JUDGMENT R.R. Rastogi, J. - These two writ petitions are directed against the order passed by the Principal, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad, respondent No. 1 on 12-11-1980 debarring the petitioners from appearing at the Post Graduate examinations which were to start from 27-11-1980. 2. The facts maybe noted in some details so as to bring out the controversies involved in these petitions. In the first petition the petitioners are Dr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Dr. S.M. Lal and Dr. Rajiv Kumar, Dr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta passed his M.B.B. S. Examination in 1976 and completed his statutory internship from 19-1-1977 till 30-12-1977. Dr. S.M. Lal and Dr. Rajiv Kumar passed their M.B.B.S. Examination in 1975 and completed their statutory internship by 31-12-1976. Thereafter all the three petitioners took admission in Post Graduate courses, petitioner Dr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta in M.D (T.D.), Dr. S.M. Lal in M.D. (Radiology) and Dr. Rajiv Kumar in M.S. Ophthalmology. The later two first took admission for Diploma course. Each of them completed their Housemanship; Dr. Gupta from 1-1-1977 to 31-12-1978 and the other two from 1-1-1977 to 31-12-1977. The later two completed their Diploma course as well towards the end of 1978 and all the three petitioners made applications for registration in Nov., 1978. Those applications were accepted for admission in the Post Graduate degree course of M.D./M.S. respectively. The session started from 1-1-1979. 3. As required under the Rules all the three petitioners submitted their theses in March, 1980. The theses of each one of the three petitioners were accepted. In the meantime Dr. Gupta took an appointment in Uttar Kashi from 1st April, 1980. Dr. S.M. Lal joined as P.M.S. Officer at Balrampur Hospital, Lucknow from 5-10-1979 and Dr. Rajiv Kumar was selected as eye specialist in B.D. Pandey (Male) District Hospital, Nainital on 14-11-1979. 4. The post Graduate degree examinations were scheduled to start from 27-11-1980. On 12-11-1980 the respondent No. 1 made the impugned order and sent it to the Heads of Departments concerned for information to the various candidates whose names were mentioned therein. This order was in regard to 32 candidates of Post Graduate courses. The name of Dr. Rakesh Kumar appears at Sl. No. 1, of Dr. S.M. Lal, at Sl, No. 20 and of Dr. Rajiv Kumar at Sl. No. 29. This order was in regard to 32 candidates of Post Graduate courses. The name of Dr. Rakesh Kumar appears at Sl. No. 1, of Dr. S.M. Lal, at Sl, No. 20 and of Dr. Rajiv Kumar at Sl. No. 29. These petitioners along with other candidates mentioned in this order were found 'not eligible to appear in the ensuing University examination on account of the reasons marked `X' given against the name of each candidate'. 5. Briefly stated, so far as the aforesaid three petitioners are concerned, the reasons were that they failed to fill in the required bonds, that they had not obtained certificate from their employers for a period of two years and lastly that their attendance was short. 6. The petitioners claim to have come to know of the impugned order on 18-11-1980 and they seek the quashing of this order in this writ petition on various grounds. 7. Dr. Dhruva Banerji is the petitioner in the other writ petition.His name did not figure in the order dated 12-11-1980. However, on Nov. 24/25, 1980, the respondent No. I sent a communication to the Registrar, University of Allahabad enclosing therewith the applications of 13 candidates for Post Graduate degree and Diploma examinations who were not found eligible for admission to the various examinations. In this list the names of 13 candidates were mentioned including those of the three petitioners of the first writ petition as also of Dr. Dhruva Banerji. When Dr. Dhruva Banerji came to know that he had been debarred from appearing at the examination, he filed the writ petition before this Court for quashing the order dated 24/25-11-1980. 8. The respondents in the writ petitions are the Principal, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, The State of Uttar Pradesh, the Director, Medical Health Service and Family Welfare, U. P. Lucknow and the University of Allahabad through the Principal, Medical College which is a constituent college of the University of Allahabad. 9. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been filed. In the counter-affidavit which has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 is Dr. Dhruva Banerji's petition, it has been stated in para. 4 that the list prepared on 12-11-1980 was in regard to those candidates who had joined Government service and for that reason had not been able to attend their classes. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been filed. In the counter-affidavit which has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 is Dr. Dhruva Banerji's petition, it has been stated in para. 4 that the list prepared on 12-11-1980 was in regard to those candidates who had joined Government service and for that reason had not been able to attend their classes. Subsequently, a separate list was prepared and communicated to the Registrar which contained the names of those candidates whose attendants had fallen short. The main question for consideration in these writ petitions, therefore, would be the ineligibility of all the 4 petitioners for the reason that their attendance had fallen short of the requirements. 