7.11.2008 and has noted, with great dismay and concern, the allegations leveled by the college authorities against the DCI and its Inspectors and, after discussion & deliberation, has concluded that the allegations so levelled are false and fabricated and are denied vehemently. It has been mentioned in the said order that "Mr. Upadhyay on the instructions of Mr. Naqvi has stated that the inspection will be carried out at the earliest. Anything contrary to this is absolutely incorrect. The authorities of the dental college are giving alibis for the Inspections having been conducted on 3rd November, 2008 just to hide the ground realities prevailing in their Institution in relation to the infrastructure facilities including teaching faculty then prevailing during 2006-2007 for starting of MDS Courses in various specialities.

In the best public interest, the said order of the Hon''ble High Court has been fully complied with on the part of DCI and the allegations made by the Petitioner dental college are baseless and trying to divert the whole issue on other side.

Further, it may also added that as per the order of the Hon''ble High Court, DCI is not in a position to conduct further inspection of the Rama Dental College, Kanpur as requested in their representation dated 6.11.2008 otherwise this will lead to contempt of Hon''ble High Court.

With the above, the Council recommends to the Government of India that since the college authority of Rama Dental College, Kanpur fails to provide the justification/documentary evidence in respect of excess admissions made by them in various specialities of MDS course for the academic year 2006-2007, the number of seats as granted by Government of India vide letter of permission (LO Ps) for the session 2006-07 may kindly be restricted at Rama Dental college, Kanpur for the session 2006-07 as per speciality-wise MDS seats indicated as under:

Oral Medicine

3

Oral & Maxillofracial Surgery

4

Prosthodontics

3

Orthodontics

3

Pedodontics

2

Community Dentistry

3

Periodontics

Nil

Conservative Dentistry

Nil

Oral Pathology

Nil

Further, the revised statement indicating in tabular form the position regarding furnishing of the various documents as per the court order dated 16.10.2008 is also enclosed for kind perusal and ready reference of the Government of India.

Yours faithfully (Maj. Gen. (Retd. P.N. Awasthi) Encls. A/s Secretary Dental Council of India

CC: The President, Dental Council of India, New Delhi.

For the subsequent years that is 2007 and 2008, the Government of India in continuation their intimation dated 17th March, 2009 passed a detailed order on 24th March, 2009 based on the report of the Dental Council of India dated 4.3.2009. The report dated 4.3.2009 for the session 2007-08 and the order passed as a consequence thereto on 24th March, 2009 by the Government of India are reproduced herein under:

DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA (constituted under the DENTISTS ACT 1948) BY SPECIAL, MESSENGER

No. DE-15(76)-2008/A9571.

Dated the 4th March, 2009

To

The Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, (Deptt. Of Head - DE Section), Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi - 110011.

Sub: Order dated 16.10.2008 passed by Hon''ble Division Bench of the Hon''ble Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 19464/2007 - regarding submission of compliance report by Rama Dental College, Kanpur to Central Government and the DCI for the academic session 2007-2008 - Regarding

Sri,

I am directed to say that the Executive Committee of the Dental Council of India in its meeting held on 22nd February 2009 at New Delhi considered letter No. RDC/DCI/200098/31. dated 2.2.2009 from the Principal, Rama Dental College, Kanpur thereby submitting the Compliance Report regarding renewal of Central Government permission for the academic session 2007-2008 and after discussion & deliberation decided as under:

That the Government of India be apprised that the following eligibility criteria was considered for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Courses at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008 as per MDS Course Regulations 1983:

Requirement of Teaching Faculty

For renewal with three seats in any speciality, the following teaching staff are required as per MDS Course Regulations:

(i) Profession & HOD -1.

(ii) Readers -2. (one for PG studies under graduatestudents)

(iii) Lecturer -1.

No department can renew PG course without Professor & HOD with 10 years teaching experience after PG as per DCI Regulations/

He must have teaching experience of 10 years of which years should be as Reader/Senior Lecturer/Assistant Professor.

(Where a Department is headed by an Assistant Professor/Reader/Senior Lecturer with the requisite qualification and experience as recommended for the Professor, he may be permitted to start postgraduate studies in the subject provided he fulfils all the requirements as laid down by the Dental Council of India).

Any other requirement in terms of infrastructural facilities, equipment, hostel facilities, etc. as per the DCI norms.

As per Section 19(a) of the DCI Regulations 2006, the dental qualification granted to the students of the college and in respect of which the capacity is sought to be increased is recognised with the existing admission capacity.

Oral Medicine & Radiology

Since the final decision for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the speciality of Oral Medicine at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 18.2.2007, the faculty available/claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3. (Three) MDS seats in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Parvathi Devi -Professor & HOD

Dr. Thimmarasa -Associate Professor

Dr. Ravi Raj J. -Reader

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Anil Kriplani Professor

He does not have relieving order from the previous institution

Dr. S. Jayadev

He does not have relieving order from the previous institution

Therefore, after considering the compliance furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology during 2007-2008 has been justified.

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery

Since the final decision for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the speciality of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 18.2.2007, the faculty available claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3. (Three) instead of 4 (Four) MDS seats in the department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Natasha Zaidi -Professor & HOD

Dr. Sunil Kumar Gupta -Professor

Dr. G.B. Vinit -Reader

Dr. Om Prakash -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Sonal Mishra -Sr. Lecurer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Shiva Shankara Reader - He left the college in November 2006

Therefore, after considering the compliance furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery during 2007-2008 has been justified.

Prosthodontics

Since the final decision for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the speciality of Prosthodontics at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 25.2.2007, the faculty available claimed upto the date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3. (three) MDS seats in the department of Prosthodontics on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. R.R. Singh -Principal & Professor

Dr. Rajshekar Sangur -Professor

Dr. B. Laxmana Rao -Associate Professor

Dr. Loknath Garhnayam -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Mirna Pradhan -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Tanu Mahajan -Sr. Lcuturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr.Ravi Kumar Associate Professor

Neither signed the affidavit nor was physically present during the days of inspection

Dr. Pradeep Reader

He was not physically present during the inspection. His teaching experience of B.P. Koirala Institute of Health, Nepal is not accepted.

Therefore, after considering the compliance furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Prosthodontics during 2007-2008 has been justified.

Orthodontics

Since the final decision for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the speciality of Orthodontics at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 25.2.2007, the faculty available claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3. (three) MDS seats in the department of Orthodontics on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal -Professor

Dr. Ashok Jena -Reader

Dr. Vinay Kumar Verma -Reader

Dr. Sujit Panda -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is/was not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. A.K. Mehrotra Professor - He had not furnished the teaching experience certificate claimed from 1.1.1988 to 4.11.2003.

Therefore, after considering the compliance furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Orthodontics during 2007-2008 has been justified.

Periodontics

Neither the DCI had recommended nor the Central Government granted its permission for starting of MDS Course in the speciality of Periodontics, no inspection for renewal of MDS Course in periodontics was carried out and no seat was granted by the GOI for the academic session 2007-2008.

Conservative Dentistry

Neither the DCI had recommended nor the Central Government granted its permission for starting of MDS Course in the speciality of Conservative Dentistry, no inspection for renewal of MDS Course in Conservative Dentistry was carried out and no seat was granted by the GOI for the academic session 2007-2008.

Pedodontics

Since the final decision for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the speciality of Pedodonitics at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 18.2.2007, the faculty available claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 2. (two) MDS seats in the department of Pedodontics on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Anil Kohli -Professor & HOD

Dr. Malikarjun -Associate Professor

Dr. Arvind Kumar -Sr. Lecturer

Therefore, after considering the compliance furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Pedodontics during 2007-2008 has been justified.

Oral Pathology

Neither the DCI had recommended nor the Central Government granted its permission for starting of MDS Course in the speciality of Oral Pathology, no inspection for renewal of MDS Course in Oral Pathology was carried out and no seat was granted by the GOI for the academic session 2007-2008.

Community Dentistry

Since the final decision for renewal of Central Government permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the speciality of Community Dentistry at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-2008, was taken in the meeting of Executive Committee on 18.2.2007, the faculty available claimed upto that date has been taken into consideration.

The Executive Committee of DCI had recommended 3. (three) MDS seats in the department of Community Dentistry on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. C.L. Dileep -Professor & HOD

Dr. Basvaraj P -Associate Professor

Dr. Jayaprakash -Reader

Therefore, after considering the compliance furnished by the college authorities, the number of MDS seats recommended in the department of Community Dentistry during 2007-2008 has been justified.

With the above, the Council recommends to the Government of India that since the college authority of Rama Dental College, Kanpur fails to provide the justification/documentary evidence in respect of excess/illegal admissions made by them in various specialities of MDS course for the academic year 2007-2008, the number of seats as granted by Government of India vide letter of permissions (LO Ps) for the session 2007-2008 may kindly be restricted at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the session 2007-08 as per speciality-wise MDS seats indicated as under:

Oral Medicine

3

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery

3

Prosthodontics

3

Orthodontics

3

Pedodontics

2

Community Dentistry

3

Periodontics

Nil

Conservative Dentistry

Nil

Oral Pathology

Nil

Yours Faithfully, (Maj. Gen. (Retd.) P.N. Awasthi Secretary Dental Council of India

CC: The President, Dental Council of India, New Delhi."

BY SPEED POST

No. V-12017/44/2003-DE (Vol. V)

Government of India Ministry of Health & Family Welfare Dental Education Section

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi Dated the 24th March, 2009

To,

The Principal, Rama Dental College, Hospital & Research Centre, 1/1-8, Lakhanpur (Near Kanpur University), Kanpur - 208024 (Uttar Pradesh)

Subject: -Determination of admission capacity for renewalof permission for 2nd year MDS Courses at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for academic session 2007-08,excess/illegal admissions in MDS Courses made by Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2008-09and grant of permission for admitting 4th batch of MDS students in specialities of (1) Pedodontics (2) Community Dentistry (3) Oral Surgery (4) Orthodontics (5)Prosthodontics (6) Oral Medicine & Radiology at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for academic session 2009-10.

Sri,

In continuation of this Ministry''s letter of even number dated 17.3.2009, I am directed to say on the subject cited above that based on the recommendations of the Dental Council of India, the Central Government vide its letter dated 30.3.2007 renewed its permission for 2nd year MDS Courses in the specialities of (1) Oral Medicine &Radiology with 3. seats (2) Pedodontics with 2. seats (3) Oral& Maxillofacial Surgery with 3. seats (4) Community Dentistry with 3. seats (5) Prosthodontics with 3. seats (6)Orthodontics with 3. seats at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-08.

In CWMP No. 19464 of 2007 in W.P. No. 32058 of2006 for determination of initial admission capacity in all specialities for academic session 2007-08, the Allahabad High Court vide its judgment dated 16.10.2008 taken a note that "the petition seeks to challenge the letter dated 30th March, 2007 with respect to certain compliance including reducing the number of seats from 18 to 17, we are of view that it would be better that the Petitioner dental college submits its compliance report to the Central Government as well as the DCI at the earliest. It will be for the DCI and on its report for the Central Government to take necessary action after receiving compliance report from the Petitioner dental college. We expect them to take necessary decisions in accordance with law at the earliest.

Accordingly, in pursuance of the above order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the Hon''ble High Court, the Petitioner dental college vide its letter dated 2.2.2009 submitted its compliance report to the Dental Council of India and after scrutinizing the papers relating to teaching faculty in terms of Court order and in accordance with the MDS Course Regulations applicable to the Petitioner dental college for the academic session 2007-08, the Dental Council of India vide its letter dt. 4.3.2009 (Copy enclosed), confirming the acceptance or non-acceptance of teaching faculty claimed by the Petitioner dental college indicating the grounds of non-acceptance thereof, have now re-iterated its earlier recommendations dt. 27Th & 28th February, 2007 determining the speciality-wise admission capacity in commensurate with teaching faculty acceptance to them for renewal of permission for 2nd year MDS Courses in the specialities of (1) Oral Medicine & Radiology with 3. seats (2) Pedodonitics with 2. seats (3) Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery with 3. seats (4) Community Dentistry with 3. seats (5) Prosthodontics with 3. seats (6) Orthodontics with 3. seats at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-08.

Further, based on the recommendations of the Dental Council of India, the Central Government vide its letter dated 19.5.2008 renewed its permission for 3rd year MDS Courses in the specialities of (1) Oral Medicine & Radiology with 3. seats (2) Pedodontics with 2. seats (3) Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery with 3. seats instead of 4 seats (4) Prosthodontics with 3. seats (5) Orthodontics with 3. seats at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2008-09 but the Council vide its letter dated 28.2.2009 (Copy enclosed) has informed that the Petitioner dental has made 26 MDS admissions against sanctioned admission capacity of 14 seats for the academic session 2008-09. As such, the college has admitted 12. excess admissions in violation of the provisions of Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993.

Moreover, in addition, the college had also admitted 5 illegal admissions in the department of Conservative Dentistry (i.e. 4 admissions) and Oral Pathology (one admission) for the academic session 2008-09 in which the Central Government did not grant its permission for starting of MDS Courses in these specialities. In this regard, the Dental Council of India vide its letter dated 19.9.2008 and 20.10.2008 had already asked the college authorities to discharge the students who were admitted in excess/illegal. Accordingly, the Dental Council of India vide its letter dated 28.2.2009 has recommended to the Central Government to take appropriate action against the subject dental college u/ s 10B of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993, according to which no dental qualification awarded to such student shall be a recognised by the Central Government. The Council has further recommended for not allowing admissions in MDS Courses in all the specialities from the academic session 2009-10 at subject dental college till the matter of illegal/excess admissions in MDS Courses made by the college authorities are resolved.

Further, the Dental Council of India vide its letters dated 28.2.2009 (copies enclosed) has recommended to the Central Government not to renew its permission for admitting next batch of MDS students in the specialities of (1) Pedodontics (2) Community Dentistry (3) Oral Surgery (4) Orthodontics (5) Prosthodontics (6) Oral Medicine & Radiology at subject dental for academic session 2009-10 on account of certain deficiencies.

In the circumstances explained above and in the best interest of the students admitted illegally and in excess by the College, the Central Government has decided that:

(1) The college is entitled for the speciality-wise initial admissions capacity of 17 seats for the academic session 2007-08 as per details given below:

Oral Medicine & Radiology -3. Seats

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery - 3. Seats

Prosthodontics - 3. Seats

Orthodontics - 3. seats

Pedodontics--2.

Community Dentistry -3. seats.

(2). In order to regularise the excess admissions for academic session 2007-08, if any and for 2008-09 made by the college in above 6 specialities the college authorities may neutralize these excess admissions @ one seats per speciality per year unless and until the effect of such excess admission in future to be fully set off.

(3). Where the institution had started 3. MDS Courses in the specialities of periodontics (2) Conservative Dentistry (3) Oral Pathology and made admissions therein without prior permission of the Central Government for the academic session 2007-08, if any and for 2008-09, the college authorities are hereby directed to discharge such students immediately and simultaneously, the Dental Council of India is directed to take up the matter with State Government and University concerned for shifting and getting the examination conducted of such students of the institution to any of the Government Dental College or otherwise.

(4). The college authority is hereby advised not to admit next batch of MDS students in all the departments from academic session 2009-10 till the matter of excess/illegal admissions in MDS Courses made by them during the academic session 2006-07, 2007-08 are resolved.

Yours faithfully (Raj Singh)

Under Secretary to the Government of India Copy forwarded for information and necessary action to:

The Secretary, Dental Council of India, Kotla Road, Temple Lane, New Delhi-2.

The Principal Health Secretary, Government of Uttar pradesh, Medical Education Section - 3, Secretariat, LUCKNOW, (UP).

The Director (ME), Government of Uttar Pradesh, Medical Education Section -3, Secretariat, LUCKNOW (UP).

Dr. Ashok Nigam, Addl. Solicitor General of India High Court of Uttar Pradesh at Allahabad, Adjacent to Court No. 20, Allahabad -211001.

Shri Ajay Bhanot, Advocate, High Court of Uttar Pradesh at Allahabad.

D-38, Ekta Vihar, Auckland Road, Allahabad -211001.

The Registrar, High Court of Uttar Pradesh at Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.

The Registrar, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra, Uttar Pradesh.

Guard file.

(Raj Singh) Under Secretary to the Government of India

Orders had been passed in relation to the 2009 and 2010 sessions as well in the courses of Oral Surgery and Community Dentistry recommending not to allow future admissions which is also on record. For the session 2009-10 the report with regard to Pedodontics and Perosthodontics which were also similar in nature are on record. The subject of Orthodontics was also dealt with and a report adverse to the Petitioner was submitted in respect thereof as well. For the session 2008-09 the Dental Council also sent a separate recommendation indicating that 12. excess admissions had been made which was beyond the sanctioned capacity.

All these orders and recommendations became subject matter of challenge in five writ petitions which came to be decided by the judgment of a learned single Judge dated 20th July, 2009. While considering the applicability of Regulations of the year 1983. and the approval of the faculties the learned Single Judge went on to hold as under in the operative part of the judgment:

The decision taken by high power bodies like D.C.I. cannot lightly be interfered with. The Court where decisions of such bodies are challenged invoking writ jurisdiction cannot dissesct the findings like the Court of first appeal. However if there is some major defect in the findings of such bodies, then writ jurisdiction is the only remedy available to the aggrieved party. The finding of D.C.I. regarding number of bona fide teachers subject wise does not contain any such error which may be interfered with exercise of writ jurisdiction. Requisite number of qualified teachers of the whole session or at least major part thereof (about 90%) can by no stretch of imagination be described as minor requirement. Teacher appointed for a part of the session cannot be taken into consideration. In this regard some deficiencies continuing for a part of a particular session may be ignored but not the deficiency of requisite number of teacher.

However, I find lot of substance in the argument of learned Counsel for the Petitioner that teacher-student ratio prescribed under 1983. Regulations does not appear to have been kept in mind while deciding the student strength for the session 2006-07. In the recommendations of D.C.I. after the inspection dated 03.11.2008, it was clearly mentioned that a particular strength of teacher in each set was ''accepted''. The report of the D.C.I. dated 16.12.2008 is an annexure to the order passed by Government of India dated 17.03.2009 copy of which is Annexure-33. to the first writ petition. Similar order dated 24.03.2009 for subsequent sessions is Annexure 35 to the second writ petition. In the recommendation of D.C.I., it is mentioned that D.C.I. had taken into consideration the Regulations of 1983. In the report of D.C.I. annexed along with government order dated 17.03.2009, several such teachers, who were appointed either immediately before or immediately after start of the session 2006-07 have been refused to be taken into consideration on the ground that they were not there at the time of earlier inspection by D.C.I. team on the basis of which its earlier recommendation dated 13.04.2006 was made. Such teachers as mentioned in the subsequent inspection report of D.C.I. are as follows:

(i) Dr. Hemlata (Professor & HOD), joined on 17.05.2006 in periodontics.

(ii) Dr. Abdul Hackeem (Professor), joined on 09.05.2006 in conservative dentistry.

(iii) Dr. Illa Srinivasan (Professor), joined on 17.05.2006 in pedodontics.

(iv) Dr. Jayaprakash K (Associate Professor), joined on 20.07.2006 in community dentistry.

In my opinion, this approach of D.C.I. is not correct. It frustrated the entire purpose of Division Bench order dated 16.10.2008 directing fresh inspection. If earlier inspection was to be taken as final, then there was absolutely no need to direct fresh inspection. Such teachers ought to have been taken into consideration for determining the strength of seats/number of students intake to be sanctioned in a particular speciality.

Accordingly, for the academic session 2006-07, D.C.I. is required to immediately send fresh recommendation on the basis of inspection made on 03.11.2008 keeping in view the above observations/findings. Elaborate reasons must be given for permitting particular number of students in each discipline on the basis of 1983. Regulations. As there is some confusion as to whether 1983. Regulations were applied on 2007 ones hence it must specifically be mentioned that what student intake on the basis of 1983. Regulations is being approved and what would have been the position in case 2007 Regulations had been applied. The teachers, who were appointed either before even though after the first inspection as well as the teachers who were appointed immediately after the start of the session, should be taken into consideration. The recommendation shall be sent within two weeks and Government of India shall pass consequent order within two weeks from the receipt of the recommendations. The time schedule must strictly be adhered to.

As far as W.P. No. 22887 of 2009 is concerned, it relates to the years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10. Government of India passed the order on 24.03.2009, which is Annexure-35 to the said writ petition. In the said order, it was mentioned that recommendations of D.C.I. were annexed, however along with the said annexure, recommendations were not annexed. Copies of recommendations were afterwards filed along with supplementary affidavit dated 29.04.2009. One of the said recommendations is dated 04.03.2009 for the session 2007-08. D.C.I. met on 22nd February, 2009 and prepared the recommendation/report after considering the letter of the Principal of the College dated 02.02.2009. Previously a meeting of Executive Committee of the D.C.I. was held on 12th & 13th February, 2009 and after considering the letter of the Principal of the College dated 19.05.2008, recommendation was sent on 28.02.2009 for academic session 2008-09 and earlier sanctioned strength was reiterated. It was also noted that excess admission had been made. There are five more reports/recommendations of D.C.I. dated 28.02.2009 relating to session 2009-10. In the said reports detailed deficiencies have been pointed out. In respect of oral surgery in the report dated 28.02.2009, it is mentioned that excess admissions have been made for the academic session 2008-09; that the dental college and Hospital are in the same building and not demarcated properly. Medicine Ward is short by 10 beds, surgery by 14 beds, the Oral Surgery Ward was shown to have 16 beds, this is merely a hall with cramped up beds failing the minimum of 20 square meters per bed, there is no nursing facility in the oral surgery ward, there are no basic life support measures like oxygen line, no suction, no emergency kits, there were no patients admitted in the oral surgery ward at the time of inspection, no records of teaching, clinical work done by Faculty could be verified, seminar room is very small. Similarly in other disciplines also other deficiencies were pointed out. For example in Orthodontics clinical material was found to be grossly inadequate and no patient was observed on the date of inspection.

Through final recommendation sent to the Government of India on 04.03.2009 (for 2007-08), the earlier recommendations were reiterated discipline-wise. In the recommendations of D.C.I. for the years 2007-08 the fact that for 2007-08 & 2008-09 excess admissions had been made by the college was specifically taken into consideration.

Through the Writ Petition No. 30360 of 2009 order communicated by Registrar, Agra University dated 06.06.2009 (Annexure-27 to the said writ petition) has been challenged. The said order is based upon the Government of India order dated 17.03.2009 and letter of D.C.I. dated 16.05.2009 and order of V.C. Dated 29.05.2009 indicating that for the year 2006-07, the college was permitted to admit only 18 students in 6 disciplines, hence examination was to be conducted only for the posts of 18 students.

Writ Petition No. 23374 of 2009 has been filed by 41. students who claim to have been admitted for the session 2006-07. They have also challenged the order of the Government of India dated 17.03.2009 challenged by the College also in W.P. No. 18548 of 2009 and a further prayer for a direction to the Respondents to arrange for their examination and then award of degree has also been made.

As far as excess admissions in the academic sessions 2007-08 and 2008-09 are concerned, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has not been able to justify the said admissions. The only argument is that as College was having interim order for 2006-07 permitting to admit 47 students, hence the said interim order was treated to be operative for the subsequent years. This argument is not at all tenable.

Paragraphs No. 2, 3, & 4 of Government of India order dated 24.03.2009 are quoted below:

In CWMP No. 19464 of 2007 in WP No. 32058 of 2006 for determination of initial admission capacity in all specialities for academic session 2007-08, the Allahabad High Court vide its judgment dated 16.10.2008 taken a note that "the Petitioner seeks to challenge the letter dated 30th March, 2007 with respect to certain compliance including reducing the number of seats from 18 to 17, we are of view that it would be better that the Petitioner dental college submits its compliance report to the Central Government as well as the DCI at the earliest. It will be for the DCI and on its report for the Central Government to take necessary action after receiving compliance report from the Petitioner dental college. We expect them to take necessary decisions in accordance with law at the earliest.

Accordingly, in pursuance of the above order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the Hon''ble High Court, the Petitioner dental college vide its letter dated 02.02.2009 submitted its compliance report to the Dental Council of India and after scrutinizing the papers relating to teaching faculty in terms of Court order in accordance with the MDS Course Regulations applicable to the Petitioner dental college for the academic session 2007-08, the Dental Council of India vide its letter dated 04.03.2009 (Copy enclosed), confirming the acceptance or not acceptance of teaching faculty claimed by the Petitioner dental college indicating the grounds of non-acceptance thereof, have now re-iterated its earlier recommendations dt. 27Th & 28th February, 2007 determining the speciality-wise admission capacity in commensurate with teaching faculty acceptance to them for renewal of permission for 2nd year MDS Courses in the specialities of (1) Oral Medicine & Radiology with 3. seats (2) Pedodonitics with 2. seats (3) Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery with 3. seats (4) Community Dentistry with 3. seats (5) Prosthodontics with 3. seats (6) Orthodontics with 3. seats at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2007-08.

Further, based on the recommendations of the Dental Council of India, the Central Government vide its letter dated 19.5.2008 renewed its permission for 3rd year MDS Courses in the specialities of (1) Oral Medicine & Radiology with 3. seats (2) Pedodontics with 2. seats (3) Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery with 3. seats instead of 4 seats (4) Prosthodontics with 3. seats (5) Orthodontics with 3. seats at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2008-09 but the Council vide its letter dated 28.2.2009 (Copy enclosed) has informed that the Petitioner dental has made 26 MDS admissions against sanctioned admission capacity of 14 seats for the academic session 2008-09. As such, the college has admitted 12. excess admissions in violation of the provisions of Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993.

Similar directions for neutralizing were issued in the Para-10 of the letter /order dated 17.03.2009. In the said order under Para-10, it was further directed as under:

However subject to the existing provisions in Dentists and Regulations made thereunder the Petitioner Dental College is free to apply afresh for grant of permission for starting M.D.S. Courses in remaining their specialities at proper time for academic session 2010-11.

Accordingly, D.C.I. is directed to decide the number of students which the college in question could legally admit discipline-wise in the light of teacher-student ratio as prescribed under 1983. Regulations taking those teachers, who were appointed prior to the start of the teaching for the said year or immediately thereafter and the other requisite facilities available with the college. If D.C.I. comes to the conclusion that more than 18 students could be permitted to be admitted by the college, then examination of those students should also be conducted with follow up action. It is further directed that if more than 18 students are held entitled to be admitted by the college for the session 2006-07, then its impact upon the permitted admissions in subsequent years shall also be decided and consequent permission shall be granted and consequent action shall be taken. However, it is clarified that neither fresh inspection shall be made nor any fresh material shall be considered by D.C.I. It is further directed that unless D.C.I. permits the college to make any admission for the current session, i.e. 2009-10, the college shall not admit a single student for the said year in any discipline.

With the above observations, all the writ petitions are disposed of.

As a consequence of the aforesaid judgment the matter was proceeded with. Certain developments in between relating to the withdrawal of the essentiality certificate by the State Government took place which became subject matter of a different writ petition No. 43458 of 2009 in which the Petitioner had been granted a stay order subject to any final decision being taken by the Dental Council of India in response to the judgment dated 20th July, 2009. Writ petition No. 43458 of 2009 is however stated to have become infructuous by virtue of a subsequent order dated 3.2.2010 passed by the State Government.

Finally, the Dental Council of India proceeded to dispatch its recommendations to the Government of India on 11th August, 2009 detailing therein the deficiencies in relation to the Academic Session 2006-07 in the light of the observations made by the Division Bench and the learned Single Judge referred to herein above. The said recommendations are extracted herein under:

To,

The Secretary to the Govt. of India Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, (Deptt. Of Health - DE Section), Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi-110 011.

Sub: Re-determination of admission capacity in MDS Courses for the academic Session 2006-07 and its renewal of permission for the subsequent academic sessions at Rama Dental college, Hospital & Research Centre, Kanpur in pursuance of the order dated 20.7.2009 passed by the Hon''ble High Court of Allahabad in WP No. 18548/2009.

Sir,

I am directed to refer to subject cited above and to say that on the basis of the recommendations of Dental Council of India, the Central Government vide its letter No. V.12017/44/2003-DE dated 30./5.2006 initially granted its permission for strating of MDS Courses in the following specialities with admission capacity indicated against each at Rama Debntal College, Hospital & Research Centre, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-07:

(1) Pedodontics with 2 seats

(2) Prosthodontics with 3 seats

(3) Oral Surgery with 4 seats

(4) Orthodontics with 3. seats

(5) Oral Medicine with 3. seats

(6) Community Dentistry with 3. seats

Total 18 Seats

Aggrieved by the Letter of Permission dated 30.5.2006; the subject dental college filed a WP No. 32058 of 2006 in the Hon''ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Vide its order dated 15.6.2006, the Hon''ble Single Bench of Allahabad High Court allowed the subject dental college to admit 47 students in 9 specialities of MDS Course in academic session 2006-07 and the Respondents were restrained to raise any objection in this regard.

Aggrieved by the said order dated 15.6.2006, UOI preferred a Special Appeal No. 695 of 2006 in the Hon''ble High Court of Allahanad at Allahabad. Vide its order dated 3.11.2007, the Hon''ble D.B. Of the Hon''ble High Court set aside the order dated 15.6.2006 (Supra). On the other hand, the Dental Council of India preferred an appeal from the order dated 15.6.2006 in the Apex Court and the Apex Court on 9.3.2007 remitted back the matter to the Division Bench of the Hon''ble High Court of Allahabad for consideration.

The Double Bench of the Hon''ble High Court vide its order dated 16.10.2008 has, inter alia, directed as under:

(1) the Council to carry out the inspection of the Petitioner Dental College at the earliest and an outer side by middle of November, 2008 and

(2) Petitioner dental college will make available its records, which will include (1) Contract of appointment and appointment letters of teacher concerned (2), their joining reports (3) attendance register and the name of the students attached to each of the teachers, (4) salary register and document showing deduction of tax and (5) addresses of residence of the teaching concerned, in support of its claim to be having its faculty from the academic session 2006-07. The Petitioner Dental College will also produce other documents, if required.

(3) It will be open to the DCI to seek information that is necessary for the purpose of their enquiry.

(4) The Central government will take its decision in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the report of the DCI.

(5) Status quo with respect to students who have been admitted to the MDS Course for the academic session 2006-07 will continue until the determination is made.

From the operative paras of the order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the Hon''ble High Coiurt, it was clear that initial number of MDS Seats at the subject dental college for the academic session 2006-07 was to be determined afresh in commensurate with teaching faculty (i.e. HOD/ Professor and Reader) which were on the roll of the College and acceptable to the Council in terms of their (1) Contract of appointment and appointment of letters (2) joining reports (3) attendance register and the name of the students enrolled with them, (4) salary register and document showing deduction of tax and (5) Proof of residence in support of its claim to be having its faculty. Accordingly, the number of MDS seats for which 2nd year MDS Courses for the academic session 2007-08 was to be renewed by the Central Government depends upon the initial admission capacity to be determined for the academic session 2006-07.

Accordingly in pursuance of the order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the Hon''ble High Court, the Dental Council of India got the subject dental college inspected through its 18 inspectors on 3rd November, 2008 for determination of initial admission capacity in all 9 specialities of MDS Courses for the academic session 2006-07 and the DCI vide its letter No. DE-15(76)-2008/A-7058 dated 16.12.2008 recommended to the Central Government to sanction 18 seats in 6 specialities (viz Oral Medicine & Radiology-3. set as, Oral Surgery-4 seats Prosthodontics-3. seats, Orthodontics-3. seats, Pedododontics-2. seats, Community Dentistry-3, Periodontics-Nil, Conservative Dentistry-Nil and Oral Pathology-Nil) at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-07 as the college did not provide the justifications/releveant documents to the DCI inspectors as per Order dated 16.10.2008 (supra) for excess admissions made by the college.

