M.N. Bhandari, J. - (1.) THIS bunch of writ petitions challenges the order dated 13th June, 2012, by which, the sonography machines were seized apart from cancellation of registration. The sinologists/doctors were also debarred to operate the sonography machines. The challenge to the impugned order has been made on many grounds. The respondents raised preliminary objections regarding maintainability of writ petitions as the petitioners are having efficacious remedy of appeal under Section 21 of The Preconception and Pre -natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short "Act of 1994"). Few petitioners preferred appeal/s prior to filing of writ petition/s, thus two remedies have been taken simultaneously. In few other cases, the appeals so preferred were dismissed and in other cases, no appeal was preferred.
(2.) IT would be necessary to first deal with the preliminary objections to which reply has been given by the petitioners stating that impugned order has been passed by the incompetent authority, thus preliminary objections regarding maintainability of writ petition/s should not come in their way. If the impugned order has been passed by an incompetent authority then one should not be relegated to the alternative remedy. It is also stated that remedy of appeal is not available in view of the fact that Section 21 of the Act of 1994 provides for appeal "in the prescribed manner". The provision of Pre -conception & Pre -natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996 (for short "Rules of 1996") does not prescribe the manner of appeal. Rule 19 of the Rules of 1996 does not provide an appeal to the State Government from the order of State Appropriate Authority, though Section 21 of the Act of 1994 provides for it. In absence of the prescribed manner, petitioners were unable to file an appeal. In view of the arguments raised above, it is to be determined as to whether remedy of appeal lies to the petitioners even if manner is not prescribed and further, the petitioners can be non -suited despite of the allegation that the impugned impugned order has been passed by an incompetent authority.
(3.) I would first deal with the issue as to whether the impugned order has been passed by the competent authority. The aforesaid is otherwise a legal issue, thus can be raised directly by maintaining a writ petition.;