Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) HEARD Shri K.P. Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rajesh Mishra, Shri J.P. Singh, Shri K.M. Mishra and other learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Dr. Ashok Nigam, Additional Solicitor General of India has appeared on behalf of Union of India and Shri Manish Goyal has appeared on behalf of the Tourist Guides' Federation of India, newly impleaded respondents.
(2.) ALL these writ petitions raising similar questions of fact and law have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Writ Petition No. 436 of 2009, Gagan Srivastava and others v. Union of India and others, is treated to be the leading petition. Learned counsel for the parties have agreed that these writ petitions be finally decided without calling for any further affidavits. For deciding this bunch of writ petitions, it is sufficient to refer to the pleadings made in the Writ Petition No. 436 of 2009 as well as in Writ Petition No. 53072 of 2008. Briefs facts of the case as they emerge from pleadings of the parties are: The petitioners claim to be working as professional guides for the last several years. Petitioners' case is that they are earning their livelihood by working as professional guides of national and international tourists. Some of the petitioners claim to be working as hereditary guides and some claim to be working on the basis of the licence issued by the Sajjada Nashin of the Durgah at Fatehpur Sikri. It is submitted that Sajjada Nashin has granted permission to several petitioners and by strength of such permission they are working as tourist guides, but interference is being caused by the Tourism Department of the Government of India as well as the Archaeological Survey of India in working of the petitioners. Hence the writ petitions have been filed. Petitioners have challenged the vires of Rule 8(d) of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959 (hereinafter called the "Rules 1959").
(3.) IN Writ Petition No. 436 of 2009, Gagan Srivastava and others v. Union of INdia and others, following prayer has been made by the petitioners: "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorariquashing the last para of the Rule 8(d) of the rules relating to licensing of the guides. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus restraining the respondents from interfering with the working of petitioners as professional guide in Agra during pendency of the instant writ petition before this Hon'ble Court so as to secure ends of justice or else the petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss." In other writ petitions, more or less similar prayers have been made.;