Rajasthan High Court - JodhpurHitesh Kumar Sharma & Ors vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 7 February, 2018HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
           S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13990 / 2016


1. Hitesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Pradhumn Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o LB-1 34 Chitrkoot Nagar, Bhuwana, Udaipur

2. Deepak Prajapat S/o Late Shri Ramchandra Prajapat, Aged
About 20 Years, R/o Satyanarayan Temple, Teliwada Choraha,
Bedla, District-udaipur

3. Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Jagdish, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
Village-jhanduwala Sotar, Tehsil-ratia, District-fatehabad, Haryana

4. Mukesh Chandra Sen S/o Shri Lal Chand Sen, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Adarsh Colony, Station Road, Vallabhnagar, Tehsil-
vallabhnagar, District-udaipur

5. Hema Rao S/o Shri Amar Singh Rao, Aged About 20 Years, R/o
E-72, Chitrakoot Nagar, Bhuwana, Udaipur

6. Kiran Prajapat S/o Tulsi Ram Ji Prajapat, Aged About 21 Years,
R/o Kumharo Ka Mohalla, Bhuwana, Udaipur

7. Yogini Patidar, S/o Devi Lal Ji Patidar, Aged About 18 Years, R/o
229-J Bloc, Sector-14

8. Suresh Suthar S/o Prakash Ji Suthar, Aged About 20 Years, R/o
Near Hanuman Prasad, P Khera, Aaspur, District-doongarpur

9. Rounak Chandawat S/o Shri Shantilal Ji Chandawat, Aged About
18 Years, R/o Naagda Basti, Aaspur, District-doongarpur

10. Chhatrpal Singh S/o Shri Dilip Singh Sisodia, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Badi Saakhthali, Tehsil-aasod, District-pratapgarh

11. Mahesh Merawat, S/o Shri Ishwarlal Merawat, Aged About 22
Years, R/o Sajjangarh, Banswara

12. Ashish Dotla, S/o Ishwarlal Dotla, Aged About 18 Years, R/o
Dungra Bada Tehsil, Sajjangarh, District-banswara

13. Durgesh S/o Gyanaram, caste Choudhary, Aged About 18
Years, R/o Village-ketalia, Tehsil-marwar Junction, District-pali
14. Upendra Pratap Singh S/o Sampat Singh, Aged About 22
Years, New Colony Jodhpur Road, Nimaz-306303(Pali)
                                                       ----Petitioners
                               Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Department of
Medical, Health & Family, Secretariat, Jaipur
                                     (2 of 8)
                                                                     [CW-13990/2016]



2. Secretary, Rajasthan Subordinate Ministerial Services Selection
Board, Jaipur

3. Rajasthan Para Medical Council, Jaipur

4. Registrar, Pacific Medical University, Udaipur
                                                            ----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s)   : Mr. Vikas Balia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Parvej for Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG
                          Mr. Manoj Bhandari
                          Mr. Yashpal Khileree for respondent No.3
_____________________________________________________
            HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUROrder
07/02/2018

      The matter comes up on second stay application, however,

learned counsel for the parties agree that the matter can be

disposed off finally.The   petitioners    through      the    present    writ    petition     are

challenging the action of the respondent authorities in not

considering their candidature for appointment on the post of

Assistant   Radiographer,      Lab      Technician,      Dental       Technician

(hereinafter referred to as "advertised post") in pursuance to the

advertisement vide Notification dated 10.10.2016 as also the act

of the Rajasthan Para Medical Council in not registering them as

Para Medical Professionals.For   the   purpose     of   recognition     of    institute     imparting

education for training for the Para Medical subjects in the State,

the State Government enacted an Act called asRajasthan Para

Medical Council Act, 2008. In the schedule enacted with the said
                                  (3 of 8)
                                                           [CW-13990/2016]

Act, the subjects were specified and the same were referred to as

the Para Medical Subjects.The relevant provisions ofRajasthan Para Medical Council

Act, 2008and Regulations of 2014 for registration of Para Medical

Professionals are quoted as under:Section 17. Persons entitled to be registered - A
     person having recognized Para-medical qualification
     shall be entitled to be registered as Para-medical
     professional.Regulation 42. Eligibility for registration:-The following persons be eligible for registration-(i)     Who has obtained certificate of a Para-medical
             course from any Government body or private
             body permitted by the Government for the
             purpose who has run the course and awarded
             certificate before the commencement of these
             regulations.(ii)    Who has passed the Para-medical course from
             any institution recognized by the Rajasthan
             Para-medical Council.(iii)   who has passed the Para-medical course from
             any institution /Government body, outside the
             territories of Rajasthan, recognized for the
             purpose by the concerned State Government or
             Central Government.(iv) Who has passed the Para-medical course from
          any institution outside the territories of India,
          recognized for the purpose by the Government
          of the country concerned and verified by the
          Government of India.The petitioners being eligible to take admission in Para

Medical courses, applied with the respondent - Pacific Medical

University, Udaipur in the month of January, 2014. After following

the due process, the petitioners got the admission in the Para

Medical courses. The said course was of two years Degree Course

which was completed by the petitioners in the month of January,
                                     (4 of 8)
                                                                   [CW-13990/2016]

2016 and the results were declared on 17.03.2016.                        In the

meanwhile, on 08.12.2014, the respondent State Government in

exercise of its power conferred in the Act of 2008 framed Rules as

above namely Rajasthan Para Medical Council Rules, 2008 as well

as framed the Regulations namely Rajasthan Para Medical Council

Regulations.      Vide   Advertisement           dated       10.10.2016,     the

respondent No.3        invited applications for appointment on the

advertised posts of Assistant Radiographer, Lab Technician and

Dental Technician. As per the said advertisement, the requisite

qualifications were prescribed and the students were required to

get themselves registered under the Rajasthan Para Medical

Council. However, only those students who have completed their

course from a recognized university / institute under the Para

Medical Council were eligible to apply for the advertised post.