In order to comply with the Order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the Hon''ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, the Central Government vide its letter dated 17.3.2009 determined the speciality-wise admission capacity of 18 MDS seats in six specialities for the academic session 2006-07 as per brake-up given below:

Oral Medicine & Radiology -3. Seats

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgey -4Seats

Prosthodontics -3. Seats

Orthodontics -3. Seats

Pedodontics -2. Seats

Community Dentistry -3. Seats

Peiodontics -Nil

Oral Pathology -Nil

With regard to renewal of permission for admitting next batch of students in the MDS Courses at the subject dental college for the academic session 2009-10, the DCI vide its letter dated 4.3.2009 recommended to the Central Government not to renew the permission pointing out some deficiencies serious in nature in each speciality with the stipulation unless and until the matter relating to excess/illegal admissions in MDS Courses made by the college authority during the academic session 2006-07, 200708 and 2008-09 are resolved, the permission cannot be renewed further. Accordingly, the Central Government vide its letter No. V. 12017/44/2003-DE dated 24.3.2009 advised the college authority for not admitting next batch of MDS students in all the departments from academic session 2009-10 till the matter of excess/illegal admissions in MDS Courses made by them during the academic session 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are resolved.

Similarly, in order to comply with the order dated 16.10.2008 in CMWP No. 19464/2008, on the basis on the recommendations dated 4.3.2009 of the DCI, the Central Government vide its letter No. V.12017/44/2003-DE dated 24.3.2009 renewed its permission for the subsequent academic session 2007-08. A Writ Petition No. 26255/2008 filed by the Rama Dental College, Kanpur seeking relief for restoration of its admission capacity to the extent of sanctioned admission capacity of 18 seats instead of 14 MDS seats for the academic session 2008-09 was already pending with the Hon''ble High Court of Allahabad.

The Executive Committee in its meeting held on 8.8.2009 decided that the Government of India be apprised that the following eligibility criteria mentioned in MDS Course Regulations, 1983. has been considered for starting MDS Courses at Rama Dental College, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-07 and its renewal of permission for subsequent academic session 2007-08 and 2008-09:

No Institution can start a postgraduate course without prior approval of the council.

A candidate for admission to the MDS course (Master of Dental Surgery) must have a degree of BDS (Bachelor of Dental Surgery) of an India University or an equivalent qualification recognised by the Dental Council of India. Candidate not possessing a recognised Dental qualification for the above purpose should secure the prior approval of his qualifications by the Dental Council of India before he can be admitted to the MDS course of any University in India.

GENERAL

i. The number of admissions to MDS courses in each speciality shall not be more than 2. students per postgraduate teacher per year.

ii. At any one time there shall be not more than 4 active, students under on postgraduate teacher.

iii. No postgraduate teacher shall enrol candidates for a discipline other than the subject of his speciality for postgraduate programme and no postgraduate teacher shall be a postgraduate teacher for more than one speciality.

iv. When the Department is headed by a recognised postgraduate Professor, the Assistant Professor of the Department, who is in possession of the requisite qualification and teaching experience in the subject of speciality, may be permitted to enrol one student per year under him as a post graduate teacher and guide.

v. At the discretion of the authorities concerned, provision may be made for reserving certain seats for candidates from other State where facilities for Postgraduate training is not available in a particular speciality.

STAFFING PATTERN FOR POSTGRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAMME IN A DENTAL COLLEGE/DENTAL WING

Staff

a. Professor, Assistant Professor and Junior Staff as proposed under the BDS Regulations, etc. of 1978. However, the council encourages the creation of an additional post of Assistant Professor in the Post graduate Departments in the interest of better teaching standards.

b. A Department which does not have a Professor and an Assistant Professor with requisite qualifications and experience, as laid down by the Dental Council of India, shall not start a postgraduate course in that speciality.

Qualification for a Professor and Head of the Postgraduate Department

I. He must posses a postgraduate qualification in the subject of speciality, recognised by the Dental Council of India.

II. He should be a full-time teacher Part-time Professors are also eligible provided they put in 4 hours a day and have only one candidate under them.

III. He must have teaching experience of 10 years of which 5 years should be as Reader/Senior Lecturer/Assistant Professor. (Where a Department is headed by an Assistant Professor/Reader/Senior Lecturer with the requisite qualification and experience as recommended for the Professor, he may be permitted to start postgraduate studies in the subject provided he fulfils all the requirements as laid down by the Dental Council of India).

Assistant Professor for MDS Course

Same as for BDS Staffing Pattern viz. A BDS degree of an India University or an equivalent qualification with postgraduate qualification in the subject with 3. years teaching experience after post graduation in the subject of specialisation.

When the full complement of staff recommended for under graduate training programme does not exist, the deficiency must be made good before starting of the postgraduate course in that Department.

As per provisions of DCI Regulations, 1993, for starting of Higher Courses of studies in existing dental college, such institutions are required to have additional financial allocation, provision for additional space, provision for additional equipment and other infrastructural facilities and provision for recruitment of additional staff as per Dental Council of India ''norms''/Regulations.

Provisions of Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993.

10 A (7) The Council, while making its recommendations under Clause (b) of Sub-section (3) and the Central Government, while passing an order either approving or disapproving the scheme under Sub-section (4), shall have due regard to the following factors, namely:

(a) whether the proposed authority or institution for grant of recognised dental qualification or the existing authority or institution seeking to open a new or higher course of study or training would be in a position to offer the minimum standards of dental education in conformity with the requirements referred to in Section 16A and the regulations made under Sub-section (1) of Section 20;

(b) Whether the person seeking to establish an authority or institution or the existing authority or institution seeking to open a new or higher course of study or training or to increase its admission capacity has adequate resources;

(c) Whether necessary facilities in respect of staff, equipment, accommodation, training and other facilities to ensure proper functioning of the authority or institution or conducting the new study of training or accommodating the increased admission capacity have been provided or would be provided within the time-limit specified in the scheme;

(d) Whether adequate hospital facilities, having regard to the number of students likely to attend such authority or institution or course of study or training or as a result of the increased admission capacity have been provided or would be provided within the time-limit specified in the scheme;

(e) Whether any arrangements has been made or programme drawn to impart proper training to students likely to attend such authority or institution or course of study or training by persons having the recognized dental qualification;

(f) the requirement of manpower in the field of practice of dentistry; and (g) any other factors as may be prescribed.

Extension of time schedule by the Central Government in pursuance of the directions of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in WP No. 157/2005.

Since the Hon''ble Supreme Court in WP No. 157/2005 extended the last date for counselling and admissions in MDS Courses by revising the time schedule for the academic session 2006-07 and accordingly, the Central Government vide its letter No. V. 12018/84/2006-ME IV dated 10.5.2006 revised the time schedule annexed with DCI Regulations, 2006. As such, in order to comply with the directions of the Hon''ble High Court that the academic session 2006-07, the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006 for the purpose of acceptance of teaching faculty in respect of subject Rama Dental college has been accepted by the Executive Committee.

It is also pertinent to mention here that in order to maintain the standard of dental education in the country as well as in order to better teaching at UG and PG level, the provision of MDS Course Regulations, 1983. provides for an additional Reader in each speciality of MDS Courses, the same provisions is adopted by the Council in respect of each and every dental colleges which starts a new PG course or increase of MDS seats as the case may be. Similarly, the same has also been adopted in the instant case.

As per the Regulations 19 (a) of 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, ''a dental qualification granted to the students of the college and in respect of which the capacity is sought to be increased is recognised with the existing admission capacity.

Further, feeling aggrieved by the order dated 17.3.2009 and 24.3.2009 passed by the Central Government, the college authorities of Rama Dental College, Hospital & Research Centre, Kanpur filed fresh Writ Petitions No. 18548/2009 and 22887/2009 for seeking relief for determination of admission capacity to the extent of 47 seats from the academic session 2006-07 and renewal thereof for the subsequent academic sessions 2007-08 to 2009-10. Simultaneously, they filed one more Writ Petition No. 30360/2009 impleading the authorities of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra to which this college is affiliated, seeking relief to have the examination of 41. students admitted during the academic session 2006-07 conducted for recognition of their MDS degree, and such students of Rama Dental College, Kanpur have also filed a separate Writ Petition bearing No. 23374/2009 seeking relief for recognition of their MDS degree awarded by the Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra.

As such, 5 Writ Petitions were pending before the Hon''ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The Hon''ble High Court, in the first instance, tagged all these Writ Petitions before a Single Judge Bench of the Hon''ble Court and the matters came up for final hearing on 7.7.2009 but the judgment was reserved. Ultimately, the Hon''ble High Court of Allahabad passed its order dated 20.7.2009 (opy enclosed) in the above petitions. The operative para of the said order are reproduced below for the sake of convenience:

The decision taken by high power bodies like D.C.I. cannot lightly be interfered with. The Court where decisions of such bodies are challenged invoking writ jurisdiction cannot dissesct the findings like the Court of first appeal. However if there is some major defect in the findings of such bodies, then writ jurisdiction is the only remedy available to the aggrieved party. The finding of D.C.I. regarding number of bona fide teachers subject wise does not contain any such error which may be interfered with exercise of writ jurisdiction. Requisite number of qualified teachers of the whole session or at least major part thereof (about 90%) can by no stretch of imagination be described as minor requirement. Teacher appointed for a part of the session cannot be taken into consideration. In this regard some deficiencies continuing for a part of a particular session may be ignored but not the deficiency of requisite number of teacher.

However, I find lot of substance in the argument of learned Counsel for the Petitioner that teacher-student ratio prescribed under 1983. Regulations does not appear to have been kept in mind while deciding the student strength for the session 2006-07. In the recommendations of D.C.I. after the inspection dated 03.11.2008, it was clearly mentioned that a particular strength of teacher in each set was ''accepted''. The report of the D.C.I. dated 16.12.2008 is an annexure to the order passed by Government of India dated 17.03.2009 copy of which is Annexure-33. to the first writ petition. Similar order dated 24.03.2009 for subsequent sessions is Annexure 35 to the second writ petition. In the recommendation of D.C.I., it is mentioned that D.C.I. had taken into consideration the Regulations of 1983. In the report of D.C.I. annexed along with government order dated 17.03.2009, several such teachers, who were appointed either immediately before or immediately after start of the session 2006-07 have been refused to be taken into consideration on the ground that they were not there at the time of earlier inspection by D.C.I. team on the basis of which its earlier recommendation dated 13.04.2006 was made. Such teachers as mentioned in the subsequent inspection report of D.C.I. are as follows:

(i) Dr. Hemlata (Professor & HOD), joined on 17.05.2006 in periodontics.

(ii) Dr. Abdul Hackeem (Professor), joined on 09.05.2006 in conservative dentistry.

(iii) Dr. Illa Srinivasan (Professor), joined on 17.05.2006 in pedodontics.

(iv) Dr. Jayaprakash K (Associate Professor), joined on 20.07.2006 in community dentistry.

In my opinion, this approach of D.C.I. is not correct. It frustrated the entire purpose of Division Bench order dated 16.10.2008 directing fresh inspection. If earlier inspection was to be taken as final, then there was absolutely no need to direct fresh inspection. Such teachers ought to have been taken into consideration for determining the strength of seats/number of students intake to be sanctioned in a particular speciality.

