- (1.) Heard Mr.Arun Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.M.A.Khan, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/University.
(2.) The appellant/writ petitioner had joined the BDS (Bachelor of Dental Surgery) Course with the Daswani Dental College and Research Centre (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the College') in the academic session commencing from 2008. He failed in the First BDS Examination held in the year 2009 in three subjects and in second attempt, he cleared one subject i.e. Human Anatomy include. Emg. & Histology. He cleared the other two subjects i.e. Human Physiology & Bio-Chemistry and Dental Anatomy in the third attempt in October, 2010. In BDS Part-II (New Scheme) Examination, 2011 (Reval) as well as BDS Part-II (New Scheme) Supp. Examination held in the month of March, 2012, even in the second attempt, the appellant/writ petitioner was declared to have failed in two subjects i.e. Pathology and Micro-Biology and General & Dental Pharmacology & Therapeutics. In his third attempt, however, he cleared General & Dental Pharmacology & Therapeutics, but failed to clear General Pathology and Micro-Biology. Admittedly because of the above failures in terms of the Revised BDS Course Regulation (Amendment) 2007 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulation) notified by Dental Council of India in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 30 of the Dentist Act, 1948, the appellant/writ petitioner was not permitted to attend the classes of the Third BDS Course at its initiation. He was however, permitted to do so only from the month of September, 2012. As in terms of the Ordinance 278-IV (8&9) prescribing the conditions of eligibility for admission in various examinations of the aforementioned course, a student was essentially required to attend the regular courses of study for 12 months to qualify to appear in the examination on the culmination thereof, the respondent-University declined to permit the appellant/writ petitioner to take the Third BDS Examination scheduled to be held in the month of March, 2013. He approached this Court and on the strength of an interim order dated 08.01.2013 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.20980/2012, he did appear in the aforementioned examination. However, his results were not declared. He filed an interim application for an appropriate direction to that effect. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Single Judge after traversing the pleaded facts and the documents on record and with due reference to the Regulation and Ordinance governing the issues, dismissed the writ petition.
(3.) Mr.Sharma has argued that as the facts on record do not disclose any intentional lapse or default on the part of the appellant/writ petitioner and that he was permitted to take the Third BDS Examination, in the singular facts and circumstances of the case and on equitable considerations, he ought to be adjudged eligible to appear in the Third BDS Examination and thus, a direction ought to have been issued to declare his results. To reinforce this plea, Mr. Sharma has placed reliance on the decision rendered by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Students Union of Rajputana Ayurvedic and Unani Tibbi College, Jaipur & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.,1988 1 RLR 826].;