VIKASH SON OF DAYANAND Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CWP No.28009 of 2013

(2.) The petitioner is is a person, who has a +2 educational qualification and he is aggrieved about the condition in the advertisement released by the Corporation for receiving applications for allotment to LPG dealership. The counsel for the petitioner brings challenge to a particular clause 6.1 regarding common eligibility criteria for all categories applying as individual set forth in the brochure and the same reads as under:-

(3.) The counsel would argue that the policy as it existed from 1928 is that a matriculate was competent to apply for dealership and the new condition of the minimum eligibility as a Diploma in Engineering and upwards has been brought about only for the first time in the year 2013. He would also point out to the fact that in RGGLV (Rajiv Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitaran), there is no such restriction and it allows even for a matriculate to be eligible to apply for dealership. The counsel states that in the matter of freedom of trade and business the protection given under Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution is fettered by the notification and the reasonable restriction which the Constitution contemplates must be through a law enacted by a State imposing in the interest of general public as reasonable restriction. In this case, it is the Corporation which has imposed such a restriction of eligibility, without there being any specific law providing by the State.