10. On behalf of the petitioners the following contentions were urged before us by Sri G.N. Verma that no opportunity was given to the petitioners to explain the alleged reasons given for holding that the petitioners were not eligible to appear at the aforesaid examination; (2) that the examination process for Post-Graduate course had started with the submission of the theses by the petitioners and after the acceptance of the same they could not be detained till this process of examination came to an end; and lastly that the Principal of the Medical College, respondent No. 1, has no power to detain the candidates from appearing at the relevant examinations. Before taking up these contentions it would be useful to refer to the Rules and Regulations. The Medical Council of India have made certain recommendations on Post Graduate Medical Education. Its recommendations were adopted by the Medical Council of India in Feb. 1971 and subsequently there was some revision made in 1976 and further they have been approved as Regulations under S. 33 of the Medical Council Act, 1956, by the Government of India. Under the head `General' there are 8 Regulations. Reg. No. 1 says that for M.D./M.S. degrees in clinical subjects, there shall be proper training in basic medical sciences related to the disciplines concerned as well as paper in these subjects at the examination. In the case of M.D. & M.S. in basic medical sciences there should be training in applied aspects of the subject and a paper on the subject. Regulation 2 says that in all post-graduate courses, whether clinical or basic medical sciences, preventive and social aspects should be emphasised. Regn. In the case of M.D. & M.S. in basic medical sciences there should be training in applied aspects of the subject and a paper on the subject. Regulation 2 says that in all post-graduate courses, whether clinical or basic medical sciences, preventive and social aspects should be emphasised. Regn. 3 says that thesis should be a part of the examination in the degree courses as this gives training in research methodology. It would be seen that thesis is only a part of the examination and the purpose is to give the candidate a training in the mode of research. Then comes Regulation 4 which restricts the student teacher ratio for the reason to enable the Post-Graduate student to have a proper training. 11. Regn. 5 provides for selection of Post-Graduates both for degree and diploma courses strictly on the basis of academic merit. Regn. 6 is very important and it reads: "The training of post-graduates for degree courses should be of Residency pattern with patient care. Both the in-service candidates and the stipendiaries should be given similar clinical responsibility. The participation of the students in all facets of the educational progress should be insisted upon and training in basic medical sciences and laboratory and experimental work emphasised. In Basic Sciences adequate number of training posts of Demonstrator, Tutors etc., should be provided for." Regn. 7 says that the candidates pursuing Degree or Diploma courses should work in the concerned department of the Institution for the full period. 12. These two regulations, therefore, clearly contemplate that the training of Post Graduates for Degree Courses is to be on the Residency pattern and the candidates are required to work in the concerned department of the Institution for the full period. In other words, these provisions totally exclude the possibility of a candidate joining a private or Government service during the course of this training for Post Graduate degree courses. The petitioners in the first petition admittedly joined Government service during the course of their training for post Graduate degree course and certainly rendered themselves ineligible for appearing in the final examination. 13. Regn. 8 provides for the number of Examiners and the number of candidates to be examined per day. Then follow minimum requirements for a Post Graduate Teaching Centre. 13. Regn. 8 provides for the number of Examiners and the number of candidates to be examined per day. Then follow minimum requirements for a Post Graduate Teaching Centre. Reference may be made to Facilities for Post Graduates Students' also because the Regulation in that behalf goes to show that for the training to Post Graduate course the candidate cannot go out of the Department of the Institution in which he has taken the admission. This Regulation reads: "There would be two types of post graduate students: (a) Those holding posts in the same Department like Resident, Registrar, Demonstrator etc. Adequate number of paid posts should be created for this purpose. (b) Those receiving stipends. The stipends should normally be Rupees 300/- per month payable for the duration of the course. The students for both the categories (a) and (b) above shall be full time Resident." This regulation, therefore, further emphasises the nature of the training and the fact that a student of a Post Graduate course has to be a full time resident. It cannot be contemplated that at any stage during the coursc of this training the student can take a job outside the Institution. 