Bombay High Court
Saiyukta Pravin Hirve vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 19 January, 2021
Bench: S.C. Gupte, Surendra Pandharinath Tavade
sg 1/4 10. wpst213-21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.213 OF 2021
Saiyukta Pravin Hirve .. Petitioner
v/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
....
Mr. Ravindra K. Adsure, a/w. Mr. Sidheshwar Biradar and Mr. Yash P.
Sonavane, for the Petitioner.
Ms. S.S. Bhende, AGP, for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Rajshekhar Govilkar, for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Sandeep Waghmare, for Respondent No.3.
....
CORAM: S.C. GUPTE &
SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATE : 19 JANUARY, 2021.
P.C:-
. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned AGP for
Respondent-State (Respondent Nos. 1 and 2) and learned Counsel for
Respondent No.3 - College.
2. The subject matter of controversy in the present petition
concerns the Petitioner's eligibility to appear for the final year exam of
B.D.S. Course. Dental Council of India had issued BDS Regulations in
2007, inter alia requiring a BDS student to clear first year of BDS within
1 of 4
sg 2/4 10. wpst213-21.doc
three years. The Petitioner was admitted to the Course of BDS in
academic year 2009-2010. The particular clause of 2007 Regulation,
requiring clearance of the first year examination within three years of
admission, was struck down by Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on
29 November 2013 in the case of Nizvy Sunil Prakash vs. The Secretary,
Dental Council of India1. The Petitioner proceeded to accordingly clear
examinations of year 1, 2 and 3. In the meantime, Dental Council of India
revised the regulations by BDS Course (7 th Amendment) Regulations
2015. The regulations inter alia require that candidates have to complete
the entire BDS Course within 9 years of admission. Maharashtra
University of Health Sciences (Respondent No.2), which is the university
in which the Petitioner's BDS Course is conducted, accordingly, issued a
circular, being Circular No.19/2018, requiring all students of the
university undergoing BDS Course to complete the entire course within 9
years. This particular rule and its application to students admitted before
the Regulations of 2015 were brought into force, have been the subject
matter of controversy in several other petitions. At least three orders in
three separate petitions have been brought to the notice of this Court by
the present Petitioner. In all these petitions, this court has taken a
consistent view, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Dr.
Dinesh Kumar vs. Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad 2, that
candidates would be governed by rules, which were in operation on the
date of their admission to the course and no subsequent change in the
rules, which was to the detriment of a candidate, would be applicable to
him. This court, accordingly, issued interim reliefs to the respective
petitioners before it, requiring the respondent-State and University to
1 2013 SCC OnLine Mad 3615
2 (1985) 3 SCC 22
2 of 4
sg 3/4 10. wpst213-21.doc
accept the petitioners' forms for appearance at the final year examinations
of BDS and permit them to appear for the examinations.
3. In that view of the matter, we issue Rule and grant interim
relief in the following terms:-
(i) Respondent No.3-College shall conduct internal assessment
of the Petitioner for Winter 2020 Examination and/or any further similar
examination and forward the same to Respondent No.2-University;
(ii) Respondent No.2-University as well as Respondent No.3-
College are directed to permit the Petitioner to submit her examination
form (without late fee) for BDS Winter 2020 Examination for the
4th/final year and/or any other similar examination and issue her hall-
ticket and allow her to appear for the said examination and also declare
the result of the Petitioner, which shall be subject to the outcome of the
present petition;
(iii) The Petitioner shall file an undertaking within two weeks not
to claim any equity, failing which this petition shall be dismissed without
reference to this Court.
4. At the request of Respondent No.2-University, the hearing of
the petition is expedited. Either party may be at liberty to apply for fixing
of a date of final hearing in the first half of March 2021. Office to club all
pending writ petitions on the subject, that is to say, Writ Petition (Stamp)
No.6899 of 2019 and others, with the present petition for such hearing.
3 of 4
sg 4/4 10. wpst213-21.doc
In case there are pending petitions before other benches of this Court,
respective petitioners will be at liberty to apply for clubbing of such
petitions with this petition.
(SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J.) (S.C. GUPTE, J.)
4 of 4
