Non-Reportable  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Writ Petition (C) No. 779 of 2018

TIRUMALA MEDICAL ACADEMY EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY AND ANR.

………PETITIONER (S) Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ……..RESPONDENT (S)

J U D G M E N T

L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.

1.  This  Writ  Petition  is  filed  challenging  the  letter  dated

27.04.2018 of  the Dental  Council   of  India-Respondent No.2

herein to the Union of India-Respondent No.1 recommending

that the first Petitioner-Tirumala Medical Academy Educational

Society is not entitled for establishment of a dental college for

the academic session 2018-2019.  The order dated 26.06.2018

passed by Respondent No.1 accepting the recommendations of

Respondent No.2 and disapproving the application of the first

Petitioner for establishment of a dental college is also assailed

in the Writ Petition.   The Petitioners seek a further direction to

Respondent No.1 to issue appropriate orders granting letter of

1

permission  for  establishing  a  new  dental  college  for  the

academic year 2018-2019.  2. Tirumala Medical Academy Educational Society, the first

Petitioner  submitted  an  application  for  establishment  of  a

dental  college  in  Nizamabad,  Telangana  for  the  academic

session 2018-2019.  The Executive Committee of the second

Respondent  considered the  proposal  in  its  meeting  held  on

21.12.2017.   The  Executive  Committee  by  its  letter  dated

29.12.2017 recommended to the Central Government not to

approve the scheme of the first Petitioner for establishment of

dental college for the academic session 2018-2019.   It was

mentioned therein that in spite of several opportunities given

to the first Petitioner, the land use certificate was not furnished

and that certificate relating to the completion of the buildings

was also not given.   The Executive Committee was also not

satisfied with the attachment of the proposed dental college

with  the  Government  Medical  College  and  Hospital  as  the

certificate issued by the Principal Secretary to Government of

Andhra Pradesh was issued four years back in which it  was

stated that  the arrangement may be revoked in  the future.

The first Petitioner was informed that an opportunity of being

heard  shall  be  afforded  to  him on  17.01.2018  to  make  his 2

submissions  regarding  the  recommendations  made  by  the

second Respondent for not approving the proposal of the first

Petitioner to start a new dental college.   A personal hearing

was  given  on  17.01.2018  in  respect  of  the  deficiencies

communicated to the first Petitioner.   Certain documents were

submitted by the first Petitioner in support of its  contention

that  the  said  deficiencies  have  been  rectified.   After

considering  the  said  documents  the  Hearing  Committee

recommended  to  the  first  Respondent  that  the  second

Respondent  should  review  their  recommendation  of

disapproval.    By  a  letter  dated  24.01.2018,  the  first

Respondent  informed  the  first  Petitioner  that  the  scheme

submitted by it  for  starting a dental  college had been sent

back to the second Respondent for a review on the basis of the

recommendations of the Hearing Committee.    3. Pursuant  to  the  direction  by  the  first  Respondent  to

review  the  scheme,  the  second  Respondent  appointed  a

Committee to conduct inspection of the dental college.  The

inspection was carried out on 22nd and 23rd March, 2018.  It is

relevant to state that there was a dispute between the first

Petitioner  and  Vels  Education  Society  which  was  running

Meghna Institute of Dental Sciences at Nizamabad regarding 3

the affiliation to the Government Hospital,  Nizamabad.  Vels

Education  Society  filed  a  Writ  Petition  in  the  High  Court  of

Telangana  and  Andhra  Pradesh  seeking  a  direction  to  the

second  Respondent  not  to  approve  the  scheme of  the  first

Petitioner for starting a dental college.  An interim order was

passed by the High Court on 17.04.2018 in I.A. No.1 of 2018 in

Writ Petition No.11172 of 2018 that the proposal of the first

Petitioner  may  be  considered,  if  permissible  under  the

regulations having regard to the peculiar facts of the case.  4. By a letter dated 27.04.2018, the Executive Committee of

the second Respondent recommended to the first Respondent

to disapprove the application/scheme of the first Petitioner for

establishment of a dental college.  Relying upon the relevant

regulations,  the request  of  the first  Petitioner  regarding the

clinical attachment with the Government Hospital, Nizamabad

was rejected as only one dental college can be attached to a

Government  Hospital.   Meghna Institute of  Dental  Sciences,

Nizamabad  was  already  having  clinical  attachment  to  the

Government Hospital.  Apart from the said deficiency, several

others were pointed out in the letter dated 27.04.2018 which

are as follows:

4

“2. The  college  has  four  specialties  clinics  in   Prothodontics, Pedodontics,  Operative  and   Periodontics in one clinic hall.

