JUDGMENT : 1. These writ petitions have been filed in relation to recruitment on the post of Lab Technician & Assistant Radiographer pursuant to the advertisement dated 12/6/2020 initiated by the Rajasthan Staff Selection Board (‘the Board’). 2. The petitions, other than CWP Nos. 7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021, have been filed by the candidates aggrieved of the action of the Rajasthan Para Medical Council (‘the RPMC’) in passing orders dated 23/6/2021 and 24/7/2021, whereby, the registration of the petitioners with the RPMC has been temporarily withdrawn and permanently cancelled, respectively. 3. CW Nos. 7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021 have been filed by other candidates against inclusion of names of the petitioners in the list of successful candidates at the recruitment and seeking cancellation of their candidature at the recruitment. 4. As all the petitions arise out of the same subject matter, the same have been heard and are being decided together. The facts of CW No. 9985/2021 are being indicated illustratively. 5. It is inter alia indicated in the petition that Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan University is recognized by the Govt. of Madhya Pradesh, M.P. Para Medical Council, Central Government as well as UGC. It is claimed that the petitioners passed the two years diploma in Medical Laboratory Technician (DMLT)/two years diploma in X-ray Radiographer Technician (DRT). 6. The Board issued an advertisement dated 12/6/2020 (Annex.3) for recruitment on the post of Lab Technician and Assistant Radiographer. The requisite qualification inter alia required diploma in Medical Laboratory Technician from an institute recognized by the State Government/Central Government/Rajasthan Para Medical Council and registration with the RPMC/diploma in Radiography from an institute recognized by the State Government/Central Government/Rajasthan Para Medical Council and registration with the RPMC. In the note appended to the requisite qualification, it was indicated that in case till the last date of filing application the candidate is not registered with the RPMC, at least the candidate must have applied for registration with the RPMC and at time of document verification, the registration certificate must be produced. The last date of filing application, which was 2/7/2020 was extended to 30/7/2020. 7. The petitioners applied for registration with the RPMC. Most of the petitioners applied on 30/7/2020 and they were issued registration certificates by the RPMC. The last date of filing application, which was 2/7/2020 was extended to 30/7/2020. 7. The petitioners applied for registration with the RPMC. Most of the petitioners applied on 30/7/2020 and they were issued registration certificates by the RPMC. Whereafter, it is claimed that suddenly by order dated 23/6/2021, the registration certificates of the petitioners were temporarily withdrawn vide Annex.8 inter alia indicating that in terms of the decision taken in the meeting of RPMC dated 18/6/2021 the registration certificates were temporary withdrawn and that same would be permanently cancelled after inquiry. 8. It is inter alia indicated in the petition that on 23/6/2021 (Annex.9), the RPMC wrote a letter to the Registrar, M.P. Para Medical Council inter alia requiring them to make inquiries in relation to four institutions indicating the defects which were found during the course of inquiry held by them. The M.P. Para Medical Council sought time for collection of documents vide its communication dated 28/6/2021. However, on 24/7/2021 by an office order (Annex.10) indicating that in pursuance of the meeting of the RPMC dated 24/7/2021, based on the Inquiry Committee report, correspondence with the M.P. Para Medical Council, physical inquiry, legal opinion and going through the documents of registered applicants and after hearing held on 23/7/2021, on finding serious discrepancies, the registrations made by the RPMC of the candidates from the four Institutions, which were temporarily withdrawn on 23/6/2021 are permanently cancelled. Feeling aggrieved, the present writ petitions have been filed. 