Accordingly, for the academic session 2006-07, D.C.I. is required to immediately send fresh recommendation on the basis of inspection made on 03.11.2008 keeping in view the above observations/findings. Elaborate reasons must be given for permitting particular number of students in each discipline on the basis of 1983. Regulations. As there is some confusion as to whether 1983. Regulations were applied on 2007 ones hence it must specifically be mentioned that what student intake on the basis of 1983. Regulations is being approved and what would have been the position in case 2007 Regulations had been applied. The teachers, who were appointed either before even though after the first inspection as well as the teachers who were appointed immediately after the start of the session, should be taken into consideration. The recommendation shall be sent within two weeks and Government of India shall pass consequent order within two weeks from the receipt of the recommendations. The time schedule must strictly be adhered to.

Accordingly, D.C.I. is directed to decide the number of students which the college in question could legally admit discipline-wise in the light of teacher-student ratio as prescribed under 1983. Regulations taking those teachers, who were appointed prior to the start of the teaching for the said year or immediately thereafter and the other requisite facilities available with the college. If D.C.I. comes to the conclusion that more than 18 students could be permitted to be admitted by the college, then examination of those students should also be conducted with follow up action. It is further directed that if more than 18 students are held entitled to be admitted by the college for the session 2006-07, then its impact upon the permitted admissions in subsequent years shall also be decided and consequent permission shall be granted and consequent action shall be taken. However, it is clarified that neither fresh inspection shall be made nor any fresh material shall be considered by D.C.I. It is further directed that unless D.C.I. permits the college to make any admission for the current session, i.e. 2009-10, the college shall not admit a single student for the said year in any discipline.

A certify copy of the order dated 20.7.2009 passed by the Hon''ble High Court was received by the Council''s Advocate and this Council itself only on 27.7.2009 and 29.7.2009 respectively and on receipt of its, a meeting of the following members in the Chairmanship of Dr. C. Bhasker Rao, Vice-President, Dental Council of India was convened to discuss the matter relating to redetermination of admission capacity in each speciallity for the academic session 2006-07 and its renewal of permission for subsequent academic session, but it could not reach at final conclusion in the matter. Moreover, the Chairman of the subject dental college raised a point in the meeting that the Hon''ble High Court has directed only the Council, not to this Committee, to take necessary action in the matter.

Dr. A.K. Mandal, DDG(M), Dte. General of Health Services

Shri Mansa Ram Jatav, Asstt. Registrar, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University Agra

Shri B.S. Kushwaha, Chairman, Rama Dental College, Hospital & Reserarch Centre, Kanpur.

Dr. Hari Prakash, Dental Expert.

The Hon''ble High Court in its order dated 207.2009 has directed the Council that ''it must specifically be mentioned that what student intake on the basis of 1983. Regulations is being approved and what would have been the position in case 2007 Regulations had been applied.'' It may be stated that as per MDS Course Regulations, 1983, there is no ceiling of number of MDS seats whereas as per Revised MDS Course Regulations, 2007, the permission for starting of MDS Course can be granted only to the extent of one unit consisting of 3. seats in each speciality. In case the Revised MDS Course Regulations, 2007, is applied to the subject dental college, the DCI would not be in a position to grant permission in the speciality of Pedodontics and Oral Pathology. However, the DCI has recommended more than 3. seats in the speciality of Oral Surgery, Prosthodontics, Orthodontics and Conservative Dentistry. Even the DCI Regulations, 2006 read with Revised MDS Course Regulations, 2007 does not make eligible any dental college to increase MDS seats in any speciality of MDS unless and until the MDS degree is recognised with existing admission capacity.

In order to comply with the directions dated 20.7.2009 passed by the Hon''ble High Court, the matter relating to re-determination of admission capacity in MDS Courses at Rama Dental College, Hospital & Research Centre, Kanpur for the academic session 2006-07 and its renewal of permissions for the academic session 2007-08 and 2008-09 has been considered by the Executive Committee of the DCI in its meeting held on 8.8.2009 in conformity with the provisions of MDS Course Regulations, 1983, DCI Regulations, 1993. and 2006 Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993. and the extended time schedule upto 30.6.2006 in pursuance of the order of the Hon''ble Supreme Court only for the academic session 2006-07, and also taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available at the college, and after discussion and deliberation decided as under:

Oral Medicine & Radiology

2006-2007

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial date 30.6.2006 recommends to start MDS Course in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology with 3. (three) seats on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-07:

Dr. Anil Kriplani -Professor & HOD

Dr. Thimmarasa -Associate Professor

Dr. Ravi Raj J. -Reader

Dr. S. Jayadev -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-07 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Parvathi Devi Professo r & HOD

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 25.9.2006 i.e. after crucial date 30.6.2006.

Dr. N.S. Yadav Director & Professo r

Not accepted since, he resigned vide his letter dated 10.4.2006 (copy enclosed) before the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that he is absconding without relieving from the college.

Dr. Vishal Mehrotra Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he joined the college on 1.6.2007 i.e. after crucial date 30.6.2006.

2007-2008

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd year MDS Course with 3. seats in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology for the session 2007-2008 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Anil Kriplani -Professor & HOD

Dr. Parvathi Devi -Professor

Dr. Thimmarasa -Associate Professor

Dr. Ravi Raj J. -Reader

Dr. S Jayadev -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2007-08 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Vishal Mehrotra, Sr. Lecturer is not accepted as he joined the college on 1.6.2007 after the last date i.e. 28.2.2007 for sending the DCI''s recommendation in respect of Higher Courses of Studies or Training to the Government of India for the academic session 2007-08.

2008-2009

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 3rd year MDS Course with 3. seats in the department of Oral Medicine & Radiology for the session 2008-2009 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2008-2009:

Dr. Anil Kriplani -Professor & HOD

Dr. Parvathi Devi -Professor

Dr. Thimmarasa -Associate Professor

Dr. Ravi Raj J. -Reader

Dr. S Jayadev -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Vishal Mehrotra--Sr. Lecturer

In addition to the above, the following observations have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd and 4th November 2008:

During the Inspection the following teachers were absent

(i) Dr. Parvathi, Prof. & Head.

(ii) Dr. Anil Kriplani, Professor

No letter from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, University, Agra was produced to Inspectors to confirm the four students admitted in the session 2006-2007.

The academic program is reflected in the log book and to our dismay all the log books were provided to us totally unsigned by both Guide & Head of Department.

There was a deficiency in training in area of clinical postings in hospital and that no teaching skill training was given.

The Seminars and journal club number was inadequate for a general level of MDS training.

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery

2006-2007

The Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial dated 30.6.2006 recommends to the Central Government to start MDS Course with 5 (five) seats in the speciality of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Natasha Zaidi

Professor & HOD

2.Dr. Sunil Kumar Gupta

professor

Dr. Shiva Shankara

However, he has been claimed as a Professor but he is acceptable as a Reader only for want of teaching experience.

Dr. G.B. Vinit

Reader

Dr. Om Prakash

Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. M.J. Ramakrishna Professor

Not accepted since, he joined the college on 9.5.2007 i.e. after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Lakshmi Gandi Professor

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 29.1.2008 i.e. after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Jayavelu Professor

Not accepted since, he joined the college on 11.7.2008 i.e. after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. D.V. Eswar Professor

He was not accepted since the college authorities had not furnished the requisite documents viz. Attendance Register, Salary Register, T.D.S. Certificate in respect of him as the Hon''ble High Court has directed not to require any documents from the college authority. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that he is absconding without relieving from the college.

Dr. Sonal Mishra Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 2.1.2007 i.e. after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Hemant Bajpai Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he joined the college on 14.6.2007 i.e. after the crucial date.

2007-2008

The Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery with 4 seats instead of 5 seats for the session 2007-2008 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Natasha Zaidi -Professor & HOD

Dr. Sunil Kumar Gupta -Professor

Dr. G.B. Vinit -Reader

Dr. Om Prakash -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Sonal Mishra -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2007-08 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Natasha Zaidi Professor

Not accepted since she left the institution in June 2007

Dr. Shiva Shankara Reader

Not accepted since he left the institution in November 2006

Dr. M.J. Ramakrishnan Professor

Not accepted since he joined on 9.5.2007 i.e. after sending DCI final recommendation to the Central Government.

Dr. Lakshmi Gandi Professor

Not accepted since she was shown as working in two places at the same time and she was visiting from Guntur.

Dr. Jayavelu Professor

Not accepted since he joined only on 11.7.2008 i.e. after sending DCI final recommendation to the Central Government.

Dr. D.V. Eswar Professor

Not accepted since the college authorities had not furnished the requisite documents viz. Attendance Register, Salary Register, T.D.S. Certificate.

In addition to the above, the following observations have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The minor OT was very dirty and dust was settled on the dental chair and scrub area indicating that it was not being used.

6 students are enrolled out of which Naveen Kr. Verma Pranav Prasar and Manish Dev were absent on the day of Inspection.

The records of these students being enrolled by University was not provided by college inspite of repeated requests.

The students have not done any exercise work on models prior to starting clinical work.

There was no records of basic sciences seminars of students and its supervision by the faculty.

There was no schedule of departmental seminars and journal club by PG students and very few seminars of journal club have been presented since beginning of course in 2006.

Out of 6 PG students 1. student did not submitted his library thesis as yet even almost after 3. years of starting of MDS.

Log book of student work was absent and there was no supervision of their work by the faculty.

Hard/soft copies of seminars of journal club were not available with PG students.

Dr. Natasha Zaidi, Professor was absent on day of Inspection. She left the college in June 2007 as per the college attendance records.

Dr. S.K. Gupta, Professor came late on day of Inspection at middle of Inspection. From 2006 till date he has done only 13. major OT cases and he is possibly not coming regularly to the college and appears to be visiting faculty.

Dr. Shivshankara, Reader left the college in November, 2006.

Dr. M.J. Ramakrishnan, Professor was absent on day of Inspecton and no leave application was provided. He joined the college in June 2007 and has done more than 39 major OT cases. He appears to be visiting faculty from Chennai.

Dr. Jayavelu, Professor was absent on the day of Inspecton. He has done only 4 major OT cases and appeared to be visiting from Chennai.

Dr. Laxmi Gandi was absent on day of Inspection and appears to be visiting from Guntur and has not done any cases in major OT.

Prosthodontics

2006-2007

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial date 30.6.2006 recommends to the Central Government to start MDS Course in the department Prosthodontics with 5 (five) seats for the session 2006-2007 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007.

Dr. R.R. Singh -Professor

Dr. Rajeshwar Sangur -Professor

Dr. Ravi Kumar -Associate Professor

Dr. B. Laxmana Rao -Associate Professor

Dr. Pradeep -Reader

Dr. Tanu Mahajan -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Loknath Garhnayam -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Mirna Pradhan -Sr. Lecturer

Note: The initial admission capacity in this speciality has been determined taking into consideration the number of students admitted by the college authorities during the academic session 2006-2007.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Manoj Verma Professor

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 15.10.2008.

Dr. Naveen S Yadav Reader

Not accepted since, he resigned vide his letter dated 10.4.2006 (copy enclosed) before the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that he is absconding without relieving from the college.

Dr. Rajiv Raina Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 19.8.2008.

2007-2008

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the department Prosthodontics with 5 (five) seats for the session 2007-2008 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008.

