Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC  ||  Delhi High Court: Elective Surgery Does Not Bar Grant of Interim Bail on Medical Grounds  ||  Delhi HC: Consensual Romance With Minor Nearing 18 May be Considered For Bail in POCSO Case  ||  Delhi HC: Not Named In FIR Doesn’t Matter If Financial Links Show Active Role in NDPS Offence  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Rape is an Affront to Womanhood and a Brutal Violation of The Right To Life  ||  Supreme Court: Single Insolvency Petition Maintainable Against Linked Corporate Entities  ||  Supreme Court: Disputes are Not Arbitrable When the Arbitration Agreement is Alleged to be Forged  ||  Supreme Court: Temple Trust Does Not Qualify as an ‘Industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act    

Dental Council Of India vs. Sailendra Sharma - (Supreme Court) (21 Oct 2022)

Admissions cannot be ordered without considering the eligibility of the candidates

MANU/SC/1385/2022

Education

The Dental Council of India has preferred the present appeals feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court, by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petitions preferred by the Respondents – students and has quashed and set aside the communication dated 6th June, 2018 of the State of Chhattisgarh annulling/cancelling the admissions of the respective respondents – original writ petitioners in the Postgraduate Dental Course.

Once it is found that the respective original writ petitioners were granted admissions illegally and their admissions are backdoor, thereafter to allow them to continue their course shall be perpetuating the illegality.

Admissions cannot be ordered without regard to the eligibility of the candidates. Decisions on matters relevant to be taken into account at the interlocutory stage cannot be deferred or decided later, when serious complications might ensue from the interim order itself. In the present case, the High Court was apparently moved by sympathy for the candidates than by an accurate assessment of even the prima facie legal position. Such orders cannot be allowed to stand.

The prayer on behalf of the institutions/students to allow them to complete their course is not required to be accepted. The undue sympathy would lead to perpetuating the illegality and giving premium to the students who got admissions illegally.

The impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court directing the admissions of the respective original writ petitioners and quashing and setting aside communication dated 6th June, 2018 issued by the Directorate/State Government annulling/cancelling the admissions of the original writ petitions is unsustainable and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside. Consequently, the writ petitions preferred by the original writ petitioners stand dismissed and communication dated 6th June, 2018 issued by the Directorate annulling/cancelling the admission of the original writ petitioners in the postgraduate course in the respective private institutions/colleges is restored.

Tags : ADMISSION   DIRECTION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved