ZEBA MEMON Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) At the outset, learned counsel for the Medical Council of India submits that since admission into BDS course was being sought by the petitioner under domicile quota of Chhattisgarh, it is the Dental Council of India which should have been made respondent as they are the necessary party, therefore, it is a case of non-joinder of the necessary party, which has implications so far as the maintainability of application is concerned.

(3.) However, ignoring the above technical objection, coming to the merits of the matter, the submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that may be at the time of registration, the petitioner did not have a domicile certificate which could be uploaded on the counselling portal, but the fact is that she had obtained the domicile certificate at the time of counseling and therefore, she should have been allowed to participate in the counselling which was not allowed to be done on the date of scrutiny.