JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel. 1. The contention of Shri R.D. Rastogi is that the petitioner was born in Rajasthan in 1975 and got her education in Saint Angela Sophia Senior Higher Secondary School Jaipur from K.G. to 3rd standard in the academic session of 1977 to 1982 and she remained in Delhi thereafter because she was suffering from acute asthma. The father of the petitioner is a permanent resident of Rajasthan and the family is living in Rajasthan for more than 100 years. The condition in the guideline for admissions in the Medical College regarding the eligibility that the father of the candidate must continuously reside in Rajasthan for a period of last 10 years in accordance with clause No. 3 C(ii) is duly fulfilled. His submission is that the condition that the candidate should have studied for last at least 5 years during the period of last 10 years in a recognised educational institution in Rajasthan is unreasonable. He has cited D.B. judgment Sandeep Kumar Arya v. The Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan Technical Education Secretariat Jaipur and ors. reported in 1988(2) R.L.R. 157 . 2. Mr. Bhandari has pointed out that in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court the quotas of the candidates for P.M.T. Examination in each of the States have been fixed and the petitioner is eligible to appear in the P.M.T. Examination in Delhi. His contention is that the judgment of the Sandeep Kumar Arya v. The Secretary to the Government and others (supra) is not applicable because that was a case of P.E.T. Examination. 3. I have considered over the matter. The petitioner has already been allowed on 11.9.91 by this Court to appear in the P.M.T. Examination, the result of which is yet to be declared. The language of the cl. (3) (c) (2) and cl. 2(a) as referred in 1988(2) R.L.R. 157 Sandeep Kumar Arya's case (supra) is similar. In the said case the words 'out of the last 10 years' were struck down. In the present case, the notification as used the word 'this period' which refers to the words 'period of last 10 years'. Since the condition has been held unreasonable and struck down for the P.E.T. examination following the same analogy the condition of 'this period' is held unreasonable. The petition is allowed. In the present case, the notification as used the word 'this period' which refers to the words 'period of last 10 years'. Since the condition has been held unreasonable and struck down for the P.E.T. examination following the same analogy the condition of 'this period' is held unreasonable. The petition is allowed. The result of the petitioner may be declared and if she is found eligible for admission the same may be given.Writ Petition allowed. *******