9. It may be noticed that while the writ petition no. 9985/2021 pertains to the candidates, who have obtained qualification from Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan University, Bhopal, three other institutions i.e. Sri Satya Sai University of Tehnology & Medical Sciences, Swami Vivekananda University, Sagar and AISECT University Institute of Para Medical Science, Raisen are also involved. 10. The petitioners have, thereafter, by way of additional affidavit filed a communication dated 13/9/2021 (Annex.18) sent by M.P. Para Medical Council, inter alia annexing the list of candidates whose admissions by the institutions have been cancelled and consequently their registration was also cancelled by the M.P. Para Medical Council. Qua Swami Vivekanand University, further time was sought and, thereafter, on 21/10/2021 (Annex.19) it was indicated that registration of 19 candidates indicated therein have been maintained and rest of the registrations have been cancelled. 11. Qua Swami Vivekanand University, further time was sought and, thereafter, on 21/10/2021 (Annex.19) it was indicated that registration of 19 candidates indicated therein have been maintained and rest of the registrations have been cancelled. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that action of the respondent RPMC in cancelling the registration is ex facie illegal. Submissions have been made that petitioners have obtained diploma from recognized institutions and on making applications they were registered by the RPMC. However, in violation of principles of natural justice, earlier their registration were temporarily withdrawn and, thereafter, the same have been cancelled. 12. Submissions have been made that the basis indicated in the order dated 24/7/2021 is inquiry conducted by the respondents, wherein, the petitioner were not involved, at no stage any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners and in fact an empty formality was done by issuing notices on 17/7/2021, which were cryptic in nature and when on 23/7/2021 the petitioners appeared and sought material in this regard, nothing was provided and on the next day i.e. 24/7/2021 cancellation took place. 13. Submissions have been made that cancellation have been effected en masse and there is no specific decision pertaining to any of the petitioners in this regard. The jurisdictional Para Medical Council i.e. M.P. Para Medical Council has taken decision and communicated the same vide its letters dated 13/9/2021 and 21/10/2021, wherein, nothing has been found against the petitioners and, therefore, action of the respondent RPMC deserves to be quashed and set aside. 14. Submissions have been made that action of the respondents in cancelling the registration en bloc without making any effort to weed out those who are not eligible is ex facie illegal. 15. Reliance has been placed on Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajesh P.U. & Anr. : (2003) 7 SCC 285 , Sachin Kumar & Ors. Vs. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB) & Ors. : (2021) 4 SCC 631 . 16. Submissions were also made that as in the case of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan University degree has been granted by the University, the RPMC cannot refuse to recognize the same. Reliance has been placed on Dr. B.L.Aswa vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : AIR 1982 SC 933 . 17. Learned counsel for the RPMC vehemently opposed the submissions. 16. Submissions were also made that as in the case of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan University degree has been granted by the University, the RPMC cannot refuse to recognize the same. Reliance has been placed on Dr. B.L.Aswa vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : AIR 1982 SC 933 . 17. Learned counsel for the RPMC vehemently opposed the submissions. It was submitted that the petitioners have remedy of filing appeal before the RPMC and in any case before the State Government under Section 26 of the Rajasthan Para Medical Council Act, 2008 ('the Act') and as such, on account of availability of alternative remedy, the petitions deserve dismissal. 