NEELAM JOSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE validity of the guidelines for Pre Medieal Tests have been challenged in this writ petition on the ground that the same is arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, THE two Clauses of the guidelines, which have been challenged are reproduced as under :- 3-C (i) THE candidates must have studied for the three years of qualifying examination continuously as a regular candidate in a recognised imstitution in Rajasthan. AND (ii) Natural father/mother of the candidate has continuously resided in Rajasthan for a period of last 10 years and the candidate has studied for at least 5 years during this period in a recognised educational institution of Rajasthan. "

(2.) IT has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, her father and grand father are the residents of Rajasthan and simply because she had not studied for last 3 years of the qualifying examination continuously as a regular candidate in any recognised institution in Rajasthan; she cannot be denied her right to appear in P. M. T. test. IT has been submitted that the father of the petitioner was born in Rajasthan and has continuously resided for a period of more than 10 years and had to shift to Delhi on account of job, which has been assigned to him and he is still an Advocate enrolled in Rajasthan and the mother of the petitioner has continir-ously resided in the State of Rajasthan and therefore, the second condition that the candidate in such a case should have studied atleast for 5 years, is also arbitrary. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Lakshmi v/s. State (l), wherein the requirements of sub-rule (8) of Rule 3 of the Karnataka Medical Colleges (Admission to post Graduate Courses) Rules, 1986 were struck down in respect of the condition of requirement of studies for a minimum period of 5 years prior to admission to M. B. B. S. in any recogaised Institution of the State of Karnataka. The learned Judge of the Karnataka High Court has referred to the decision of Pradeep Jain V/s Union of India (2), wherein the whole-sale reservationmade by seme of the State Governments on the basis of domicile or resident requirement within the State or on the basis of institutional preference for the students who have passed the qualifying examination held by the University for the State excluding the students not satisfying this requirements regardless of the merit was condemned.

(3.) LAST argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the son or daughter or serving or retired employee of the Government of Rajas-tnan including the Officers of All India Service borne on the State cadre of Rajasthan or employees of the under-taking Corporations, Improvement Trust, Municipal bodies duly constituted by the State Government of Rajasthan and all any of the Universities in Rajasthan or the Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan are also entitled to appear in such P. M. T. test, if the employes has put in 3 years service in the year of admission. This condition has been shown to point out that the son/daughter of such employee is not required to have any education in Rajasthan and therefore, the petitioner should be allowed to appear on the basis of this condition. This condition/clause is for the benefit of various employees enumerated in the Clause and is in the public interest. The petitioner does not fulfil the condition of this clause as her father was not an employee in last 3 years in the State of Rajasthan and therefore, no benefit can be availed on the anology of this clause.