Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI
Vikash Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners denied bds completion due to 9-year limit. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. 9-year limit violates articles 14, 19; arbitrary application. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. covid-19 disruptions warrant time extension. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. regulations mandatory; no relaxation for bds duration. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. dci amendment validly approved under dentists act section 20. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 6. 9-year limit from admission inclusive of internship. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 7. petitioners failed to complete within mandatory time; no equity relief. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 8. writ petitions dismissed; no interference. (Para 44) |
ORDER :
1. The application of 9 year outer limit for completion of B.D.S. Course from the date of inception into the educational stream in view of the amendment made to the BDS Course Regulation, 2015 resulting in the negation of the representation given by the petitioners by permitting them to partake in the examination and also complete their internship, which has led to the filing of the present writ petitions.
2. The facts of the individual petitions are not dealt with in d
9-year limit for BDS completion, including internship from admission, is mandatory under validly framed regulations; no relaxation for COVID or delays; discharge upheld for non-completion despite opp....
Regulations governing course completion must be adhered to unless adequately challenged; failure to provide sufficient evidence of health issues led to dismissal of the petition.
The court upheld that educational regulations mandating completion within nine years are binding and cannot be overridden by claims of hardship or health, emphasizing adherence to the rule of law.
Admissions to BDS courses granted under relaxed percentile criteria by the State were illegal, emphasizing that only the Central Government holds the authority to set qualifying standards for NEET.
The amended Regulation had a direct nexus with the object of providing adequate teaching and training facilities to the students and was not manifestly arbitrary. The differential treatment for diffe....
The evaluation ordinance by Rajiv Gandhi University conforms to statutory regulations, allowing for valid single evaluations post-revaluation.
The court established that the Medical Council of India Regulations of 1997 did not impose a 9-year limit for MBBS course completion, rendering the notice invalid.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