18. Submissions have been made that the petitioners have done their diploma course from the year 2013-14 to 2020-2021 but none of them got themselves registered with the M.P.Para Medical Council prior to making application for registration before the RPMC. Submissions have been made that on account of the provision in the advertisement dated 12/6/2020 providing for the eligibility of the candidates, who have applied with the RPMC before the last date, which was 30/7/2020, there was flood of applications received by the RPMC and several candidates, who had done their diploma from outside the State applied. While the applications for registration were pending before the RPMC, a complaint was filed by one Bharat Beniwal (Annex.R/1) pointing out that there were several discrepancies in the certificates which were submitted by the candidates for obtaining registration and as such, it was decided by the RPMC to conduct investigation and a committee was constituted. The Committee after thorough investigation with regard to the documents submitted by the candidates along with their applications, submitted its report on 15/6/2021 (Annex.R/3) pointing out that the candidates, who have been registered after 30/7/2020 from the four Institutions of Madhya Pradesh be excluded from the recruitment 2020, their registration with the RPMC be cancelled and registration from such institutions of Madhya Pradesh be stopped in future. In the detailed inquiry report, various instances were given regarding wrong doing on part of the institutions in according admission/issuing diploma to the candidates. 19. It is submitted that pursuant to the report, vide order dated 23/6/2021 all the registration certificates were temporarily withdrawn. In the detailed inquiry report, various instances were given regarding wrong doing on part of the institutions in according admission/issuing diploma to the candidates. 19. It is submitted that pursuant to the report, vide order dated 23/6/2021 all the registration certificates were temporarily withdrawn. Whereafter, a team headed by the Registrar, Rajasthan Para Medical Council also personally visited Madhya Pradesh and contacted M.P. Para Medical Council and handed over the entire record and sought inquiry. 20. Submissions were made by the RPMC accusing the M.P. Para Medical Council being in hand in glove with the institutions and it has been alleged that in a very slipshod manner the colleges were permitted to fulfill lacunae, regarding which on receiving information the RPMC warned the Registrar, M.P. Para Medical Council in this regard. 21. Submissions have been made that notices were issued to the candidates on 17/7/2021 pointing out the defects which were found in the forms and they were called upon to bring the original documents for physical verification, wherein, out of 416 students only few students appeared and they were not able to satisfy the requirement of the Act of 2008, based on which the order dated 24/7/2021 was passed to cancel the registration issued to the students, who have done their diploma from the four institutions. 22. Further submissions have been made that from the reports which have been sent by the M.P. Para Medical Council dated 13/9/2021 and 21/10/2021 (Annex.18 and Annex.19) produced by the petitioners, the wrong doing on part of the institutions is writ large and, therefore, the action of the RPMC cannot be faulted. It was sought to be emphasized that based on the registration, the petitioners have been made eligible for recruitment on the post of Lab Technician and Assistant Radiographer and in case the candidates like the petitioners are permitted to participate in the recruitment, on getting selected they would be dealing with the lives of unsuspecting patients and, therefore, on that count also the petitions deserve to be dismissed. 23. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in CW Nos. 7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021 supported the submissions made by counsel for the RPMC. 24. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 25. 23. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in CW Nos. 7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021 supported the submissions made by counsel for the RPMC. 24. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 25. The facts which emerge from the record are undisputed, wherein, on account of stipulation in the advertisement dated 12/6/2020 (Annex.3) requiring at least application for registration with the RPMC on the last date of filing application, the petitioners, who hitherto had not cared to apply to the RPMC, rushed to seek registration with the RPMC. The registration was accorded to them making them eligible for recruitment pursuant to the advertisement. 26. Apparently, certain candidates/the national President of All India Medical Students Association (United) made complaints regarding the eligibility of the petitioners to get registration with the RPMC, based on which the RPMC formed a committee for investigation. The committee gave its detailed report running into 21 pages inter alia pointed out discrepancies in various applications and made recommendations, which inter alia read as under: ^^lq>ko%& 1- lansg ds vk/kkj ij fnukad 30-07-2020 ds ckn iathd`r vU; jkT;ksa esa ls e/;izns'k dh mDr pkj ;wfuoflZVh ds vH;fFkZ;ksa iSjkesfMdy HkÙkhZ 2020 ls vfr'kh?kz vyx fd;k tk;saA 2- bu pkj fo'ofo|ky; ds iath;uksa dks rqjUr izHkko ls lansg o budh vfu;ferrkvksa ds vk/kkj ij jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly ds fu;e@fofu;eksa ds vuwlkj jn fd;k tk;saA 3- Hkfo"; esa bl izdkj dh iqujko`fÙk u gks bl gsrq fuEu pkjksa e/;izns'k dh futh fo'ofo|ky;ksa ij iath;u dh jksd yxkuh pkfg;sA** 27. A perusal of the report produced as Annex.R/3/4 reveals that though several discrepancies pointed out are glaring in nature, however, this is also a fact that at no stage the committee involved the candidates, whose registration were at stake. 28. A perusal of the report produced as Annex.R/3/4 reveals that though several discrepancies pointed out are glaring in nature, however, this is also a fact that at no stage the committee involved the candidates, whose registration were at stake. 28. Based on the inquiry report dated 15/6/2021, the RPMC held its meeting on 18/6/2021 and took the following decision: ^^Ø-la- ,ts.Mk ,ts.Mk 1 iSjkesfMdy HkrhZ 2020 esa ckgjh jkT;ksa ls fMIyksek fMxzh/kkjh vH;fFkZ;ksa }kjk jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly] t;iqj esa iath;u gsrq izLrqr nLrkostksa dh tkWp fjiksVZ is'k dh tkus ckcr~A tkWp desVh }kjk izLrqr fjiksVZ dks fnukad 18-06-2020 dks dkSafly dh vke lHkk dh cSBd esa izLrqr dh xbZ ftlesa dkSafly }kjk loZlEefr l s ;g fu.kZ; fy;k x;k fd mDr lHkh vfu;ferrkvksa dh foLr`r Lrj ij tkWp ¼e/;izns'k lg~&fpfdRlk ifj"kn Hkksiky½ vko';d gS ftlds varxZr leLr vH;fFkZ;ksa ds nLrkostksa o iSjkesfMdy dkslZ ds v/;;u lacaf/kr nLrkostksa dk HkkSfrd lR;kiu fd;k tkdj tkWp gksus rd eq[;r% e/;izns'k jkT; ds bu 4 futh fo'ofo|ky; 1- Jh lR; lkbZ ;wfuoflZVh vkWQ VSDuksyksth ,.M esfMdy lkbUl] flgksj ¼e/;izns'k½] 2- MkW- loZiYyh jk/kkd`".ku ;wfuoflZVh gks'kaxkckn jksM Hkksiky] ¼e/;izns'k½ 3- Lokeh foosdkuUn fo'ofo|ky; lkxj] ¼e/;izns'k½ ,oa 4- vkbZlsDV ;wfuoflZVh baLVhV~;wV vkWQ iSjkesfMdy lkbUl jk;lsu] ¼e/;izns'k½ l s fMIyksek@fMxzh/kkjh vH;fFkZ;ksa ds iath;u dks jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly ls vLFkkbZ :i ls izR;kgkfjr djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS mDr laLFkkvksa ds vH;fFkZ;ksa ds nLrkostksa dk HkkSfrd lR;kiu e/;izns'k lg~&fpfdRlk ifj"kn Hkksiky tkdj djus gsrq ,d lfefr dk xBu djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;kA^^ 29. A perusal of the above decision reveals that the RPMC took a decision based on the report that a detailed inquiry was required for which, the documents of all the candidates and documents pertaining to their study of para medical course were required to be physically verified and the registration was ordered to be temporarily withdrawn and a committee was ordered to be constituted for visiting Bhopal in this regard. 30. 