DALJIT SINGH KANG Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition filed by the petitioners in the nature of public interest litigation directions are sought for quashing the transfer of registration of the respondent No. 3 from Delhi to Punjab and also for quashing of nomination/election of the respondent No. 3 as a member of the Dental Council of India on the strength of such transfer of registration. Alongwith the writ petition, the petitioners also filed a stay application contending inter alia, that the transfer of registration of the respondent No. 3 from Delhi to Punjab is illegal and unjustified and that he has no right to continue as a member of the Dental Council on the strength of such illegal transfer of registration. In the stay application the petitioners seek for stay of the communication dated 23.8.1995 whereby the respondent No. 3 has been called to function as a member of the Dental Council by the respondent No. 2.

(2.) This Court on 18.10.1995 issued notice on both the writ petition and stay application in pursuance of which the respondent No. 3 has appeared and contested both the writ petition and stay application by filing counter affidavit. The respondents Nos. 2 & 6 have also filed affidavits before us. As notices on all the respondents have not yet been served we are not in a position to hear the writ petition finally and accordingly on the prayer of the Counsel for the petitioner and with the consent of the Counsel appearing for the respondents Nos. 3 & 6, we take up the stay application filed by the petitioners for consideration.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioners and the respondent No. 6 who supported the cause espoused by the petitioners took us through the relevant provisions of the Dentist Act, particularly the provisions of Sections 33,34 and 46A of the said Act and submitted that since the respondent No. 3 did not entirely shift his practice to Punjab from Delhi, he could not have been allowed transfer of his registration from Delhi to Punjab and also could not have been nominated as a member of Dental Council of India from Punjab. The learned Counsel relied upon the expression "resides and carries on the profession of dentistry" appearing in Sections 33 and 34 of the Dentist Act in support of his aforesaid submission and desired that we should read the said expression by adding the word 'entirely' or 'primarily' before the said expression. If it is so read, according to the learned Counsel the respondent No. 3 does not fulfil the requirement for registration in the State of Punjab as he did not shift his practice to Punjab entirely.