INDIAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INDIAN Dental Association has filed this writ petition for quashing the Gazette notification published in the Gazette of Pondicherry dated 22.6.82 under S. 32(4) of the Dentists Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as the Act, which contains the First register of dentists prepared by the Registration Tribunal constituted in December 1978 by the Health Electricity and Works Department, Pondicherry. It is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act, before referring to the facts.

(2.) S. 2(b) of the Act defined dental hygienist? as a person not being a dentist or a medical practitioner, who scales, cleans or polishes tooth, or gives instruction in dental hygiene. S. 2(c) defines dental mechanic as a person who makes or repairs denture and dental appliances S. 2(d) defining the term ?dentistry? reads as follows: (d) ?dentistry? include- (1) the performance of any operation on, and the treatment on any disease, deficiency or lesion of, human teeth or jaws, and the performance of radiographic work in connection with human teeth or jaws or the oral cavity: (ii) the giving of any anesthetic in connection with any such operation or treatment; (iii) the mechanical construction or the renewal of artificial dentures or restorative dental appliances; (iv) the performance of any operation on or the giving of any treatment, advice or attendance to any person preparatory to; or for the purpose of, or in connection with, the fitting, inserting, fixing, constructing, repairing or renewing of artificial dentures or restorative dental appliances, and the performance of any such operation and the giving of any such treatment, advice or attendance, as is usually performed or given by dentists;? S. 2(a) defines ?dentist? as a person who practises dentistry. Under S. 21, the State Council shall constitute Dental Council consisting of members set out in the said section. Four of them should be elected from among the dentists registered in Part B of the State register; another four of them should be elected from among the dentists registered in Part B of the State register. It is not necessary to refer to the other members. S. 31 provides for preparation and maintenance of register of dentists for the state. Under sub-S. (2) of S. 31, the State Council shall upon its constitution assume the duty of maintaining the register in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Under sub-S. (3), the register of dentists shall be maintained in two Parts A and B; Part A should refer to persons possessing recognised dental qualification and Part B should include persons not possessing such qualifications. S. 32 prescribes the procedure for the first preparation of register. It reads thus:

(3.) RESPONDENTS 4 to 10 are the persons, who are said to have been impleaded as representatives of the persons who are found in Part B of the register. The affidavit has not made any allegation against any one of the respondents. The petitioner has failed to state that respondents 4 to 10 are not qualified to be entered in Part B register. From the affidavit filed by the petitioner, the court has to make an inference that it is the basis on which the writ petition has been filed in. Naturally, respondents who have been impleaded individually have not been able to deny in the counter affidavits any allegation with regard to their qualification, as there is no specific allegation in the affidavit as against them. But they in their counter affidavits have stated as to how they are qualified to be entered in Part B of the register.