Dr. R.R. Singh -Professor

Dr. Rajeshwar Sangur -Professor

Dr. Ravi Kumar -Associate Professor

Dr. B. Laxmana Rao -Associate Professor

Dr. Pradeep -Reader

Dr. Tanu Mahajan -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Loknath Garhnayam -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Mirna Pradhan -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Manoj Verma Professor

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 15.10.2008.

Dr. Naveen S Yadav Reader

Not accepted since, he resigned vide his letter dated 10.4.2006 (copy enclosed) before the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that he is absconding without relieving from the college.

Dr. Rajiv Raina Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 19.8.2008.

2008-2009

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 3rd year MDS Course in the department Prosthodontics with 3. (three) seats instead of 5 seats for the session 2008-2009 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2008-2009.

Dr. Rajeshwar Sangur -Professor

Dr. B. Laxmana Rao -Associate Professor

Dr. Pradeep -Reader

Dr. Tanu Mahajan -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Loknath Garhnayam -Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Mirna Pradhan -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2008-2009 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. R.R. Singh

Not accepted since, his name was not mentioned as per teaching list furnished by the college authorities to the Council''s Inspectors as such it is clear that he left the college.

Dr. Manoj Verma Professor

Not Accepted since, he joined on 15.10.2008 i.e. after the last date i.e. 28.2.2008 for sending the DCI''s recommendation in respect of Higher Courses of Studies of Training to the Government of India for the academic session 2007-08.

Dr. Ravi Kumar

Not accepted since, he left the college as his name was not shown teaching list.

Dr. Naveen S Yadav Reader

Not accepted since, he left the Institution before Inspection i.e. 10.4.2006.

Dr. Rajiv Raina Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 19.8.2008.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

Dr. Tanu Mahajan, Sr. Lecturer has joined Rama Dental College on 14.12.2007 and was upgraded to Reader on 14.12.2007. As per Regulations of DCI he does not qualify to be appointed Reader on 14.12.2007. Technically he is still Sr. Lecturer.

The college was permitted to admit 3. students in speciality of Prosthodontics for doing PG course but the department has taken 5 admissions instead of 3. during the session 2006-2007.

As per patients attendance records maintained in the deptt. Of Prosthodontics, most of the patients are being done by the lecturers and the registered PG and UG students. Many of the patients entered in the Patients'' Record Register do not have name of the Operator and simply written ''checkup''. It seems senior faculty member are not attending too much patients as per work register.

It was noted that the average No. of journal clubs, seminars & specialized cases done by most of the PG students are rather inadequate. No implant, Prosthesis cases have been done. No contemporary restorations like laminates, veneers or all ceramic restorations have been done by the students. The first batch students have finished their theses and copies are present in the department but yet to be submitted to the University.

One of the MDS student Dr. Pawanjeet Singh Chawala who was initially registered under Asso. Professor Dr. Ravi Kumar in 2006-2007 and upon his leaving was shifted to Dr. R.R. Singh, Professor, who also left in Dec., 2007 and now this student is registered under Tanu Mahajan who is as per teaching experience is lecturer only and is technically not qualified to take up MDS students independently.

Similarly Dr. Ankit Mehrotra has been registered under Dr. Pradeep from the year 2006 onwards. Dr. Pradeep is qualified to be Reader and PG students cannot be allotted under Reader independently.

As per the protocol, the guide of a student can be changed only with prior permission of the university and has to be technically qualified which was not followed by the Institute. Also the letter from the university for registration of the students under each guide and the letter of approval of the PG guides is conspicuous in its absence.

The clinical material for 15 MDS students (5 each year) and 200 clinical students (BDS 3rd & final year) and interns is highly inadequate.

Bio medical waste management protocol is not being properly followed by the institute.

There are no nurses or trained paramedical staff who is aware of sterilization protocols.

9 The department has 34 basic dental chairs and 10 dental chairs in the PG section, which are also inadequate as per the students admitted by the institution.

No implant prosthesis cases have been done by the MDS students in 2006-2007.

Orthodontics

2006-2007

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial date 30.6.2006 recommends to the Central Government to start MDS Course in the department of Orthodontics with 5 (five) seats for the session 2006-2007 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal -Professor

Dr. A.K. Mehrotra -Professor

Dr. Ashok Kumar -Reader

Dr. B.C. Chandra Shekhar Reader

Dr. Sujit Panda -Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Vinay Kumar Verma Reader

Not Accepted since, he joined the college on 1.9.2006 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Shrish Charan Srivastava Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since he joined on 10.6.2008 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

2007-2008

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the department of Orthodontics with 5 (five) seats for the session 2007-2008 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal -Professor

Dr. A.K. Mehrotra -Professor

Dr. Ashok Kumar -Reader

Dr. B.C. Chandra Shekhar -Reader

Dr. Vinay Kumar Verma -Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Shrish Charan Srivastava Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since he joined on 10.6.2008 after the last date i.e. 28.2.2007 for sending the DCI''s recommendation in respect of Higher Courses of Studies or Training to the Government of India for the academic session 2007-08.

2008-2009

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 3rd year MDS Course in the department of Orthodontics with 5 (five) seats for the session 2008-2009 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2008-2009:

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal -Professor

Dr. A.K. Mehrotra -Professor

Dr. Vinay Kumar Verma -Reader

Dr. Sujit Panda -Reader

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2008-2009 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Ashok Kumar

Not accepted since, his name was not mentioned as per teaching list furnished by the college authorities to the Council''s Inspectors as such it is clear that he left the college.

Dr. B.C. Chandra Shekhar

Not accepted since, his name was not mentioned as per teaching list furnished by the college authorities to the Council''s Inspectors as such it is clear that he left the college.

Dr. Shrish Charan Srivastava Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since he joined on 10.6.2008 i.e. after sending DCI final recommendation to the Central Government.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The college has 2. Professors, 2. Readers & 1. Sr. Lecturer in the department of Orthodontics:

72.

(i) On the day of inspection Dr. Neeraj Aggarwal, Professor & Dr. Sujit Panda, Reader were not present and they reached the department at 11.30 am.

(ii) Dr. Neeraj Aggarwal, Professor has produced relieving from SPIDS, Lucknow. Since original was not shown authenticity of the documents may be verified.

(iii) Faculty strength as evident from their records that was physically verified is highly understaffed for the intake of 6 P Gs in the session 2006-2007.

(iv) No dental mechanic, hygienists & nursing staff were present in the department.

The college was permitted to admit 3. students in specially of Orthodontics for doing PG course during the session 2007-2007 but the department has taken double number of candidates in total six instead of 3. (three) during the session 2006-2007. Document verifying enrolment No. of these candidates from the university was not provided.

The department has failed to be of the required standard as per DCI norms in all aspects including infrastructure, academic, clinical output, teaching standards, clinical material & faculty strength.

(I) Totalno. of patients on the day of inspection were 8 only whereas per DCI norms 20 cases per day should report to the department for 3. seats (there is intake of 6 students).

(II) On the day of inspection 6 out of 8 interns were absent. 2. had signed out of which one was absconding.

Detailed interaction with the PG students revealed that all the PG''s were fully aware of the risk of being over admitted beyond DCI sanctioned. However, now each candidate now claims to be legitimate 3. and has presented records supporting this.

Perodontics

2006-2007

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial date 30.6.2006 recommends to Central Government no to allot any MDS seat in the speciality of Periodontics at Rama Dental College, Hospital & Research Centre, Kanpur for the session 2006-2007 due to the following reasons:

There is deficiency of Professor & HOD since:

Dr. Hemalata has been claimed as a professor & HOD by the college authorities with the date of joining of 17.5.2006 in the deptt. But to the contrary to their claim, she vide her letter dated 28.5.2006 refused herself as a teaching faculty of the subject dental college by making an statement that she resigned from M.R.A. Dental College, Banglore on 17.5.2006 and not joined any dental college thereafter.

Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that she is absconding without relieving from the college.

Dr. J Mahesh was not accepted since he is not eligible to become professor & HOD as he did not have 10 years of teaching experience at that time.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-07 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Shanker T Gokhale, Associate Professor

Not accepted since, he joined the college on 28.7.2008 after crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Rohit Gupta Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he joined on 8.5.2007 after crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Ira Gupta Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, she joined on 18.6.2007 after crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

Dr. Ratna Bajpai, Reader and Dr. Shiva Manjunath, Reader had left the Institution during 2008.

At the time of inspection, in the PG clinic of the department available. Thus there is a deficiency of 08 dental chairs. Other facilities like departmental library books, equipments, clinical teaching materials are not sufficient for 6 PG students.

One of the PG among the 6 students, Dr. Sanjeev Mishra has not done any pre clinical works, seminars, library the years 2006. Although, he has been allotted a thesis topic, the proof of submission of thesis proforma with names of guides and co-guides to the University is not there. He has not prepared his log book detailing his day to day clinical work and thus the proud of his supervision by the concerned faculty is also not available.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority are acceptable for the session 2006-07 but due to not acceptance of the Professor & HOD, the permission for starting of MDS Course in Periodontics cannot be agreed to:

Dr. K. Rosaiah -Professor

Dr. Ratna Bajapi -Reader

Dr. R.G. Shivamanjunath-Reader

Dr. Jiji John -Reader

Since the college is not entitled for starting of MDS Course in the speciality of Periodontics from the academic session 2006-07, therefore, the question of renewal of permission for MDS Course in the speciality for the academic sessions 2007-08 and 2008-09 does not arise.

Conservative Dentistry.

2006-07, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009

It is pertinent to mention here that the scheme for starting of MDS Course in this speciality has already been disapproved by the Central Government under the provision of Section 10A (4) of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993, even the performance bank guarantee furnished by the college to the Central Government has already been returned by them vide their letter dated 17.3.2009. But in order to comply with the directions dated 20.7.2009 passed by the Hon''ble High Court, the Council determined the admission capacity in this speciality and the college is now entitled for starting of MDS Course in the speciality of Conservation Dentistry with 4 (four) seats from the academic session 2006-07 and for renewal of permission for the subsequent academic session 2007-08 and 2008-09. In these facts and circumstances, the Central Government may take appropriate action at their end in the matter.

Accordingly, the Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial dated 30.6.2006 left to Central Government to grant its permission, as it may think fit, for starting MDS Course in the department of Conservative Dentistry with 4 (four) seats for the session 2006-2007 and renewal permission for the subsequent academic session 2007-08 and 2008-09 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted):

Dr. Abdul Hackeem -Professor & HOD

Dr. Pradhan Hegde -Professor

Dr. Ramesh H.G. -Reader

Dr. M.S. Sivakumaraswamy-Reader

Dr. Sudhin Kuria -Reader

Dr. Ashish Kumar Sawhney Sr. Lecturer

Dr. Kalyani Chaudhary Sr. Lecturer

Note: The initial admission capacity in this speciality has been determined taking into consideration the number of students admitted by the college authorities during the academic session 2006-07.