14. We may omit the regulations in regard to clinical subjects and criteria for the selection of candidates except for saying that a student for Post Graduate training is to be selected strictly on merit judged on the basis of his academic records in the undergraduate course, that he should have obtained full registration, that he must have completed satisfactorily one year of compulsory rotating internship after passing the final M.B.B.S. examination and must have full registration with State Medical Council and lastly, subsequently he should have done one year's housemanship prior to the admission to the post graduate degree or diploma course. In the alternative criteria mention may be made of cl. (ii) which says that a student, who has worked it. State Medical Services, Armed Forces Medical Services or other equivalent services of public undertakings local bodies, etc. for a period of three years after full registration can also be admitted to the Post Graduate degree or Diploma course. This criterion is in the alternative to cl. (c) referred to above which requires completion of one year's housemanship. 15. Reference may next be made to the Regulation given under the head 'period of training'. for a period of three years after full registration can also be admitted to the Post Graduate degree or Diploma course. This criterion is in the alternative to cl. (c) referred to above which requires completion of one year's housemanship. 15. Reference may next be made to the Regulation given under the head 'period of training'. It says that the period of training for M.D., M.S. shall be 3 years after full registration including one year of house job or equivalent thereof and for Diploma courses, 2 year after full registration including one year of house job. In other words a student after passing the final M.B.B.S. examination and completing one year of compulsory rotating internship and after obtaining full registration with the State Medical council can complete the Post Graduation courses in a period of three years which includes one year of house job. For Diploma courses such period is two years. If a student after doing his diploma course wants to join Post-Graduate course, again he will have to put in training for two years. 16. Under the head Methods of Training' it has been stated: "The emphasis should be on in-service training and not in didactic lectures. The candidate should take part in Seminars Group Discussions, Clinical meetings etc. The candidate should be required to write a thesis or dissertation with detailed commentary which should provide the candidate with necessary background of training in research methods and techniques along with the art of writing in research papers and learning the use of library. The in-service training requires a candidate to be a resident in the campus and he should be given graded responsibility in the management and treatment of patients entrusted to his care. Adequate number of post of clinical residents or tutors should be created for this purpose." Again, there is emphasis on in-service training and further that the candidate has to remain in the institution for the entire period of the course of training. It is not necessary to refer to the other Regulations except that a brief reference may be made to the recommendations of the Post Graduate Committee dated 8th Aug., 1978. It is not necessary to refer to the other Regulations except that a brief reference may be made to the recommendations of the Post Graduate Committee dated 8th Aug., 1978. In respect of Post-Graduate Medical Education, it was emphasised that the post-graduate training be de-linked from housemanship, that the post-graduate training for the post-graduate degree under the category "Broad Specialities" and General Medicine and General Surgery shall be for three years and for diploma two years after the completion of the compulsory pre-registration training and obtaining the degree and full registration with the State/Central Medical Council. Paragraph 3 says that the candidates who are admitted to the post-graduate courses and who have done housemanship or equivalent training will he entitled to an exemption upto a maximum period of one year in the duration of training for the post graduate course. The number of admission to the post-graduate courses should be based on the number of recognised post-graduate teachers, the number of teaching beds available for the training of the students in the subject of training and the out-patient attendance. These recommendations as well contemplate that for post-graduate courses the training is entirely on the Residency pattern and the student has to remain in the campus for the full term of the training. 