A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. - (1.) The respondent No.1 filed a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, being Writ Petition (Civil) No.3515 of 2017, challenging the decision of the Dental Council of India (the appellant herein) rejecting the request for migration from M.N.D.A.V. Dental College and Hospital, Solan to Baba Jaswant Singh Dental College, Ludhiana, on medical grounds. The said decision vide Annexure P-12 to the writ petition was communicated to the appellant, which reads thus: "SUB:-Request for Migration from MNDA Dental College, Solan to Baba Jaswant Singh Dental College, Ludhiana in 2nd year BDS Course on Medical ground-Mr.Anhad Raj Singh- Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter dated 10.2.2017 alongwith the other documents thereby requested DCI for your migration on medical ground/ill health and to say that the Executive Committee of the Dental Council of India in its meeting held on 09.03.2017 considered your letter referred to above and after some discussion and deliberation, decided as under:- The Executive Committee has examined the matter strictly in consonance with the statutory provision of migration, prescribed in the Revised BDS Course Regulation, 2007, according to which migration is allowed only on two grounds i.e. (i) Death of supporting guardian and (ii) Disturbed conditions as declared by Govt. in the Dental College area, but in the present case, the migration has been sought for only on medical ground which is not permissible under the Regulation. Moreover, the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur-in the W.P.No.7836/2016, in the matter of Sh.Anand Rai v. Medical Council of India and Ors. has, inter-alia, directed DCI to strictly compliance to Regulation of migration without deviation therefrom, the request of applicant for migration from MNDA Dental College, Solan to Baba Jaswant Singh Dental College, Ludhiana in 2nd year BDS course may not be acceded to. With the above, the decision of the Executive Committee of the DCI is communicated to you for your information and ready reference. Yours faithfully, (Dr.Sabyasachi Saha) Secretary Dental Council of India."
(2.) The learned Single Judge after adverting to the aforementioned communication, opined that the decision of the Dental Council of India was unexceptionable. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 25.4.2017. The respondent No.1 filed Letters Patent Appeal, bearing LPA No.336/2017 against the said decision. Additionally, the respondent No.1 filed interlocutory application, bearing C.M. No.2190/2017 to allow the appellant to join second year BDS Course at Baba Jaswant Singh Dental College, Ludhiana. The Division Bench while issuing notice on the Letters Patent Appeal vide impugned judgment dated 31.05.2017, granted interim direction permitting respondent No.1 to join the second year BDS Course in the Dental College situated at Ludhiana, i.e. Baba Jaswant Singh Dental College, Ludhiana and for appearing in the supplementary examination, which would be subject to the outcome of the appeal.
(3.) This interim order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court is the subject matter of this appeal. This Court while issuing notice on 9.10.2017, in the appeal, stayed the operation of the impugned order. Pursuant to the notice, the respondent No.1 has appeared and would submit that the direction issued by the Division Bench is just and proper. It being a discretionary order, the Court should be loath to interfere with the same. The respondent No.1 has placed reliance on the medical record which is indicative of the fact that he is suffering from Asthama. According to respondent No.1, the appellant had no objection for migration of other students similarly placed, from one University to another. In the present case, no objection has been issued by the Institution at Solan where the respondent No.1 has been admitted and is pursuing the BDS Course as also by the Institution at Ludhiana. No prejudice will be caused to the appellant. Further, the Division Bench was satisfied that irreparable loss will be caused to respondent No.1.;