PRINCIPAL, KANNUR DENTAL COLLEGE Vs. ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE & FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Principal of the Kannur Dental College has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P9 order passed by the first respondent declining to approve the admission of 13 students to the Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) course conducted by the college and approved by the Dental Council of India. The first respondent has by Ext.P9 order directed the second respondent University not to register the names of the said students. Accordingly Ext.P11 order has been passed by the second respondent refusing registration to the said students. According to the petitioner, the impugned orders are illegal, unsustainable and liable to be set aside.

(2.) The third respondent Dental Council of India has permitted an intake of 100 students. Accordingly, a prospectus was issued by the College inviting applications from students who had passed and qualified in the Common Entrance Test conducted by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations , Kerala (KEAM 2014). The qualification and eligibility criteria were stipulated as insisted on by the Dental Council of India. However, the petitioner could not obtain sufficient number of students. Therefore, the Association of the Colleges had approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing an application in a pending case, Special Leave Petition No:19473/2014 filed against the judgment in WPC 16775/2014 seeking a direction permitting the Association to conduct a separate examination. The writ petition from which the Special Leave Petition arose had been filed seeking a direction from this Court to the effect that the time schedule stipulated by the Supreme Court in its judgment was not applicable to the self financing colleges. The Supreme Court considered the request of the Association of Colleges to conduct an examination and passed Ext.P1 order on 19.8.2014. The Supreme Court noticed that the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations had already conducted an Entrance Examination and had prepared a list of eligible candidates. Therefore, as per Ext.P1 order the State Government was directed to furnish an initial list of 5000 candidates in the order of merit from the said list, from which, the colleges were to admit students. It has been clarified in the said order that if sufficient number of students do not accept admissions in the colleges from the first list of 5000 candidates, a further list of 5000 candidates was to be furnished. Though the above order was complied with, sufficient number of students did not accept admission in the various colleges. Therefore the Supreme Court was approached again. Thereupon by Ext.P2 order the Supreme Court after noticing the peculiar situation, directed the first respondent, to conduct a fresh Entrance Examination on 26.9.2014 after issuing necessary advertisements inviting applications from interested students. The advertisements issued were to be made on 28.9.2014. As per Ext.P2 order the results of the Entrance Examination was to be declared on 27.9.2014. Ext.P2 further directed that the process of admission be completed by 30.9.2014.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that, in compliance with the directions contained in Ext.P2, an agreement was entered into between the State Government and the petitioner on 19.9.2014, a copy of which is Ext.P3. On the basis of the agreement and the Entrance Examination conducted by the first respondent allotments were made by the Government and students were admitted. However, only 77 students have joined the college for the year 2014-15 though the permitted intake was 100. Thereafter, the list of the students so admitted have been furnished to the Dental Council, as evidenced by Ext.P4. A similar list has been furnished to the second respondent University, which is Ext.P5. Neither the second respondent nor the third respondent has objected to any of the admissions so granted.