Rungta College Of Dental Sciences And Research v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No.1708 of 2017 Rungta College of Dental Sciences and Research, Through Shri Sanjay Rungta, S/o late Ghanshyam Das Rungta, Age- 55 years, Administrator, Rungta College of Dental Sciences and Research, Khokha Road, Kurud, Bhilai (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Vice-Chancellor, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Memorial Health Sciences and Ayush University, Formerly known as Chhattisgarh Ayush & Health Science University, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Controller of Examinations, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Memorial Health Sciences and Ayush University, Formerly known as Chhattisgarh Ayush & Health Science University, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner:

Mr. Saurabh Dangi, Advocate.

For Respondent No.2: Mr. N.K. Vyas, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 19/07/2017

1. Rungta College of Dental Sciences & Research is the petitioner herein who seeks to challenge the assigning of common practical examination centre by the respondent University - Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay Memorial Health Sciences and Ayush University of Chhattisgarh, Raipur for two different dental colleges one run by the petitioner and another run by Maitri College of Dentistry and Research Centre, Durg on the ground that fixing of one common practical examination centre is violative of Ordinance No.12 of the Chhattisgarh Ayush and Health Science University which provides

for fixing of common practical centre in case two colleges are situated in the same city/town.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Bhilai and Durg are two different cities having different Municipal Corporations and the two dental colleges are almost 25 Kms. apart and are situated in two different cities/towns of Bhilai and Durg, therefore, the petitioner College will have to carry the patients and equipments along with them which would cause great hardship to the petitioner, as by order Annexure P-1, the petitioner College and Maitri College of Dentistry and Research Centre were allotted common practical examination centre for MDS course. He further submits that highlighting the grievances of the petitioner, the petitioner College had also made representation to the respondent University which has not been considered and decided.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions and also gone through the material available on record with utmost circumspection.

4. Holding of practical examination in the MDS course is an important academic affair and all grievances, which have been highlighted in the representation made to the respondent University, ought to be decided by the concerned University. This Court expects that the respondent University would take a decision considering the grievances raised by the petitioner and also considering the sufferings of patients if they are required to be taken from Bhilai to Durg, as distance from Bhilai to Durg is 22 Kms. which is a considerable distance. The competent authority of the University is

directed to take a decision expeditiously looking to the fact that practical examinations are likely to begin very shortly.

5. The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the aforesaid observation. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma