RAM LAL Vs. UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The present petitioners want to appear at the incoming Pre-Medical Test going to be held on 27-6-1996. Condition No. 3(a) of the guidelines issued by the Examining Body prescribes the minimum age at 17 years for appearing at the said test. Petitioner Ram Lal's age falls short by 9 days, that of Miss Shanti Bishnoi by one year and that of Gyaneshwar Prasad by two months of the aforesaid minimum age of 17 years prescribed for appearing at the aforementioned test.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the fixation of the minimum age of 17 years is quite arbitrary and violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as it deprives qualified persons from appearing at the pre-admission test for a professional course. In this behalf reliance has been placed on the orders passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 4480/92 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4586/92 Kumari Puja Arora v. University of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1189/96 Gopal Krishan v. State and another and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1468/96 Ram Lal v. University of Rajasthan where interim orders, permitting the petitioners, whose age fell short of the minimum 17 years as prescribed in the guideline No. 3(a), were made. Relying on Vishnu Traders v. State of Haryana, 1995 Supp (1) SCC 461, it was also urged that though interlocutory orders passed by the High Court do not have binding precedent, however, there is every need of maintaining consistency in approach and uniformity in the exercise of the judicial discretion respecting similar matters.