17. A brief reference may he made to the relevant provisions contained in the prospectus of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Allahabad. As for the subjects, the mode of selection of candidates, preparation and submissions of thesis, pattern of training etc. the provisions are the same and it is not necessary to refer to them. Reference may be made only to regulation 12 given under the head "General". It says: "12. A candidate whose thesis has been accepted shall appear in: (i) A written examination consisting of four papers (details of papers are not necessary here): (ii) An oral or practical examination: (iii) Clinical Examination for candidate appearing in clinical subjects. These are the three stages of the examination for Post-Graduate courses. It is not necessary to mention the other provisions which are in regard to the duties of the Examiners and the amount of fee required. These are the three stages of the examination for Post-Graduate courses. It is not necessary to mention the other provisions which are in regard to the duties of the Examiners and the amount of fee required. Under the Head `Transitory Ordinance', Regulation 5 emphasises at a consolidated course in research methods and techniques along with the art of writing research papers and learning the use of the library and methods of collecting and analysing data including medical statistics to he given to all the candidates soon after they have been registered. In addition for candidates registering in clinical subjects training is required to he given in Anatomy, Physiology, Bio-chemistry, Bio-physics, Pharmacology and Pathology in their applied aspects so far as they relate to the speciality of the candidate concerned. It further says: "The Course will he organised by the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine. Each candidate will he required to attend a minimum 90% of all lectures, demonstrations/practical seminars, group discussions, clinical meetings etc. "He will be required to participate in the teaching and training programmes of the under-graduate students. "In clinical subjects he will be given graded and increasing responsibility in the management and treatment of patients." Then follow the details of courses of study and scheme of examinations. 18. Now, we shall deal with the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners one by one. As for the opportunity to explain, the basic question which arises is as to whether the petitioners were eligible to appear at the examination which was to start from 27-11-1980 and for that the reason which now remains for consideration is shortage of attendance. It was emphasised by Sri Verma that the requirement of 90' of attendance is' only for the period prior to the submission and acceptance of the thesis and thereafter there is no such requirement. It has been stated in the petition as well that after the acceptance of thesis no attendance register is maintained and there are no regular classes. It has been claimed that the petitioners fully complied with the requirements of the Regulations and the Prospectus of the Allahabad University. We have given the relevant provisions of the Regulations and the Prospectus above and in our opinion the present petitioners do not fulfil the requirements in this behalf. It has been claimed that the petitioners fully complied with the requirements of the Regulations and the Prospectus of the Allahabad University. We have given the relevant provisions of the Regulations and the Prospectus above and in our opinion the present petitioners do not fulfil the requirements in this behalf. It is correct that in regard to the petitioners of the first petition up to the stage of submission of their thesis there was no defect found in it entraining. Their Professors and Co-examiners gave the necessary certificates which are Annexures 2, 3 and 4 to the writ petition. These theses were duly accepted. Dr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta joined the service after the submission of thesis, while the other two did so even prior to that. It may be that alter joining service they might have taken leave and completed the requisite quota of attendance in the institution. Any how for the period prior to the submission and acceptance of thesis the question of shortage of attendance does not arise. It arises for the period thereafter. Admittedly, these three petitioners were in service elsewhere and they have not averred also that physically they made any attempt to attend the training required under the Regulations or the Prospectus. Further we have indicated that the Regulation contemplates that throughout the training the student has to be a full time resident. There are only two types of Post- Graduate Students provided for: (i) those holding posts in the same Department in which they have sought admission and (ii) those receiving stipends. Both the categories of these students are required to be full time residents. They have to remain in the Institution for the entire period of their training. This was lacking in the cases of these three petitioners and hence for shortage of their attendance they rendered themselves ineligible to appear at the examination. 18-A. As for Dr. Dhruva Banerji, the details of his attendance during 1979-80 have been given. Dr. Banerji has not controverted these details. They clearly go to show that for weeks together Dr. Banerji absented himself from the Institution and has made no attempt to explain as to how the shortage in his attendance occurred. 19. It is correct that every person or authority empowered to decide a matter which may affect the rights of another is under a duty to hear that person. There are, however. Banerji absented himself from the Institution and has made no attempt to explain as to how the shortage in his attendance occurred. 