3. The oral Surgery clinics are in next hall. 4. There is no biometrics for staff attendance. 5. There was shortage of clinical material. 6. There was no record of work done in Register/ log   

book of lab/ Ceramic work. 7. Many staff have residential  address  of  Hyderabad   

city (160 km from college). 8. 15  affidavits  are  incomplete,  despite  requests  to   

complete them  and  give  proofs  of  degrees,   registration etc.

9. The  list  of  medical  college  staff  (teachers  +  non   teaching) was not provided in the inspection hence, no verification could be done of medical teachers  teaching the dental students.

10. Some Professors have no IT Returns after 2014. 11. The library had no journals, back journals only a few  

e- journals. 12. No staff lives in the dental college premises. 13. The  information  of  annexures  No.  7,  8  are  to  be   

provided by  the  dental  college  directly  to  the   council, as it was not provided during inspection.

14. Medical Teaching Staff information not given. 15. DCI cards not available. 16. Information about university approval of appointment

of teachers not available. 17. Attached Medical College details are as under:-

Department Require d

Allotted Occupancy  

During  last  6 months

On the day of Inspection  

General  Ward- Medical  including allied specialties

30 Information  not  given  to the Inspectors  

General  Ward- Surgical  including allied specialties

30

Private  Ward  (A/c  & Non A/c)

9

Maternity Ward 15 Pediatric Ward 6 Intensive  Care Services  (4% of  bed strength)  

4

5

Critical Care Services (6% of bed strength)  

18. Area  Requirement  (As  per  Bureau  of  Indian Standards):-

Required Available Covered Area 20 sq.m./bed Information not given Impatient Services 40% Outpatient Services 35% Department  and  supportive Services

25%

19. There  are  following  information  of  Man  Power   Requirement in various departments not given by the college authority during Inspection:-

Medical Staff: - General Surgery-2, General Medicine- 2, Obstetrics & Gynaecology-2, ENT-2, Paediatrics- 2, Anaesthesia-2,  Orthopaedics-2,   Pharmacologist-1, Radiologist-1,  GDMO-1,   Community Medicine-1, Hospital   Administration-1. Nursing  Staff:  Matron-1,  Sister   Incharge-6, O.T. Nurses-6, General  Nurses-20,   Labour Room Nurses-4. Health Staff:  Female Health Assistant-1,  Extension   Educator Paramedical Staff-1, Lab Technician/ Blood  Bank Tech-4,  ECG  Technician-1,  Pharmacist-4,  Sr.   Radiographer-1, CSSD-2, Medical Records-1. Engineering Staff: Civil-2, Mechanical-2, Electrical-2,  Engineering Aid-4. Other Staff: Drivers-2, Carpentor-1, Cooks-2, Barbar- 1, Class IV including chowdikers-55. Administrative Staff: Office Superintendent-1, Head   Clerk-1, Cashier-1, Stenographer-1, UDC-2, LDC-4.

20. Non-Teaching Staff/ Ministerial Staff: (Annexure10),   Manager-4,  Assistants-7,  D.S.A.  (Chair  side   attendant)-12, Dent.  Tech.  (Dental  Mechanic)-6   Dent.Hygst.-2, Radiographer-3,  Photographer-1,   Artist-1, Physical Direction-1, Electricians-4, Plumber- 2, Carpenter-1, Meson-1,  A.C.  Tech-1,  Helpers   Electrical-3, Sweepers & Scavengers-9,   Attenders-18, Security Personal-5, Dept. Secretaries- 5, Driver-1, Nurses-2, Lab. Technicians-4.

21. Central Library: not available any journal. Indian Journals: No International Journals: No

6

Back Volumes: No Journal Room: No separate room (one big hall only) Computer/ Internet Room: No Room for librarian: No  

