CWP-5092/2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5092/2006 Ram Chandra Sharma. Versus. Union of India & ors. DATE OF ORDER : 07/04/2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI *** None present for petitioner. Mr. Rajendra Choudhary, for respondents. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers:- “(i)to issue any order or direction or writ of any nature for quashing the resolution of Bar Council of India dated 25/26.06.2005 and Bar Council of Rajasthan dated 07.08.2005 and order dated 27.08.2005 and reference letter dated 17.09.2005 and 02.01.2006, 16.02.2006; (ii)to issue any order or direction or writ of any nature directing the non- petitioners to enroll the petitioner as an Advocate with immediate effect.” It has not been controverted by counsel for respondents that the controversy raised in the instant writ petition has been decided by Division Bench in CWP-7426/2007, Mangala Ram Vs. Bar Council of Rajasthan and others, decided on 19/08/2008 in which it has been held as under:- “The judgment (supra) was delivered on 17.1.1995 by the Supreme Court. The Bar Council of Rajasthan enacted and added rule 10-A to the Rules, sought to be quashed, in the year CWP-5092/2006 2 2005 without noticing that such restriction of upper age of 45 years has already been declared by the Apex Court as ultra vires to Article 14 of the Constitution of India, creating a situation for second round of litigation. There was no need to frame such a rule, which has already been set aside by the Supreme Court. Since this issue is not res integra as stood settled by the Supreme Court in the judgment (supra), therefore, rule 1-A framed by the Bar Council of Rajasthan, sought to be quashed, does stand the scrutiny of law and is struck down as ultra vires declared ultra vires and discriminating in terms of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed. The Bar Council of Rajasthan, Jodhpur/Jaipur is directed to consider the application of Shri Mangla Ram Gujar for his enrollment as an Advocate.” In the light of the judgment referred to supra, the present writ petition is allowed. The Bar Council of Rajasthan, Jodhpur is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for his enrollment as an Advocate if he is otherwise eligible under the provisions of the Act. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. Raghu/p.2/ 5092-CW-2006-final.doc