30. The communication dated 23/6/2021 was sent to the M.P. Para Medical Council (Annex.R/6) pointing out the defects found by the committee and inter alia observing and requesting as under: ^^,slh voLFkk esa mDr laLFkkuksa }kjk tkjh fMIyksek@fMxzh o 'kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk ds nLrkostksa dk HkkSfrd lR;kiu vkids dk;kZy; Lrj ij gh fd;k tk ldrk gSA jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly] t;iqj mDr laLFkkuksa ds fo:) vlaxr nLrkostksa ds vk/kkj ij O;olkf;d fMIyksek@fMxzh tkjh djus ds QyLo:i vko';d dk;Zokgh vey esa ykus dk fopkj dj jgh gSA vr% vkils vkxzg gS fd mDr laLFkkuksa }kjk layXu lwph esa of.kZr vH;fFkZ;ksa ds nLrkostksa dh xgu tkWp dj nks"kh ik;s tkus ij buds fo:) vko';d dkuwuh dk;Zokgh dj dh xbZ dk;Zokgh ls bl dkSafly dks voxr djkus dk Je djsaA layXu %& 1- vH;fFkZ;ksa dh lwphA^^ 31. From the above communication it is apparent that the RPMC was well aware of the fact that the diploma issued by the institutions and the documents could only be physically verified by M.P. Para Medical Council and as such, it required the said Council to do the needful. The committee also visited Bhopal and also held discussions with the authorities of M.P. Para Medical Council. The M.P. Para Medical Council based on the communication received from the RPMC informed the institutions to hold inquiry and inform the M.P.Para Medical Council. 32. The RPMC on receiving information about certain wrong doing even during the course of investigation, again informed the M.P. Para Medical Council in this regard and when admittedly nothing was received from M.P. Para Medical Council, issued notices to the candidates dated 17/7/2021. 33. 32. The RPMC on receiving information about certain wrong doing even during the course of investigation, again informed the M.P. Para Medical Council in this regard and when admittedly nothing was received from M.P. Para Medical Council, issued notices to the candidates dated 17/7/2021. 33. The notices, which were issued to the candidates contain ominous indications, which read as under: ^^fo"k; %& uksfVl ckcr~ jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly esa xyr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij iath;u djkus ds Øe esaA mijksDr fo"k;kUrxZr ys[k gS fd vkids }kjk jktLFkku iSjkeSfMdy dkSflay esa ith;u gsrq vkosnu fd;k x;k Fkk] ftlds vk/kkj ij vkidk iath;u fd;k x;k fdUrq nLrkostks dh tkap desVh }kjk dh xbZ] ftld nkSjku vki }kjk izLrqr nLrkostksa esa dbZ izdkj dh dfe;k ikbZ xbZ %& tSls izf'k{k.k vof/k es nks LFkkuks ij ukekadu] izf'k{k.k vof/k ds nkSjku vU;= lsokjr gksuk] izf'k{k.k e izoas'k gsrq fu/kkZfjr vk;q ls de vk;q ds ckotwn izos'k ysuk rFkk e/; izns'k lg fpfdRlk ifj”kn Hkksiky ds fu;eksa ds foijhr 12 oh d{kk esa xf.kr fo"k; ds ckotwn izos'k ysuk vkfnA vr% vki fnukad 23-07-2021 dks izf'k{k.k ds fy, izos'k gsrq laLFkk es tek djk;s x;s nLrkost rFkk jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSfaly esa itha;u gsrq vkosnu i= ds lkFk tek djok;s x;s nLrkostks ds ewy nLrkost ysdj v/kksgLrk{kjdrkZ ds le{k mifLFkr gksosa vU;Fkk ,d i{kh; fu.kZ; ysrs gq, vkidk iath;u rRdky izHkko ls fujLr dj fn;k tk;sxkA lgh@& jftLVªkj^^ 34. A perusal of the above notices would indicate that all the candidates were given a general notice pointing out the four defects pointed out by the committee and calling upon them to respond. A perusal of the above notices would indicate that all the candidates were given a general notice pointing out the four defects pointed out by the committee and calling upon them to respond. It appears that certain candidates appeared before the RPMC on 23/7/2021 and on 24/7/2021 the following office order (Annex.R/4) was passed: ^^&dkkZy; vkns'k^^ jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly] t;iqj esa vk;ksftr vke cSBd fnukad 24-07-2021 esa fy;s x;s fu.kZ; dh vuqikyuk esa tkWp desVh fjiksVZ] e/; izns'k lg~&fpfdRlk ifj"kn~ Hkksiky ds lkFk fd;s x;s i=kpkj ,oa HkkSfrd tkWp] fof/kd jk; rFkk leLr] iathd`r vH;fFkZ;ksa ds nLrkostksa ds voyksdu ,oa fnukad 23-07-2021 dks lquokbZ ds mijkUr ikbZ xbZ xaEHkhj vfu;ferrkvksa ds vk/kkj ij layXu lwph e/;izns'k jkT; ds 4 futh fo'ofo|ky; fuEu of.kZrkuqlkj %& 1- Jh lR; lkbZ ;wfuoflZVh vkWQ VSDuksyksth ,.M esfMdy lkbUl] flgksj ¼e/;izns'k½] 2- MkW- loZiYyh jk/kkd`".ku ;wfuoflZVh gks'kaxkcknjksM Hkksiky ¼e/;izns'k½ 3- Lokeh foosdkuUn fo'ofo|ky; lkxj ¼e/;izns'k½ 4- vkbZlsDV ;wfuoflZVh baLVhV~;wV vkWQ iSjkesfMdy lkbUl jk;lsu ¼e/;izns'k½ mijksDrkuqlkj futh fo'ofo|ky; ls fMIyksek@fMxzh/kkjh vH;fFkZ;ksa ds iath;u tks fd dkSafly ds iwoZ vkns'k Øekad 654 fnukad 23-06-2021 ds }kjk vLFkkbZ :i ls izR;kgkfjr fd;s x;s Fks dks rqjUr izHkko ls LFkkbZ :i ls fujLr fd;s tkrs gSA^^ 35. A perusal of the above impugned order reveals that reference has been made to the meeting dated 24/7/2021 of the RPMC, inquiry report, correspondence with the M.P. Para Medical Council, physical inquiry, legal opinion and personal hearing based on which the registrations have been cancelled, as a result of which, the petitioners have been rendered ineligible for recruitment pursuant to the advertisement dated 12/6/2020. 36. The entire sequence of events, as noticed hereinbefore, clearly reflects that there has been a gross violation of principles of natural justice on part of the RPMC. The action has been taken based on the inquiry report submitted to it by the committee formed by it. The committee at no stage involved the petitioner-candidates. The committee though gave few instances pointing out glaring discrepancies, even candidates regarding whom the discrepancies were pointed out were not confronted with the said discrepancies even when the notices were issued to them on 17/7/2021. The committee at no stage involved the petitioner-candidates. The committee though gave few instances pointing out glaring discrepancies, even candidates regarding whom the discrepancies were pointed out were not confronted with the said discrepancies even when the notices were issued to them on 17/7/2021. As noticed, ominous notices have been issued to all the candidates without pointing out as to what specific deficiency the candidate was required to meet, which nature of show cause notice cannot be sustained, as for a proper opportunity of hearing, a candidate must know specific allegations against him so as to be in a position to respond to the same. The ominous allegations could not have been responded by the candidates and, therefore, the candidates being handicapped in this regard, could not be expected to give answers and/or produce material in support of their eligibility and, therefore, the nature of show cause notice issued and purported opportunity granted to the petitioners cannot be sustained. 37. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Susme Builders (P) Ltd. vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority & Ors. : (2018) 2 SCC 230 has inter alia observed as under: "When a notice is issued to a party it must be clearly told what are the allegations which it must meet. The notice should be clear and unambiguous." 38. The inquiry report obviously was not supplied to the petitioners and in any case the same does not indicate defects for each and every candidate for whom the cancellation has taken place and, therefore, the violation of principles of natural justice is writ large. 39. There is substance in the submission made by leaned counsel for the petitioners that based on few instances indicated in the inquiry report, the respondent RPMC could not have cancelled the registrations en bloc/en masse. 40. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh P.U. (supra) inter alia came to the following conclusion: ".....Applying a unilaterally rigid and arbitrary standard to cancel the entirety of the selections despite the firm and positive information that except 31 of such selected candidates, no infirmity could be found with reference to others, is nothing but total disregard of relevancies and allowing to be carried away of irrelevancies, giving a complete go-by to contextual considerations throwing to the winds the principle of proportionality in going farther than what was strictly and reasonably to meet the situation. In short, the competent authority completely misdirected itself in taking such an extreme and unreasonable decision of cancelling the entire selections, wholly unwarranted and unnecessary even on the factual situation found too, and totally in excess of the nature and gravity of what was at stake, thereby virtually rendering such decision to be irrational." 