19. It is correct that every person or authority empowered to decide a matter which may affect the rights of another is under a duty to hear that person. There are, however. certain exceptions to this rule. If there is an express provision in the Legislation or the relevant Regulations in regard to a particular requirement and that has not been fulfilled, it is doubtful that the rule of opportunity would come in the picutre. Even in the present writ petitions no attempt has been made by these petitioners to explain the shortage in their attendance. As for the three petitioners of the first petition there could have been no explanation because admittedly physically they could not have been presented in the institution in which they had sought admission for Post-Graduate courses. In our opinion, therefore, there is no breach of principles of any natural justice. The decision of the Delhi High Court in Azra Seema v. I. P. Obroi (AIR 1979 Delhi 101) is on its own facts and is of not much help to the petitioners. Similarly the decision in Board of High School and Intermediate Education U. P. v. Chittra, (AIR 1970 S C 1039) is distinguishable on facts. In that case the Board of High School and Intermediate Examination cancelled the examination of a candidate who had been allowed to appear at the examination and had actually answered all the Question papers on the ground that he had been admitted to the examination in spite of shortage in attendance at lectures. Since no show cause notice had been given to the candidate, it was held that the action of the Board was vitiated by violation of rules of natural justice. In the present case the petitioners were given prior notice of the grounds on which they were found ineligible to appear at the examination. They could have shown cause before the Principal of the College but they did not do so. They have been allowed to appear at the examination under orders of this Court. That situation is entirely different. In our opinion, therefore, this contention has no substance. 20. As for the second contention, as we have shown above, there are three stages in the examination of Post-Graduate courses. They have been allowed to appear at the examination under orders of this Court. That situation is entirely different. In our opinion, therefore, this contention has no substance. 20. As for the second contention, as we have shown above, there are three stages in the examination of Post-Graduate courses. The first stage is of submission of thesis. The acceptance of the thesis is a pre-condition for admission to sit in the rest of examination, as stated in the Regulations aforesaid at page 11. The rest of the examination consists of four theory papers and the clinical examination. It is not correct to say that the process of the examination starts with the submission of the thesis and if the thesis is accepted, then the candidates cannot but be allowed to take the theory and clinical tests even though otherwise they may not have satisfied the other requirements of the training. What the Regulation and the relevant provisions of the prospectus in this behalf require is that after the acceptance of the thesis the candidate shall take in-resident training and appear at four theory papers and at the clinical examination. In other words, in order to entitle himself to a degree in the post-graduate course, the candidate is first required to submit a thesis and if it is accepted then he has to pass in the theory and clinical examination. 21. Reliance was placed on behalf of the petitioners on the decision of the Supreme Court in Sri Krishan v. Kurukshetra University, (AIR 1976 S C 376) in which it has been laid down that once the candidate is allowed to take the examination rightly or wrongly, then the statute which empowers the University to withdraw the candidature of the student has worked itself out and the candidate cannot be refused admission subsequently' or any infirmity which should have been looked into before giving the candidate permission to appear. In our opinion this decision is o` not much help to the petitioners because they were not allowed here to take the examinations which were to commence on 27-11-1980. The acceptance of the thesis ends one part of the examination. For the other part of the Examination, namely, the written papers etc. the mandatory requirement is to attend the classes in the Institution for one more year. Without this training candidate is not eligible to appear at the written examination. The acceptance of the thesis ends one part of the examination. For the other part of the Examination, namely, the written papers etc. the mandatory requirement is to attend the classes in the Institution for one more year. Without this training candidate is not eligible to appear at the written examination. That training was not gone through by these three petitioners at least and as for Dr. Dhruva Bauerji is attendance was clearly short of the requirements. For all these reasons, therefore, we do not accept this contention as well. 22. Coming to the last question, now it is only of academic interest. The contention is that the Principal of the College has no power to restrain the candidate from appearing at an examination. Here the final list which was prepared on Nov. 24/25, 1980 was communicated by him to the Registrar. The decision, therefore, was to be taken by the University authorities concerned. We do not know what orders were passed on it. This submission also, therefore, is not of such consequence. 23. In the result, therefore, both these petitions fail and are dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, however, we make no orders as to costs.