- (1.) The controversy as well as the reliefs claimed in both the writ petitions are similar and common therefore, both the writ petitions are being decided by this common order.
(2.) Heard Shri Adarsh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1, Shri K.S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2. Shri Mata Prasad, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 3 and Shri Sudeep Harkauli, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.
(3.) The petitioners of writ petition no. 53730 of 2015, who are 11 in number, are seeking quashing of the order dated 30.12.2013 whereby their applications for the post of Dental Hygienist have been rejected on the ground that they do not fulfill the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement, namely, that they are not registered with the U.P. State Dental Council. The petitioners are also challenging the advertisement dated 5.9.2015 in so far as it mandates the requirement of registration as Dental Hygienist with the U.P. State Dental Council. Subsequently an amendment application was filed and allowed and by the amendment application the petitioners have also sought a direction in the nature of mandamus for declaring Rule 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Dant Swasthya Vigyani Aur Dant Mechanic Sewa Niyamawali-1993 as ultra vires Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.;