41. Further in the case of Sachin Kumar (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has reiterated the principles laid down in the case of Rajesh P.U. (supra). As such, merely based on few instances the respondent RPMC could not have cancelled the registration en bloc. 42. It is important to note that the RPMC had not produced the minutes of meeting dated 24/7/2021, which resulted in passing of the order dated 24/7/2021 cancelling the registrations. However, under the directions of the Court, minutes of the meeting have been produced, the relevant minutes inter alia read as under: ^^Ø l ,ts.Mk fu.kZ; 1 jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly dh cSBd fnukad 18-06-2021 ds fcUnq la[;k 01 ds vuqlkj ¼tkWp desVh }kjk izLrqr fjiksVZ dks fnukad 18-06-2020 dks dkSafly dh vke lHkk dh cSBd esa izLrqr dh xbZ ftlesa dkSafly }kjk loZlEefr ls ;g fu.kZ; fy;k x;k fd mDr lHkh vfu;ferrkvksa dh foLr`r Lrj ij tkWp ¼e/;izns'k lg~&fpfdRlk ifj"kn Hkksiky½ vko';d gS ftlds varxZr leLr vH;fFkZ;ksa ds nLrkostksa o iSjkesfMdy dkslZ ds v/;;u lacaf/kr nLrkostksa dk HkkSfrd lR;kiu fd;k tkdj tkWp gksus rd eq[;r% e/;izns'k jkT; ds bu 4 futh fo'ofo|ky; 1- Jh lR; lkbZ ;wfuoflZVh vkWQ VSDuksyksth ,.M esfMdy lkbUl] flgksj ¼e/;izns'k½] 2- MkW- loZiYyh jk/kkd`".ku ;wfuoflZVh gks'kaxkckn jksM Hkksiky] ¼e/;izns'k½ 3- Lokeh foosdkuUn fo'ofo|ky; lkxj] ¼e/;izns'k½ ,o a 4- vkbZlsDV ;wfuoflZVh baLVhV~;wV vkWQ iSjkesfMdy lkbUl jk;lsu] ¼e/;izns'k½ ls fMIyksek@fMxzh/kkjh vH;fFkZ;ksa ds iath;u dks jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly ls vLFkkbZ :i ls izR;kgkfjr djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k Fkk lkFk gh mDr laLFkkvksa ds vH;fFkZ;ksa ds nLrkostksa dk HkkSfrd lR;kiu e/;izns'k lg~&fpfdRlk ifj"kn Hkksiky tkdj djus gsrq ,d lfefr dk xBu djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k Fkk½ bl lEcU/k esa mDr laLFkkuksa ds iath;u dks LFkk;h :i ls fujLr djus ij gsrq ppkZA mDr izdj.k dh dkSafly ds vf/koDrk }kjk fof/kd jk; fy;s tkus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gSA vko';drk gksus ij lEcfU/kr izdj.k esa lafyIr vH;fFkZ;ksa@dkfeZdk sa ds fo:) fu;ekuqlkj dk;Zokgh fd;s tkus fu.kZ; fy;k tkrk gSA^^ 43. A perusal of the decision, which has been taken on the agenda item pertaining to cancellation of registration, reveals that the RPMC decided to take legal opinion from the counsel and, if required, to take action against the candidates/employees involved, in accordance with law. Apparently, the decision to cancel the registration was not taken by the RPMC and even if the decision as taken, is implemented, the same was to take legal opinion and once the legal opinion was taken, the same should have been placed before the RPMC and, thereafter, a specific decision in this regard was required to be taken. No decision by the RPMC to cancel the registration is available on record. 44. The requirement of the decision by the RPMC in this regard cannot be overemphasized as it is the RPMC which had taken the decision to temporarily withdraw the registration in its meeting dated 18/6/2021. When temporary withdrawal of registration required decision by the RPMC, it cannot be said/expected that cancellation would not require a decision by the RPMC and, therefore, apparently in absence of decision of the RPMC to cancel the registration, the cancellation of registration on that count also cannot be sustained. 45. In view of the fact that this Court has come to the conclusion that the orders impugned have been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the plea sought to be raised by the respondents of availability of alternative remedy to the petitioners against the orders cancelling their registrations cannot be accepted. 46. 45. In view of the fact that this Court has come to the conclusion that the orders impugned have been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the plea sought to be raised by the respondents of availability of alternative remedy to the petitioners against the orders cancelling their registrations cannot be accepted. 