22. There are following deficiencies of Major Equipments  in various departments: Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge: Extra oral/ Intra  oral trace-2, Preheating furnace-1, Surveying unit-1, Deflasking unit-4, Hydraulic press-2, Vacuum mixing  maching-1, Curing pressure pot-1, Porcelain Furnace- 1, Vibrator-2,  Sand  blasting  unit-1,  Model   Trimmer-1, Geyser-2,  H.P.  Grinder  with  suction-1,   Heavy duty lathe-2, Phantom  Heads-50,  Pre- clinical working tables-100. Ceramic and Cast Partial Laboratory: Pindex System- 1, Circular saw-1, Model Trimmer with Carborandum disc-1, Model Trimmer with Diamond disc-1, Induction casting machine-1, Programmable porcelain furnace with vacuum pump with instrument kit and material kit-1,  Vacuum  mixing  maching-1,  Spindle  Grinder 24,000 RPM with vacuum suction-1, Curing pressure pot-1,  Milling  machine-1,  Palatal  trimmer-1,  Micro surveyor-1, Pre-clinical Prosthetics Laboratory (Work table preferably complete stainless steel fitted with light,  Bunsen  burner,  air  blower,  working  stool)-60 (deficient), Adequate number of lab micro motor with attached hand piece-20, Plaster room for Pre-Clinical Work:  Vibrator-2,  Model  Trimmer-1,  Carborandum Disc-1, Diamond disc-1. Conservative  Dentistry  and  Endodontics:  Dental Chairs and Unit-33, Glass bead sterilizers-4, Vibrator- 2,  Intra-oral  X-ray  Unit-Radiation  safety  not  there, injectable gutta percha-1, Phantom Lab Unit-60. Chemical  Laboratory:  Model  Trimmer  Carborandum disc.-1,  Model  Trimmer  Diamond  disc-1,  Spindle Grinder-1,  Vibrator-2,  Burnout  furnace-1,  Porcelain furnace-1,  Sand  blasint  machine-1,  Lab  Airrotor-1, Pindex  System-1,  Circular  Saw-1,  Vacuum  mixer-1, Pneumatic chisel-1.

23. Staff  Quarters  (Separate  from  Hostel):  Principal   Bungalow- not occupied and Quarters for staff not   occupied.

No. of equipped common rooms: None No. of messes: only one

24.  Boys Hostel:- 4 seater boys hostel. 7

25. As  per  Hospital  Attachment  only  clinical  facility   provided to the proposed dental college.”

5. The recommendation for  disapproval  of  the scheme by

the second Respondent was accepted by the first Respondent

on 30.05.2018.  The first Petitioner approached the High Court

of  Andhra  Pradesh  and  Telangana  seeking  a  direction  to

Respondent No.1 and 2 herein to consider his representation

dated 28.05.2018 for grant of permission to establish a new

dental college.  By an order dated 07.06.2018, the High Court

directed the first  Respondent to  consider  the representation

dated  28.05.2018  in  accordance  with  law.    The  first

Respondent reconsidered the matter as per the directions of

the High Court and reiterated that the first Petitioner is  not

entitled to start a new dental college for the year 2018-2019

by an order dated 26.06.2018. 6. We have heard Mr. Shyam Divan, learned Senior Counsel

appearing  for  the  Petitioners,  Ms.  Pinky  Anand,  learned

Additional  Solicitor  General  for  the  Union  of  India  and  Mr.

Gaurav Sharma,  learned Advocate for  the Dental  Council  of

India.  Mr. Divan submitted that the recommendation by the

second Respondent for disapproval of the scheme of the first

Petitioner to start a dental college and the acceptance of the

8

said recommendation by the first Respondent are in flagrant

violation  of  Section  10  A  (3)  (a)  and  10  (4)  of  the  Indian

Medical Council Act, 1956.  He contended that no opportunity

was given to the Petitioners to rectify the deficiencies pointed

out in the inspection conducted on 22nd and 23rd March, 2018.

He also  urged that  the first  Respondent  failed to  provide a

hearing to the first Petitioner before disapproval of the scheme

for starting a new dental college.   He relied upon a judgment

of  this  Court  in  Royal  Medical  Trust  v.  Union  of  India,

(2015) 10 SCC 19 in support of his contention.  Mr. Divan

urged  that  the  dispute  pertaining  to  the  affiliation  to  a

Government  Hospital  has  been  settled  and  Vels  Education

Society has withdrawn the Writ Petition filed by it in the High

Court  of  Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.   According to him,

there is no dispute about the Petitioner No.1 being the only

college  affiliated  to  the  Government  Medical  Hospital,

Nizamabad  at  present.    He  further  submitted  that  all  the

deficiencies pointed out in the inspection have been rectified

and  he  requested  for  a  direction  to  Respondent  No.2  to

conduct another inspection to verify whether the deficiencies

still exist.  He also submitted that huge investment has been

9

made on the dental college and the Petitioners would suffer

immense hardship unless permission is  granted to start  the

dental college for the academic session 2018-2019. 7. The learned Additional  Solicitor  General  submitted that

