LAWS(DLH)-1995-8-3

H R PREM SACHDEVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On August 30, 1995
H.R.PREM SACHDEVA Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners numbering seven and all dentists have filed this petition (CWP No. 3021/95) under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking restraint on the holding of the meeting of the Dental Council of India at Bangalore on 8, 9 and 10 September 1995 as per notice dated 30 July 1995 issued by the Secretary, Dental Council of India. The petitioners also want appointment of a nominee of the Central Government as Administrator of the Dental Council of India till proper elections to the Dental Council and to the Executive Cmmittee are held. Various other prayers are also sought which we will consider as we proceed with the judgment. There are three respondents. The third respondent was the Vice President and in the absence of the President he performs the functions of the President.

(2.) In Writ Petition (CWP No. 3023/95) filed by Dr. Pradip Jayna, also a dentist, there is challenge to the communications dated 2 February 1995 and 8 May 1995 of the second respondent as well as to the order dated 31 July 1995 of the first respondent. Restraint is also sought on the resspondents from preventing the petitioner to act as a member of the Dental Council.

(3.) Petitioners have contended that the last meeting of the Dental Council was held in Delhi on 13/14 December 1994, and the third respondent, the Acting President, was not authorised to fix the venue and the date of the next meeting of the Dental Council which he did so unauthorisedly fixing the meet at Bangalore for 8 to 10 September 1995. Before we discuss the rival contentions it may be appropriate to set out the relevant provisions of the Dentists Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') under which the Dental Council is constituted and the Regulations of the Dental Council of India and so also the Dental Council (Election) Regulations, 1952. Both the Regulations have been framed by the Dental Council of India with the approval of the Central Government under section 20 of the Act. It is not disputed that the regulations are statutory.