- (1.) WHEN the writ petition was filed in the year 1997, the petitioners sought the following reliefs: i) a writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to consider the petitioners for appointment on the post of dental hygienists in pursuance to the advertisement published in the newspaper dated 6.1.1997 without any objection as to absence of registration by the State Dental Council, U.P. and/ or to command the State Dental Council, U.P. to register the petitioners as Dental Hygienists as has registered the persons appearing in the Dental Hygienists Course along with the petitioners as detailed in the writ petition. ii) a writ, order or direction of suitable nature declaring Rule 8 of the notification dated 13.7.1993 to be unconstitutional and in operative. iii) a writ or any other writ order and/or to pass such other further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. iv) to award cost of the petition to the petitioners. By the amendment made on 21.4.2008 the following fresh reliefs have been sought which are as follows: (v) It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ or order on direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to treat the petitioners as eligible for being selected and appointed as Dental Hygienists in pursuance of the selection process to be held pursuant to the advertisement dated 15.12.2007. (vi) It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties to give the petitioners the age relaxation for being considered and appointed to the post of Dental Hygienists as the petitioners had been pursuing their Writ Petition diligently. (vii) It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to enroll the petitioners as Dental Hygienists from U.P. State Dental Hygienists Council.
(2.) THE petitioners are the Dental Hygienists Certificate holders issued by the B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur. They claimed that they took admission in the dental hygienists batch in the year 1989 which was two years course and passed the same from B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur which is the State recognized Medical College. In the petition, it is contended that on 12.12.1995, in a meeting conducted under the Chairmanship of Secretary, Department of Medicines and Health, a decision has been taken regarding training of para medical staff. It was decided to provide training of dental hygienists to be imparted by six Government Government Colleges in batches of five dental hygienists each. The decision has also been taken to increase the seats in the Dental College, Lucknow from 10 to 30 and another meeting was chaired by the Secretary, Medicines and Health on 18.9.1986. For increasing the number of seats at the Dental Colleges, a Government Order dated 31.12.1986 was issued by the State Government whereby budgetary allocations were made for imparting instructions for study of dental hygienists in six Government Medical Colleges. In pursuance of the aforesaid decision, training of dental hygienists was commenced in all the six Medical Colleges, including Allahabad Medical College and Gorakhpur Medical College from the year 1987 and the first admission was made in the year 1987. The dental hygienists course was of two years. It is stated that papers relating to three petitioners were forwarded by their respective medical colleges to the State Dental Council, U.P., Lucknow for registration. However, no action whatsoever has been taken by the State Dental Council, U.P. Thereafter, the State Government has framed a rule named as the U.P. Dental Health Science and Dental Mechanics Service Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules 1993") in exercise of the power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and the same has been published by means of the notification dated 13.7.1993. Rule 8 of the said Rules specifies the educational qualifications required for appointment. Under the said Rules, it is provided that the possession of a certificate/diploma in Dental Health or Dental Mechanics from a recognized institution as also registration with the State Dental Council, U.P. was a necessary pre condition for being considered for appointment. An advertisement has been published by the Director General, Medical Health, U.P. on 6.1.1997 inviting applications for filling up the post of Dental Hygienists. Under the aforesaid advertisement, there were 32 posts of dental hygienists reserved for Scheduled Caste, four posts for Scheduled Tribe and six posts for Backward Class and three posts for general category. The petitioners belong to other Backward Class. The aforesaid advertisement specifies possession of a certificate of dental hygienists from an institution recognized by the Indian Dental Council as also registration as a Dental Hygienists with the State Dental Council, U.P. as the minimum eligibility requirement for being considered. Due to the aforesaid qualifications prescribed in the advertisement, the petitioners have been precluded from applying for the post of Dental Hygienists, as they did not possess such qualification. Except petitioner no. 4, other petitioners applied for the post under the aforesaid advertisement. At this stage, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. Since the petitioners did not have requisite qualifications prescribed in the advertisement, the petitioners' applications have not been entertained.
(3.) IT appears that a fresh advertisement has been made on 15.12.2007 for the post of Dental Hygienists. In the said advertisement, again the same qualification was provided. The petitioners applied for the said post in pursuance of the said advertisement and moved an amendment application seeking further reliefs, referred hereinabove.;