MAHENDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein have approached this Court with the grievance that the respondent - Rajasthan Para Medical Council has wrongly turned down their request of registration.

(2.) Mr. Bhavit Sharma, learned counsel for the Para Medical Council, at the outset, raises an objection about the maintainability of writ petitions by arguing that petitioners have got an alternative and efficacious remedy in the form of appeal under Section 25 and 26 of the Rajasthan Para Medical Council Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2008') and, thus, this Court should not interfere in the matter.

(3.) In response to the preliminary objection so raised, Mr. Yash Pal Khileree, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the remedy by way of appeal would be an empty formality, as the appeal against the impugned order of Registrar lies to the Para Medical Council, which has raised various queries and in spite of the satisfactory reply filed by the University stating that the course in question carried out by it is valid, the Para Medical Council has not considered their submissions objectively. It is also argued by Mr. Khileree that as the larger question regarding jurisdiction of the Para Medical Council and extent of information which it can ask from respondent - Mahatma Gandhi University, Meghalaya (hereinafter referred to as 'MGU or respondent- University') is to be decided, petitioners cannot be asked to avail remedy of appeal.