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-07 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Lavanya Verma

Not accepted since, she was not available. She joined only on 15.10.2008.

Dr. S.J. Deshpande

Not Accepted since, as per inspection report 3.11.2008, he joined the college on 5.4.2006 as a Reader and was relieved on 3.6.2006 even the college could not furnish sufficient documents viz. Attendance Register, Salary Register and TDS Certificate to the Inspector and the Council.

Dr. Gagan Chauhary Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he joined on 7.12.2006 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Aruna K Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 3.6.2008

Dr. Abhinav Mishra Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, he was not available. He joined on 1.8.2008.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The clinical material and infrastructure in speciality is highly inadequate.

Bio medical waste management protocol is not followed.

The PG guide for the first batch (2006-2007) has been changed many times. As per the protocol, the guide of a student can be changed only with prior permission of the University. But these guidelines were totally neglected by the college.

After evaluation of the papers available it is evident that Dr. Lavanya (Prof.) & Dr. Sudim Kurian (Reader) are not coming to the department & surprisingly even their names are not mentioned in the faculty attendance register.

Dr. Ashish Kumar Sawhny was promoted as Reader on 15.6.2008 after completion of 3. year teaching. One PG students is allotted to him (2006-2007 batch). He has even signed their thesis. But as per DCI guidelines the minimum senior Lecturer and not as Reader.

The work done by the students admitted in 2006-2007 is highly inadequate & the most possible reason seems to be the least involvement of the senior faculty members.

Pedodontics

2006-2007

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial date 30.6.2006 recommends to the Central Government to start MDS Course in the department of Pedodontics with 2. (two) seats for the session 2006-2007 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. Anil Kohli -Professor

Dr. Mallikarjun -Associate Professor

Dr. Arvind Kumar -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Ila Srinivasan Professor

Dr. Ila Srinivasan has been claimed as a Professor by the college authorities with the date of joining of 17.5.2006 in the deptt. but to the contrary to their claim, she vide her letter dated 28.5.2006 refused herself as a teaching faculty of the subject dental college by making a statement that she resigned from M.R.A. Dental College, Bangalore on 17.5.2006 and not joined any dental college thereafter. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, the the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that she is absconding without relieving from the college.

2007-2008

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd Year MDS Course in the department of Pedodontics with 2. (two) seats for the session 2007-2008 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. Anil Kohli -Professor

Dr. Mallikarjun -Associate Professor

Dr. Arvind Kumar -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Ila Srinivasan Professor

Dr. Ila Srinivasan has been claimed as a Professor by the college authorities with the date of joining of 17.5.2006 in the deptt. but to the contrary to their claim, she vide her letter dated 28.5.2006 refused herself as a teaching faculty of the subject dental college by making a statement that she resigned from M.R.A. Dental College, Bangalore on 17.5.2006 and not joined any dental college thereafter. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, the the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that she is absconding without relieving from the college.

2008-2009

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 3rd year MDS Course in the department of Pedodontics with 2. (two) seats for the session 2008-2009 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2008-2009:

Dr. Anil Kohli -Professor & HOD

Dr. Mallikarjun -Associate Professor

Dr. Arvind Kumar -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2008-2009 due to the reasons mentioned again each:

Dr. Ila Srinivasan Professor

Dr. Ila Srinivasan has been claimed as a Professor by the college authorities with the date of joining of 17.5.2006 in the deptt. but to the contrary to their claim, she vide her letter dated 28.5.2006 refused herself as a teaching faculty of the subject dental college by making a statement that she resigned from M.R.A. Dental College, Bangalore on 17.5.2006 and not joined any dental college thereafter. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, the the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that she is absconding without relieving from the college.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The students admitted to MDS Course in Pedodontics have not so far been confirmed/enrolled to the course by the concerned University.

The outline and synopsis and guide/Co-guide have not been approved by the concerned University. So far the approved syllabus of MDS in Pedodontics, academic calendar and schedule of examination approved by BDS Faculty, Medical/Dental Sciences are not available to the college.

There is no schedule of seminar, journal club, clinical posting or Inter departmental posting followed in the department of Pedodontics.

There is inadequacy of space in the department of Pedodontics in terms of lack of PG laboratory, research room, counselling room, Oral health education room and space for training children with special needs.

There is inadequacy of teaching material in Pedodontics.

The availability of the teaching faculty is not regular as expressed by PG students.

Oral Pathology

2006-2007, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009

It is pertinent to mention here that the scheme for starting of MDS Course in this speciality has already been disapproved by the Central Government under the provision of Section 10A(4) of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993, even the performance bank guarantee furnished by the College to the Central Government has already returned by them vide their letter dated 17.3.2009. But in order to comply with the directions dated 20.7.2009 passed by the Hon''ble High Court, the Council determined the admission capacity in this speciality and the college is now entitled for starting of MDS Course in the speciality of Oral Pathology with 2. (two) seats from the academic session 2006-2007 and for renewal of permission for the subsequent academic sessions 2007-2008 and 2008-2009. In these facts and circumstances, the Central Government may take appropriate action at their end in the matter.

Accordingly, the Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial dated 30.6.2006 left to Central Government to grant its permission, as it may think fit, for starting MDS Course in the department of Oral Pathology with 2. (two) seats for the session 2006-2007 and renewal permission for the subsequent academic session 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted):

Dr. Shantha Bharathan -Professor

Dr. Srinivas Kallianpur -Associate Professor

Dr. Thanuja R -Sr. Lecturer

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned again each:

Dr. G.P. Rathod Professor & HOD

Not accepted since, he joined the college on 6.10.2006 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006,

Dr. Priya Sahni Professor

Not accepted since, she vide her letter dated 8.9.2005, addressed to the Rama Dental College, Kanpur endorsement to the DCI, had resigned from the college with immediate effect and moreover the relevant documents viz. Attendance Register, Salary Register & TDS Certificate has not been furnished. Even her name was not indicated in the list furnished by the college authorities at the time of first inspection.

Dr. S.M. Manjunath Reader

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 12.9.2006 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Prerna Singh Sr. Lecturer

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 3.7.2006 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Gauri Mishra Sr Lecturer

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 17.4.2007 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

2007-2008

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd year MDS Course in the department of Oral Pathology with 2. (two) seats for the session 2007-2008.

2008-2009

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 3rd year MDS Course in the department of Oral Pathology with 2. (two) seats for the session 2008-2009.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

The Guides and Professor in the department of Oral Pathology left since 2007 under whom the 2006 PG students were admitted.

The college was not given permission to admit any PG student in the speciality of Oral Pathology by DCI, the college still admitted the following students:

2006-2007

(i) Dr. Shobhit Pradhan, (ii) Dr. Vidhi Dhakray, (iii) Dr. Prateek Khare

2007-2008

(i) Dr. Amrita Raj, (ii) Sarika Singh, (iii) Dr. Himanshu Mishra 2008-2009

(i) Dr. Swati Arora

The observation of the work done by PG students of first batch (2006) (i) Dr. Shobhit Pradhan, (ii) Dr. Vidhi Dharkray & (iii) Dr. Prateek Khare are as under:

(i) Dr. Shobhit Pradhan: The Progress of PG studies was found to be unsatisfactory. The student is not versed with staining, laboratory techniques and slide diagnoses. His basic Oral Pathology record book was not produced. Thesis work is lagging behind and was not submitted yet.

(ii) Dr. Vidhi Dharkray: She has not completed her library dissertation yet. Thesis work is going on but the student was not able to give the details of her study. The study is not being done in the deptt. and she takes held from General Pathology faculty. Her basic knowledge of the subject is very poor and on verification of work done as per the daily PG curriculum no supporting evidence could be found. She reported to the deptt. at 12.30 pm on the day of inspection.

(iii) Dr. Prateek Khare: His library dissertation was not present. He was unable to give details of his thesis topic as the work had not even started. Surprisingly the student was not even sure of his dissertation title. No pre-clinical or clinical work in the deptt. had been done by him. He reported to the deptt. at 1.30 pm on 3.11.2008.

The infrastructure, facility & equipment in the department of Oral Pathology are as under:

(i) The department had only three dental chairs.

(ii) One Trinocular Microscope with digital Olympus camera was present.

(iii) Only one Binocular Microscope for all PG was present.

(iv) No. of biopsy on the day of inspection was only one.

(v) No. of patients reported to the deptt. for examination. There was inadequate clinical material in the department.

(vi) The laboratory was equipped with equipments of unknown/local make which did not appear to be in use.

(vii) No histopathology technician was present.

(viii) Seminar room which was on the floor above was locked and did not appear to be in use. Audio visual aids were not shown.

(ix) The department does not have any qualified technician.

In the department of Oral Pathology only one PG student of 2006 batch namely, Shobhit Pradhan was present the other two PG students of the batch had to be telephonically called.

Community Dentistry

2006-2007

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college as on the crucial dated 30.6.2006 recommends to start MDS Course in the department of Community Dentistry with 3. (three) seats for the session 2006-2007 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2006-2007:

Dr. C.L. Dileep -Professor & HOD

Dr. Basvaraj P -Associate Professor

Dr. Jayaprakash K -Associate Professor

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2006-2007 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Jyothi C. Associate Professor

Not accepted since she joined the college on 2.7.2008 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Vrinda Saxena Reader

Not accepted since, she resigned vide her letter dated 10.4.2006 (copy enclosed) before the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that she is absconding without relieving from the college.

2007-2008

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 2nd year MDS Course with 3. (three) seats for the session 2007-2008 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2007-2008:

Dr. C.L. Dileep -Professor & HOD

Dr. Basvaraj P -Associate Professor

Dr. Jayaprakash K -Associate Professor

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2007-2008 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Jyothi C. Associate Professor

Not accepted since she joined the college on 2.7.2008 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Vrinda Saxena Reader

Not accepted since, she resigned vide her letter dated 10.4.2006 (copy enclosed) before the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006. Moreover, as per annexure, duly signed by the Principal, to the letter dated 21.7.2006 written by the college authorities addressed to the DCI, the college authorities themselves admitted that she is absconding without relieving from the college.

2008-2009

The Executive Committee, after taking into consideration the teaching faculty and other infrastructural facility available with college recommends to the Central Government to renew its permission for 3rd year MDS Course with 3. (three) seats for the session 2008-2009 on the basis of following teaching staff (accepted) during the academic session 2008-2009:

Dr. C.L. Dileep -Professor & HOD

Dr. Jayaprakash K -Associate Professor

However, the following teaching staff claimed by college authority is not accepted for the session 2008-2009 due to the reasons mentioned against each:

Dr. Basvaraj P Associate Professor

Not Accepted since he resigned

Dr. Jyothi C. Associate Professor

Not accepted since, she joined the college on 2.7.2008 after the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

Dr. Vrinda Saxena Reader

Not accepted since, she resigned vide her letter dated 10.4.2006 (copy enclosed) before the crucial date i.e. 30.6.2006.

