- (1.) THE validity of Clause 10(xxxii) of the Rajasthan Tourism Trade (Facilitation and Regulation) Rules, 2010 (for short, hereafter referred to as 'the Rules') has been impeached in the instant petition, to be ultra vires the Constitution of India as well as the other provisions of the Rajasthan Tourism Trade (Facilitation and Regulation) Act, 2010 (for short, hereafter referred to as 'the Act'). By the impugned provision, a ceiling of 65 years has been enjoined to be the maximum age for a Guide to act as such, under the Rules. We have heard Mr.Bipin Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dinesh Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General for the State -respondents.
(2.) THE pleaded case of the petitioner is that he has been holding a license from the Tourism Department of the State to act as a guide, on completion of the requisite training. He has claimed to be in this occupation since 1960, and that, over the years, has gained immense experience therein. Apart from contending that he is a highly qualified person, as well ideally suited to act as a guide, the petitioner has asserted that on the completion of his training in the year 2002, the Tourism Department had issued a license to him in the same year, facilitating his activities in the said capacity, and his license was last renewed in the year 2010 upto 31.12.2012. According to the petitioner, on the expiry of the period of license as above, he applied for the renewal thereof and also submitted his license card No.171 before the concerned respondent -authority for the said purpose. He has alleged that the respondent -Department however, did neither renew his license nor did otherwise respond to his request. However, after he had submitted all documents alongwith his health certificate, date of birth certificate etc. for consideration of his request for renewal of his license vide his letter dated 27.6.2013, he received a letter dated 29.7.2013 issued by the Tourism Department, whereby he was informed that his license cannot be renewed as he had meanwhile attained the age over 65 years, and that thus, he was ineligible for such renewal. Contending in essence that the restriction of upper age limit of 65 years to act as a guide, as prescribed by clause (xxxii) of the Rule 10 of the Rules, amounts to an unreasonable restriction in contravention of the fundamental right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to carry on any profession as guaranteed by Article 19(1)(g) thereof, the petitioner has mounted the challenge.
(3.) IN reply, the respondents have asserted that Rule 10(xxxii) of the Rules is valid constitutionally and otherwise, as a tourist guide has to be essentially medically as well as physically fit, amongst others, primarily for his/her safety. According to them, the petitioner's license, he being aged 73 years, is not renewable in terms of the mandate of Rule 10 (xxxii) of the Rules. The respondents have underlined that the State Government is competent to impose restrictions and issue instructions inter alia for the safety of the tourist guide(s). They have asserted that in the backdrop of this perspective, the ceiling of 65 years, as enjoined by Rule 10(xxxii) of the Rules can, by no means, be faulted with.;