Since the procedure of recognition was introduced vide the

regulation   of   December,    2014        and    the    admissions     of   the

petitioners in the respondent University was prior in time i.e.

December,      2013,   therefore,     the      petitioners    could   not    get

themselves registered with the respondent Council. At the same

time, an effort made by the respondent - University to apply for

recognition of Para Medical Courses was also rejected. As a result,

the forms of the petitioners too were not accepted forcing the

petitioners to approach this Court by way of filing the present

petition.Thus, the petitioners are aggrieved as they are considered

ineligible for appointment on the said posts on the ground that

they do not have the qualification of Diploma in Medical Lab
                                         (5 of 8)
                                                                      [CW-13990/2016]

Technology (MLT) recognized by the State Government / Central

Government / Rajathan Para Medical Council as is required for the

post in question as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Medical &

Health Subordinate        Service Rules,            1965   and secondly, the

petitioners are not entitled to be registered and nor are registered

as Para Medical Professionals.Reply has been filed.     As per the reply and as vehemently

opposed      by   Mr.   Yashpal    Khileree,        learned     counsel   for   the

respondent No.3, the Diploma in Medical Lab Technology obtained

by the petitioners from Pacific Medical University, Udaipur is not

recognized by the State Government of Rajasthan or Rajasthan

Para Medical Council as prescribed under the Rules of 1965.

Reliance was placed on the judgment rendered by the Jaipur

Bench of this Court in the case ofLohade Ram Meena & 30 Ors.

Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.reported in 2012(3) WLC

(Raj.) 214 to contend that a petition preferred by similarly

situated candidates who obtained Diploma or Certificate Course of

Medical Laboratory Technology from various institutes/Universities

like NIMS University, Janardhan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidhyapeeth,

Udaipur; Manav Bharti University; Technical University, Punjab and

Jiwaji     University   which     are      not     recognized    by   the    State

Government of Rajasthan too has been dismissed and since the

petitioners have obtained their Diploma in Medical Lab Technology

from Pacific Medical University, Udaipur which is not recognized by

the State Government of Rajasthan or Rajasthan Para Medical

Council, they too are not eligible to apply for the registration or to

be considered in terms of the advertisement.(6 of 8)
                                                          [CW-13990/2016]




      At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners restricts the

present petition to the alternative prayer made by him seeking

direction to register the petitioners under the Rajasthan Para

Medical Council   published in the Gazette Notification dated 05 th

December, 2014. As observed above, one of the eligibility criteria

for registration prescribed underRegulation 42(iii)is as under :42. Eligibility for registration:- The following
           persons shall be eligible for registration -(iii) who has passed the Para-medical course
           from any institution/Government body, outside
           the territories of Rajasthan, recognized for the
           purpose by the concerned State Government or
           Central Government.The respondent Pacific Medical University, Udaipur was

constituted vide Notification published in Rajasthan Gazette on

25.09.2013 under a statute . Thus, the only issue is whether the

University established under a Statute need to further get

registration for the courses, Diploma imparted by it or not.The issue as to whether the courses offered by a University

created by law or under the law requires to be further recognized

by any other authority or not is no more res integra in view of the

judgment rendered by the learned Single Bench of this Court in

the case ofSunil Bishnoi & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan& ors.

(SB    Civil   Writ   Petition     No.8149/2015)       decided       on

01.02.2018, wherein the courses offered by Singhania University,

Pacheri Bari, Jhunjhunu were held to be automatically recognized

as the said University was established under the Statute relying on

the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case ofDr. B.L.
                                 (7 of 8)
                                                          [CW-13990/2016]

Asawa Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.reported in AIR 1982

SC 933 as well as the judgment rendered by this Court in the

case of Mrs. Madhu Santosh Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B.

Civil Writ Petition No. 2502/1989) and the decision of Punjab

& Haryana High Court rendered in the case ofMs. Neelam Devi

& Anr. Vs. Haryana Nurses Registration Council & Ors.reported in 2010 158 PLR 323.               While allowing the writ

petition, the learned Single Bench observed as under :"As stated earlier, it is not in dispute that the
           respondent No.3-University is a University
           established under the statute and, therefore, in
           view of the lawlaid down inthe above referred
           cases that a degree, diploma or any qualification
           awarded by any University, established under
           the statute, is automatically recognized and
           needs no recognition by any other authority,
           there is no hesitation in holding that the
           respondent No.2-RNC cannot refuse to register
           the petitioners under the provision of Act of
           1964 on the ground that the respondent No.3-
           University, from which the petitioners have
           completed GNM and ANM courses, is not
           recognized by the INC."The   judgment    relied   on    by   learned   counsel   for   the

respondent No.3 in the case ofLohade Ram Meena's case (supra)

relates to a deemed University and cannot be equated with the

University established under a Statute.The respondent - Pacific Medical University was constituted

vide Gazette notification published in Rajasthan Gazette on

25.09.2013, wherein the schedule annexed with the notification

entitles the University to conduct various specified courses. In the

schedule, the University was authorised to conduct courses of the

Para Medical Subjects.    It is not disputed that the respondent
                                           (8 of 8)
                                                                   [CW-13990/2016]

          University is established under a statute. Hence, while deciding

          the writ petition being covered by the judgment rendered by this

          Court in the case ofSunil Bishnoi(supra), the present writ petition

          is allowed only to the extent that the respondent No.3 shall

          register the petitioners, in case they are otherwise found eligible.

          Needful be done within one month of the receipt of this order.Second stay petition too stands disposed of accordingly.(NIRMALJIT KAUR),J.Anil/24