In addition to the above, the following observation have also been made by the Council''s Inspectors during the recent Inspection carried out on 3rd & 4th November 2008:

On the day of inspection Asso. Professor i.e. Dr. Jay Prakash and three tutors with BDS degree qualifications were present. Dr. C.L. Dileep and Dr. Jyoti C., Asso. Professor were not present, their leave application were produced later on. As per attendance register Dr. Jyoti C was absenting from the college from 1.10.2008 and she has applied leave from 20.10.2008 to 13.11.2008.

Dr. C.L. Dileep who was shown as Prof. & Head during the session 2006-2007 was not eligible for the post of Professor as he was never promoted/served as Reader/Asstt. Professor/Asso. Professor. For the post of Professor one should have a minimum 3. years teaching experience as a lecturer after completing his MDS degree and 5 years as a Reader as per DCI norms. So, he can not be considered as a guide for PG degree course students.

Dr. Basavraj P., who was shown as a Reader in 2006-2007 not present on the day of inspection. As the statement of the Principal of the college has resigned from the institution but no record w2as provided to us.

Dr. Vrinda Saxena who was shown as a Reader during inspection has resigned from this college in February 2006 and joined as reader in Peoples College of Dental Sciences, Bhopal on 10.4.2006. So she can not be considered on the roll during the inspection for the session 2006-2007 for starting MDS course in the speciality of Community Dentistry in Rama Dental College, Kanpur.

As per records Dr. Vrinda Saxena was not present during the inspection in April, 2006 for starting MDS course in the speciality of Community Dentistry. There was a deficiency of one Professor and 2. Readers for the teaching/guiding of 4 PG students and 100 UG students as per DCI norms.

Dr. Jyothi C has joined very recently and she can not be the guide and also can not sign the thesis of the students who were admitted during the session 2006-2007.

5 The college permitted to admit 3. students in speciality of Community Dentistry for doing PG course during the session 2006-2007 but they have admitted 4 students which is contrary to Govt. of India permission namely:

(I) Dr. Bahu Singh

(ii) Dr. Bhuvandeep Gupta

(iii) Dr. Ankur Chaudhary

(iv) Dr. Rajat Bhargava

The number of dental chairs and units in PG clinics is inadequate as 3. batches have been admitted. Number of chairs has to be increased.

With regard to renewal of permission for admitting next batch of students in the above MDS Courses at the subject dental college for the academic session 2009-2010, it is pertinent to mention here that the Hon''ble High Court in its order directed that unless DCI permits the college to make any admission for the current session, i.e. 2009-2010, the college shall not admit a single student for the said year in any discipline. In this connection, it is pertinent to mention here that as per time schedule annexed with DCI Regulation, 2006, the last date for sending the recommendations by the DCI to the Central Government for the academic session 2009-2010 is already over since long back. Moreover, the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh vide his letter dated 31.7.2009 (copy enclosed) addressed to Dr. B.S. Kushwaha, Chairman Royal Society of Education, Kanpur (i.e. Management of the subject dental college) has now informed that the Hon''ble Governor has solicited his approval for withdrawal of the Essentiality Certificate issued by them vide office order No. 1194/71-3-04-N-1/03. dated 25.5.2004 and University Affiliation dated 29.12.2006 issued by Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra to the subject dental college. In these facts and circumstances, the Council is not in a position to renew the Central Government permission for admitting next batch of the students in the above MDS Courses at the subject dental college for the academic session 2009-10.

The above said decision of the Executive Committee of the Council is communicated to you for your necessary action in the matter.

Further the following documents are also attached herewith for your ready reference:

1) The Hon''ble High Court of Allahabad order dated 20.7.2009.

ii) Joint Inspection Reports of Council''s Inspectors conducted on 3.11.2008, in pursuance of order passed by Hon''ble High Court on 16.10.2008.

iii) Letter dated 21.7.2006 of Rama Dental College, Kanpur alongwith its annexures.

iv) Letter dated 10.5.2006 issued by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, extending the time schedule upto 30.6.2006.

v) A copy each of the resignations of faculty those left the dental college.

vi) A copy of letter No. 3067/71-3-08-N-1/2003. dated 31.7.2009 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh.

Yours faithfully (Maj. Gen. (Retd.) P.N. Awasthi) Secretary Dental Council of India

Encls. As above

Copy of information to Shri Pankaj Naqvi, Advocate, SF-2, Narinjan Apartments, Ashok Nagar, Allahabad-211001.

(Maj. Gen. (Retd.) P.N. Awasthi) Secretary Dental Council of India

The Petitioner had already filed his representation on 8.8.2009 and the matter was taken up by the Government of India that ultimately passed an order on 25/27th August, 2009. It is the said order which is impugned in the present writ petition and is subject matter of consideration.

Having traversed the aforesaid facts and having heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Pankaj Naqvi for the Respondents, it is evident that the impugned order passed by the Government of India dated 25th/27th August, 2009 cannot be sustained for the simple reason that it does not contain any reason for either rejecting or not accepting the explanation submitted by the Petitioner to the Government of India on 8th August, 2009. Want of reasons therefore vitiates the same and the order has to be set aside on this short ground alone.

However, in view of the submissions that have been raised, it would be appropriate to refer to the submissions raised. So far as the applicability of the rules are concerned for the session 2006-2007 and onwards, the calculation has to be governed by the provisions of the Dentists (Amendment) Act, 1993. read with the MDS Regulations, 1983. and the Dental Council of India Regulations, 1983. and 2006. There are no other rules to the contrary as applicable for the relevant years. This has also been noticed by the learned single Judge in the judgment dated 20th July, 2009.

There is yet another thing which has to be noticed that the Petitioner institution itself gave an undertaking on 8th April, 2005. The College would be bound by such undertaking. The same is reproduced herein under:

RAMA DENTAL COLLEGE

8.4.2005

To

The President, Dental Council of India, New Delhi

UNDERTAKING

Rama Dental College Hospital & Research Centre, Kanpur undertake that if Dental Council of India, recommends to Central Government the number of MDS seats as per the faculty available in the college and as per MDS Regulations. The college will not object to the number of seats recommended to Central Government for the said college.

We will abide by the decision of the DCI.

Yours sincerely Sd/- (Dr. B.S. Kushuwah)

Individual deficiencies had been pointed out by the Dental Council of India and had been brought on record. However, when the matter came up before the Division Bench, the bench noted the letter dated 14th October, 2008 of the Dental Council of India where it was stated that the Council will have no objection to take out a fresh inspection in order to ascertain the correctness or otherwise of the claim relating to the capacity of the Petitioner as per DCI norms as was then available for the session 2006-07. Noticing the said fact, the Division Bench called for a fresh inspection to be made and the Central Government was directed to take a decision within four weeks from the date of receipt of a fresh report by the Dental Council. It is to be noted that the Division Bench did not decide any issue on merit at all.

Thereafter, a fresh inspection has been carried out to which objections have been raised and a report was submitted by the Dental Council of India which has been extracted herein above. The Petitioner was not given any formal opportunity hearing. The Petitioner institution sent its objections on 8th August, 2009, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 35 to the writ petition.

Sri Pankaj Naqvi contends that whatever documents were available on record have been taken into consideration and the matter has been objectively dealt with by the Dental Council. Hence, its recommendations are neither perverse nor there is any infirmity in the same. Sri Naqvi relied on the judgment of Mridul Dhar (Minor) and Another Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, and other judgments to contend that the Dental Council being an expert body had already arrived at a conclusion and that the time table for admissions on the basis of inspection report has to be strictly maintained. He further submits that the admissions being in excess of the norms fixed cannot be justified in any way and therefore the recommendations are justified. Relying on the said report the impugned order has been passed.

For the purpose of calculating the availability of faculties, it is to be noticed that the judgment of the learned single Judge clearly noted the stand of the council that the college did not have sufficient teachers or faculties whereafter it came to the conclusion that the teachers-students ratio prescribed under the 1983. Regulations had not been kept in mind while deciding the matter. It was further observed that several teachers who were appointed either immediately before or immediately after start of the session 2006-2007 have been refused to be taken into consideration which approach of the council was described as not correct. The learned single Judge also observed that this would frustrate the purpose of the division bench judgment dated 16.10.2008 for fresh inspection. Accordingly, the council was directed to given elaborate reasons. The council did give its elaborate reasons in the subsequent report which has been extracted hereinabove.

However, categorical objections have been raised in the response of the Petitioner which was sent straight away to the Government of India on 8th August, 2009. These objections clearly narrate the deficiencies in the recommendations made by the Dental Council of India. Not only this, the Petitioner institution had also made a request for grant of personal hearing so that the minute details be pointed out and sifted. The said personal hearing was obviously not given and the impugned order has been passed. The order further recites that the extended time by the Supreme Court for the session 2006-2007 was till 30th June, 2006. It is the said date which has been taken into account for accepting the teaching faculties as required per norms. At this juncture, the observations made by the learned Single Judge become relevant where it was clearly observed that the teachers appointed either immediately before or after the inspection ought to have been taken into consideration. This objection has been raised by the Petitioner yet the impugned order dated 25/27.8.2009 nowhere takes into consideration the said aspect.

Apart from this, the details with regard to the experience of teachers and the availability of faculties as indicated in the reply of the Petitioner in all the six departments have been clearly highlighted on which there is no finding by the Central Government. In such a situation the absence of consideration of the reply of the Petitioner vitiates the order.

This Court will not sit as an expert in order to determine the assessment made by the Dental Council yet one thing is certain that the Respondents started with extending the benefit of sanction of only 18 seats to the Petitioner which was reduced to 17 and now under the impugned order the same has been raised to 29 for the session 2006-2007. This variation itself demonstrates that the recommendations of the Dental Council were not accepted in its entirety and the Central Government has varied its stand keeping in view the recommendations made by the Dental Council itself.

Accordingly, for this reason also the Central Government was under an obligation to have considered the objections raised by the Petitioner in order to further find out as to determine the claim of the institution beyond what has been granted in the impugned order. Once, this basic error is present then the same logic would follow for the subsequent years that is 2007-2008 and 2008-2009. However, while proceeding to take a decision thereon, the Central Government will keep in mind the observations made by the learned single Judge which is to the following effect:

As far as excess admissions in the academic sessions 2007-08 and 2008-09 are concerned, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has not been able to justify the said admissions. The only argument is that as College was having interim order for 2006-07 permitting to admit 47 students, hence the said interim order was treated to be operative for the subsequent years. This argument is not at all tenable.

Nonetheless, after making those observations, the learned single Judge in the operative part of the judgment also directed the authorities to assess the impact in the subsequent orders, once the entitlement is finalized for the year 2006-07. The Central Government will have to keep that in mind at the time of proceeding to take a final decision in the matter.

Accordingly, for the reasons given herein above, this writ petition is allowed. The order dated 25/27th August, 2009 is quashed. The Central Government shall take a decision after considering the objection of the Petitioner to the recommendation of the Dental Council within one month from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order. The status of the admission capacity as declared in the impugned order shall be retained till such decision is taken by the Central Government in the light of the observations made herein above and shall finally abide by the same.