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 opportunities.

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 detail and as the gravamen of the pleadings raised by the petitioners fall within a very narrow sphere, suffice to capture the essence of the said averments in the present petitions so as to analyse the issues raised in the present petitions.

3. The petitioners, upon clearing and coming out successful in the NEET examination were selected and admitted to the respective Dental Colleges for pursuing BDS course during the academic year 2017-2018. The petitioners have continued in the said course and had completed the major portion of the four year course barring certain exams in a semester, or a semester or the final year exams. However, when they sought the indulgence of the respective respondents to permit them to write the exams and complete the BDS course, the same was rejected citing that double the duration of the above course has passed and, therefore, as per the amendment made to B.D.S. Course (7^th Amendment) Regulations, 2015 (for short ‘Regulations, 2015’) aggrieved by which the present petitions have been preferred.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners submitted that the amendment made vide Regulations, 2015, is in gross violation of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution and it is not in tune with Section 20 (2) of the Dentists Act, 1948.

5. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the intention of the legislation must be to ensure that students, who are unable to complete the papers within a particular time frame for reasons beyond their control by restricting the maximum time limit of 9 years to complete the degree course would amount to deprivation of the rights of the students to complete the course successfully. Therefore, the impugned regulations is against the interest of the petitioners and it violative of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution, as it otherwise spoils the efforts of the petitioners in pursuing their BDS career.

6. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that in respect of MBBS course, the outer time limit to complete the course is fixed at 10 years whereas for BDS course, it is fixed at 9 years, which time prescription is without any rationality and equality and, thereby, there is clear violation of the guarantees provided under the Constitution. Further, the period of 9 years restriction fixed under Regulations, 2015, has no nexus with the impugned clause and the objects sought to be achieved in order to maintain the standard of dental education.

7. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that during the period in which the petitioners were undergoing their studies, there was the intervening period of lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic in which the Apex Court had extended the period of limitation for the purpose of filing cases and b