the Hearing Committee of the Union of India fairly considered

the representation of the Petitioners and sent the matter back

to  the  second Respondent  for  review in  January,  2018.   As

gross  deficiencies  have  been  pointed  out  by  the  second

Respondent on the basis of inspection conducted on 22nd and

23rd March, 2018, the recommendation for disapproval of the

scheme  of  the  first  Petitioner  was  accepted  by  the  first

Respondent.   She  stated  that  there  was  no  requirement  of

giving  an  opportunity  at  every  stage  and  in  view  of  the

personal hearing given to the first Petitioner in January, 2018,

there was no necessity of another opportunity to be given by

the first Respondent before passing a final order.  She further

submitted that there are time lines fixed in the schedule which

cannot  be  violated  as  per  the  judgments  of  this  Court.

According  to  her,  the  first  Petitioner  is  not  entitled  for  any

relief as the last date for grant of approval by the Union of

India was 31.05.2018.   Mr.Gaurav  Sharma urged that the Writ

Petition warrants dismissal as the Petitioners are not entitled 10

for  the  relief  claimed  for.   He  stated  that  the  deficiencies

pointed out have not been cured.  By referring to the material

placed on record by the Petitioners, he submitted that there is

large scale shortage of clinical material.  He also contended

that the settlement arrived at between the first Petitioner and

Vels  Education Society  was  only  last  week.   At  the  time of

consideration  of  his  proposal  by  the  Respondents,  the  first

Petitioner  was  not  entitled  for  permission  to  start  a  dental

college as it was not the only college affiliated to Government

Hospital.   He  supported  the  Additional  Solicitor  General  by

stating  that  the  first  Petitioner  was  not  entitled  for  an

opportunity after the inspection was held in view of the fact

that an oral hearing was given by the Union of India before

sending  the  matter  back  to  the  Dental  Council  of  India  in

January, 2018.  8. Section 10 (A) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and

the relevant Regulations framed under Section 33 of the Act

were considered by this Court in Royal Medical Trust (supra)

in which it was held as follows:

“30. In the light of the aforesaid facets, namely, that the scheme under Section 10-A may itself contemplate stage- wise achievement of annual targets and the requirements of reasonable opportunity to be afforded not only at the

11

initial stage but also in cases of subsequent renewal and further that the opportunity must be afforded at both the stages,  namely,  by  MCI  as  well  as  by  the  Central Government,  the  Schedule  under  the  Regulations  must accommodate and provide for adequate time-limits to take care  of  such  eventualities.  The  Schedule  which  was brought in force by way of an amendment dated 21-9-2012 unfortunately  does  not  provide  for  such  stage-wise consideration. It simply gives four stages without indicating any  time-limits  to  ensure  grant  of  such  reasonable opportunity in case the decisions of disapproval are taken against  the  applicants.  It  also  does  not  speak  of  any compliance verification.  The pattern that emerges in the present  cases  is  common  and  consistent  in  that  the inspections were undertaken in and around April/May 2014 and the  letters  of  disapproval  were  sent  by  the  Central Government  on  or  about  15-7-2014.  Though  the compliance was reported, no verification in that behalf was undertaken.

31. MCI  and  the  Central  Government  have  been  vested with  monitoring  powers  under  Section  10-A  and  the Regulations. It is expected of these authorities to discharge their functions well within the statutory confines as well as in conformity with the Schedule to the Regulations. If there is  inaction  on  their  part  or  non-observance  of  the  time schedule,  it  is  bound  to  have  adverse  effect  on  all concerned.  The  affidavit  filed  on  behalf  of  the  Union  of India shows that  though the number of  seats had risen, obviously  because  of  permissions  granted  for establishment of new colleges, because of disapproval of renewal cases the resultant effect was net loss in terms of number of seats available for the academic year. It  thus not  only  caused  loss  of  opportunity  to  the  students community but at the same time caused loss to the society in terms of less number of doctors being available. MCI and the Central Government must therefore show due diligence right from the day when the applications are received. The Schedule  giving  various  stages  and  time-limits  must accommodate every possible eventuality and at the same time must comply with the requirements of observance of natural justice at various levels. In our view the Schedule must ideally take care of:

(A) Initial assessment of the application at the first level should comprise of checking necessary requirements such

12

as  essentiality  certificate,  consent  for  affiliation  and physical features like land and hospital requirement. If an applicant fails to fulfil these requirements, the application on the face of  it,  would  be incomplete and be rejected. Those  who  fulfil  the  basic  requirements  would  be considered at the next stage.

