Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) THESE writ petitions raise similar issues of facts and law and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The first two writ petitions contain similar pleadings and reliefs whereas the relief claimed in third writ petition is dependent on outcome of decision in first two writ petitions.
(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to these writ petitions are : Writ Petition No. 68499 of 2006 (hereinafter referred to as first writ petition) The first writ petition has been filed by a registered association of tourist guides registered at Varanasi, the members of which have been recognised as Regional Guides by Department of Tourism, Government of India and are known as Regional Guides. They claimed to have been issued identity cards by the Department of Tourism, Government of India for guiding the tourists at ancient monuments, i.e., protected monuments. The petitioners have challenged the advertisement dated 21st November, 2006 issued by the Directorate of Tourism, State of Uttar Pradesh inviting applications for training of State Level Tourist Guide Programme. The petitioners' case in the writ petition is that advertisement issued by the State Government is not in consonance with the guidelines dated 24th February, 2003 issued by the Government of India, Department of Tourism. The petitioners' case further is that the State of Uttar Pradesh has no jurisdiction to recruit any State Level Tourist Guide at the places -where offices of India Tourism have been established by the Government of India. The petitioners claim to be stationed at Varanasi where India Tourism Office is situate, hence the State has no jurisdiction to recruit any guides at such place. The case of the petitioners is that the State of U.P. can recruit State Level Guide and Local Guides only at places where India Tourism Offices are not located. Following prayers have been made in the writ petition : "(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records and quashing the advertisement dated 21.11.2006, issued by the respondent No. 2 as well as the corrigendum issued on 30.11.2006 (Annexures -1 and 2 to the present writ petition). (b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents No. 1 and 2 from undertaking any selection process pursuant to the impugned advertisement dated 21.11.2006 insofar as recruitment of State Level Guide in Varanasi Region is concerned. (c) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 from recruiting any State Level Guide in Varanasi Region. Writ Petition No. 52805 of 2007 (hereinafter referred to as second writ petition) The second writ petition has been filed by Approved Guides of the Department of Tourism whose members are stationed at Agra and claimed to be working as Guide. The pleadings in the second writ petition are almost similar to the first writ petition. This writ petition also makes the similar prayers as made in the first writ petition. In this writ petition a counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the Director General, Department of Tourism, Government of India. Writ Petition No. 11104 of 2007 (hereinafter referred to as third writ petition) The petitioners, who are thirteen in number, claim to be resident of Agra and working as Tourist Guide at various historical places. Petitioners' case in the writ petition is that they submitted their application in response to the advertisement dated 21st November, 2006 issued by the Director of Tourism, State of Uttar Pradesh. However, it has been pleaded that no call letter for holding the training of State Level Guide has yet been issued to the petitioners. The petitioners claim that looking to the large number of tourists (about 20,000 per day) more and more tourist guides are required. The prayers of the writ petition as amended are to the following effect: "(A) to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents No. 3 and 4 to complete the proceedings of recruitment of State Level Guides in lieu of the advertisement dated 21.11.2006 filed as Annexure -1 to the writ petition published by respondent No. 3, Director General, Directorate of Tourism, C -13, Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow in Dainik Jagaran newspaper. (B) to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to restraining them not to interfere in the peaceful working of the petitioners as Tourist Guide at the Historical Monuments. In first writ petition two applications for impleadment have been filed, one by Agra Tourist Guides Welfare Association and another by Indian Association of Tour Operators, which have been allowed permitting them to be impleaded as respondents. The impleadment applications are supported by detail affidavits. The case of the newly impleaded respondents is that the advertisement dated 21st November, 2006 is fully in consonance with the guidelines issued by the Government of India. It is stated that the State Level Guides cannot be discriminated by prohibiting them to work as Guide in the monuments controlled by the Archaeological Survey of India. It is pleaded that the State Level Guides are also entitled to guide the tourist at protected monuments. It is further pleaded that Regional Guides have no right to challenge the advertisement. Acounter affidavit by the State of U.P. has also been filed in the first writ petition supporting the advertisement issued by the Director of Tourism, State of U.P. It is stated that the State Level Guides are to operate in whole State of Uttar Pradesh including Agra and Varanasi whereas the Regional Guides are permitted to work in their respective regions which normally comprises of several States of their regions. It is pleaded that State Level Guides are licensed to work in particular State and not for particular City or Cities. It has further been pleaded that by large number of Guides, the State can ensure larger number of tourist arrival.
(3.) THE Director of Tourism, Government of India has filed counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit in second and third writ petitions. THE Government of India has pleaded in the counter affidavit that guidelines have been issued in exercise of power under Section 29(a) of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 1958 Act). It has further been stated that revised guidelines for selection of Regional Level Guides have been issued in the year 2007. In the supplementary counter affidavit relying on a D.O. letter dated 14th August, 1985 issued by the Additional Director General, Department of Tourism, Government of India, it has been stated that Archaeological Survey of India and State should not be recognising any guides at stations where guide training courses have been conducted by the department of tourism. We have heard Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in first two writ petitions and Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners in third writ petition. Smt. Subhash Rathi, learned Standing Counsel has appeared for State of U.P., Dr. A.K. Nigam assisted by Sri K.P. Bajpayee has appeared on behalf of the Union of India and Smt. Anjana Gosain, Advocate assisted by Sri Manu Khare has appeared on behalf of the newly impleaded respondents in first writ petition.';