46. However, despite the fact that the action of the respondent RPMC has been found in gross violation of principles of natural justice and there being no decision by the RPMC for cancellation of registration of the petitioners, looking to the fact that the committee has pointed out glaring discrepancies in the diplomas obtained by several of the candidates and all the institutions themselves vide communication sent by M.P.Para Medical Council dated 13/9/2021 and 21/10/2021 (Annex.18 & Annex.19) have found large number of students ineligible for grant of diploma and the fact that ultimately the petitioners would be dealing with the unsuspecting patients, whose lives would be dependent on the investigation conducted by the petitioners, who are seeking recruitment on the post of Lab Technician and Assistant Radiographer, the RPMC is required to be afforded an opportunity to comply with the requirements of principles of natural justice as well as adopt proper proceedings i.e. decision by the RPMC in case any action is required to be taken against the candidates. 47. As per the reports submitted by the institutions, several of the petitioners in the present petitions have been found ineligible by the said institutions and M.P. Para Medical Council and their admissions itself have been cancelled by the institutions, they are not entitled to any relief qua the cancellation made, however, for lack of specific information in this regard, though the order was passed by this Court, no specific order qua such petitioners is being passed. 48. So far as CW Nos.7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021 are concerned, as the RPMC itself is of the view that the candidates from the four institutions were not entitled to participate in the recruitment and their registration has been cancelled, no separate order need be passed in the petitions filed by the petitioners in the said writ petitions. 49. 48. So far as CW Nos.7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021 are concerned, as the RPMC itself is of the view that the candidates from the four institutions were not entitled to participate in the recruitment and their registration has been cancelled, no separate order need be passed in the petitions filed by the petitioners in the said writ petitions. 49. However, as the impugned orders have been found to be unsustainable and the matters are being remanded back to the RPMC to take appropriate action in accordance with law, the petitioners in the above 03 petitions may make representations to the RPMC pointing out the material/make submissions with regard to the candidature of the petitioners in other writ petitions and it is expected of the RPMC to keep the same in view while taking decision qua the petitioners in other writ petitions. 50. Consequently, except for CW Nos.7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021, the writ petitions are allowed. The order dated 24/7/2021 passed by the respondent RPMC cancelling the registration of the petitioners is quashed and set aside. The matters are remanded back to the RPMC, who is directed to issue fresh specific notices to the petitioners pointing out to each individual candidate the deficiency/ineligibility/disqualification with regard to their diploma/registration. On notices being issued, the petitioners shall respond to said notice within a period of two weeks, which date shall be fixed by the RPMC in the notice and after affording opportunity of hearing to the candidates, the RPMC would pass fresh orders in accordance with law. 51. It is made clear that till such time the decision in each individual case is taken by the RPMC, none of the candidates shall be treated as eligible for the purpose of recruitment only on account of the fact that the order dated 24/7/2021 has been quashed by this Court and only after RPMC record specific finding about the registration of the petitioners being valid, they would be treated as eligible by the respondent Board. 52. It is further directed that till such time the inquiry is completed by the RPMC, the respondents shall keep the posts of selected candidates vacant. The RPMC is directed to complete the entire exercise within a period of four months from the date of this order. 53. Writ Petition Nos. 7528/2021, 8141/2021 and 9997/2021 are disposed of in terms of the observations made hereinbefore.