https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280375 The statutory scheme under Section 10-A of the Dentists Act, 1948 vests permission decisions in the Central Government on the Dental Council's recommendations, and judicial review cannot be converted into prior judicial participation in that process; a condition making renewal contingent on Supreme Court approval was therefore impermissible. The 2006 regulations fixed a renewal timetable, but also allowed recorded modification of that schedule in appropriate cases; where the delay was not attributable to the applicant or the authorities and the matter was reconsidered pursuant to court directions, the renewal could be treated as valid. The conditional portion was unsustainable, while the renewal for the academic year 2010-2011 was upheld as effective. en-us Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 May 2019 10:43:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280375 The statutory scheme under Section 10-A of the Dentists Act, 1948 vests permission decisions in the Central Government on the Dental Council's recommendations, and judicial review cannot be converted into prior judicial participation in that process; a condition making renewal contingent on Supreme Court approval was therefore impermissible. The 2006 regulations fixed a renewal timetable, but also allowed recorded modification of that schedule in appropriate cases; where the delay was not attributable to the applicant or the authorities and the matter was reconsidered pursuant to court directions, the renewal could be treated as valid. The conditional portion was unsustainable, while the renewal for the academic year 2010-2011 was upheld as effective. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280375