CHENNAI:Holding that students cannot ask for migration from one college to another midway of studies as a matter of right on grounds other than the ones stipulated, the Madras High Court has rejected a plea from a student to do so.
A Nisshanthi moved the High Court to quash an order dated November 22, 2017 of the Dental Council of India (DCI) refusing permission to her to migrate from Mahe Institute of Dental Science, Mahe to Sri Venkateswara Dental College in Puducherry, as highly illegal and consequentially direct the council to grant permission to her for migration for the BDS-II year.
The rejection order stated that migration is permitted from a recognised dental college to another which is also recognised by DCI in the beginning of the second year BDS course only on compassionate grounds i.e. death of supporting guardian or disturbed conditions as declared by government in the college area, as per DCI norms.
Petitioner submitted that her mother was unwell and hence, her request ought to have been considered. The college where she was studying and the one were she sought admission had expressed their willingness. Moreover, there are 14 vacancies in Sri Venkateswara college and hence there cannot be any hurdle on the part of DCI to permit the migration, she said.
The judge noted that what is provided in clauses 1 to 5 with regard to migration is the procedure(s) to be followed. But with regard to the migration on compassionate grounds, the petitioner lacked the prescribed criteria. If the petitioner has not fulfilled any other conditions and if her contention is accepted that her mother is unwell, the other students may also knock at the doors of DCI after getting the no objection certificates from the college where they studied to the college they want to join, thereby creating disturbance to the functioning of the colleges and it would be a wrong signal.
As long as the BDS Course Regulations published in the gazette dated September 10, 2017, which were approved by the Centre under the Dentists Act, which are more or less similar to DCI regulations, the petitioner cannot, as a matter of right, seek for migration, the judge said.