(B) Inspection should  then  be  conducted  by  the Inspectors  of  MCI.  By  very  nature  such  inspection  must have an element of surprise. Therefore sufficient time of about three to four months ought to be given to MCI to cause inspection at any time and such inspection should normally  be  undertaken  latest  by  January.  Surprise inspection  would  ensure  that  the  required  facilities  and infrastructure are always in place and not borrowed or put in temporarily.

(C) Intimation  of  the  result  or  outcome  of  the inspection would  then  be  communicated.  If  the infrastructure  and  facilities  are  in  order,  the  medical college  concerned  should  be  given  requisite permission/renewal. However, if there are any deficiencies or  shortcomings,  MCI  must,  after  pointing  out  the deficiencies, grant to the college concerned sufficient time to report compliance.

(D) If  compliance is  reported  and  the  applicant  states that  the  deficiencies  stand  removed,  MCI  must  cause compliance verification. It is possible that such compliance could be accepted even without actual physical verification but that assessment be left entirely to the discretion of MCI and  the  Central  Government.  In  cases  where  actual physical  verification  is  required,  MCI  and  the  Central Government  must  cause  such  verification  before  the deadline.

(E) The result of such verification if positive in favour of the medical college concerned, the applicant ought to be given requisite permission/renewal. But if the deficiencies still  persist  or  had not  been removed,  the applicant  will stand  disentitled  so  far  as  that  academic  year  is concerned.

11. The  recommendation  of  the  first  Respondent  for

disapproval of the scheme of the first Petitioner by its letter

dated 29.12.2017 to the second Respondent pertained to the

initial assessment of the application at the first level.  Having 13

been satisfied with the explanation of the first Petitioner during

the hearing held on 17.01.2018, the first Respondent directed

the  second  Respondent  to  review  the  proposal  of  the  first

Petitioner for starting a new dental college for the academic

session  2018-2019.   It  is  relevant  to  mention   that  no

inspection of the college was done at that stage.   The only

inspection that was done was on 22nd and 23rd March, 2018.

The first Petitioner was entitled for  an opportunity to report

compliance  after  the  deficiencies  were  communicated  to  it.

Admittedly, no such opportunity was afforded by the second

Respondent.  Consequently, the Dental Council of India did not

also call for compliance verification.  No opportunity was given

by  the  first  Respondent  to  the  first  Petitioner  before

disapproving the scheme of the first Petitioner.  We do not see

any  substance  in  the  submissions  made  on  behalf  of  the

Respondents that there was no requirement of an opportunity

to be given to the first Petitioner.    The only inspection that

was conducted in this case was on 22nd and 23rd March, 2018

and according to the judgment of this Court in Royal Medical

Trust (supra),  the  first  Petitioner  was  entitled  for  an

opportunity  to  rectify  the  deficiencies  pointed  out  in  the

14

inspection  and  a  further  hearing  before  a  final  order  was

passed by the first Respondent.  12. Having held that the letter dated 27.04.2018 of the first

Respondent recommending disapproval of the scheme of first

Petitioner  to  start  a  dental  college  and  the  order  dated

28.06.2018 of the first Respondent are in flagrant violation of

Section  10  of  the  Indian  Medical  Council  Act,  1956,  it  is

necessary  to  decide  as  to  whether  the  first  Petitioner  is

entitled for a direction for re-inspection to enable it to make

admissions for the academic session 2018-2019.  13. The time schedule for the receipt of the applications for

establishment of new dental colleges and processing them by

the Central Government is as follows:

Sl. No.

State of processing Last Date

1. Receipt of applications by the Central Government  

Between  15thJune  to 7thJuly  (both  days inclusive) of any year

2. Forwarding  of  applications  by  the Central Government to Dental Council of India  

By 31stJuly  

3. Technical Scrutiny, Assessment and  Recommendations by the Dental  Council of India

By 31stDecember

4. Receipt of reply/ compliance from the applicant  by  the  Central  Government and for personal hearing thereto, if any and forwarding of  compliance by  the Central  Government  to  the  Dental Council of India

Two months from receipt of  recommendation from DCI  but  not  after 31stJanuary.

5. Final recommendation by the Dental  Council of India

By 30thApril

6. Issue of Letter of Permission by the By 31stMay 15

Central Government  7. Commencement of academic session/  

term 1stof August

8. Last date upto which students can be  admitted/ Joined against stray  vacancies arising due to any reason  

By 15thSeptember  

14. The time schedule for receipt of application for opening of

higher  courses  of  study/increase  of  post  graduate

seats/renewal of permission and processing of the applications

by the Central Government and the Dental Council of India is

as follows:

SI. No.

Stage of proceeding Last Date

1. Receipt  of  applications  by  the  Central Government.  

Between 15th March to  7th April  (both days  inclusive  of any year)

2. Forwarding of applications by the Central Government to Dental Council of India.

By 30th April

3. Technical  Scrutiny,  Assessment  and Recommendations  by  the  Dental  Council of India.

By 15th October

4. Receipt  of  reply/compliance  from  the applicant by the Central Government and for  personal  hearing  thereto,  if  any  and forwarding  of  compliance  by  the  Central Government to the Dental Council of India.

Two  months  from receipt  of recommendation from  DCI  but  not after 15th November

5. Final  recommendations  by  the  Dental Council of India.  

By 31st January  

6. Issue of letter of permission by the Central Government.  

By 28th February

7. Commencement  of  academic session/term.

1st May

8. Last  date  up  to  which  students  can  be admitted/Joined  against  stray  vacancies arising due to any reason.

By 31st May

16

15. The  last  date  for  grant  of  permission  by  the  Central

Government was 31.05.2018 and commencement of academic

session is 01.08.2018.  A time schedule for completion of the

admission  process  for  first  BDS  Course  for  the  academic

session 2018-2019 was issued by a notification of the second

Respondent on 11.06.2018. According to the schedule, the first

round of State Counselling was scheduled to be held between

25th June to 5th July and the second counselling is to be held

between 15th July to 26th July.   16. The notification issued by the Dental Council of India with

previous sanction of the Central Government prescribing the

time schedule for receipt of applications for establishment of

new  medical  colleges  and  processing  the  applications  was

approved by this Court in  Ashish Ranjan v. Union of India

(2016)11 SCC 225.  17. After holding that the Respondents acted in violation of

Section  10  A  (3)  (a)  and  Section  4  by  not  affording  an

opportunity  to  the  Petitioner  No.1,  we  proceed  to  examine

whether the Petitioners are entitled for the relief  claimed in

this Writ Petition.  The final order relating to the relief may be

different and not a natural consequence of the ratio decidendi

of  the  judgment.   This  may happen either  on account  of  a

17

subsequent event or the need to mould the relief to do the

complete justice in the matter.  See:  Sanjay Singh v. U.P.

Public Service Commission (2007) 3 SCC 720 and  U.P.

Public Service Commission v. Manoj Kumar Yadav & Anr.

(2018) 3 SCC 706.           It has been repeatedly held by this

Court that the schedule prescribed by the Dental Council  of

India is binding on all concerned and should not be ordinarily

relaxed.   Any  direction  given  by  us  in  this  case  would

necessarily involve relaxation of the time lines mentioned in

the schedule.  We are not inclined to do that in this case as the

Petitioners  are  also  responsible  for  the  delay  caused  in

consideration of their proposal to start a new dental college.

Initially, they did not furnish the required information sought

by the second Respondent regarding the land and buildings

which resulted in the recommendation of disapproval  of  the

scheme proposed by them.  If they complied with the direction

for  submission  of  the  relevant  documents  sought  by  the

Respondent  No.2,  the  inspection  of  the  college  would  have

been  conducted  as  scheduled  in  December,  2017  itself.

Further delay was caused due to the order passed in the Writ

Petition filed by the Petitioners in the High Court of Telangana

18

and Andhra Pradesh by which Respondent No.1 was directed to

consider the representation made on 28.05.2018.  Further, the

settlement between the Petitioners and Vels Education Society

regarding  the  affiliation  to  the  Government  Medical  College

and Hospital  was reached only last week.   In the facts  and

circumstances mentioned above, we are not inclined to give

any direction to the Respondents to consider the proposal of

the  Petitioner  No.1  to  start  a  new  dental  college  for  this

academic  session  by  relaxing  the  schedule  issued  by  the

Dental Council of India.    18. For  the  aforementioned  reasons,  the  Writ  Petition  is

disposed of.     

               ......................................J.                                                                       [S.A. BOBDE]

                 ......................................J.

             [L. NAGESWARA RAO] New Delhi, August 21, 2018.

19