A. K. MATHUR, J. ( 1 ) BY this petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction annulling the scheme of enlisting licensing of tourist guides and controlling and restricting their profession by mere executive fiat varying from time to time without the sanction of any law. The petitioners have further sought a direction that the respondents may be directed to create some autonomous body to regulate and control tourism like other profession. It is also prayed that respondents may be prohibited and restricted from regulating this business. ( 2 ) BRIEF facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner No. 1 is a Tourist Approved Guide Association, Khajuraho and Shri O. P. Sharma is the President along with Shri Sudhir Sharma, Gangaprasad and Brijendra Singh who are working as guides at Khajuraho, Distt. Chhatarpur, M. P. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 are members of this Association. It is alleged that Govt. of India invites applications by advertising in newspapers for suitable candidates for enrolment by selection of guide training course consisting of lectures in History of India, Indian Art, Culture, Dance, Archaeology, Architecture, Wild life, Aviation, Transportation, Functions of travelling Agencies including ticketing, Reservation, Hotels, Airports. etc. . Candidates were required to go through comprehensive written test and those qualified in the test are then given identity cards to operate as approved guides in a certain region subject to certain terms and conditions. It is alleged that some terms and conditions were laid down in 1976-77 and candidates who accepted those terms and conditions, were issued identity cards. Their licences are renewable from time to time. It is alleged that applications for tourist guide training course are invited through advertisements region-wise from time to time and Khajuraho tourist centre is covered by the Regional Office at Bombay. First such applications were invited in 1968 and after 1968, advertisements have been issued in 1970, 1976, 1986 and 1989, last such advertisement was issued as per this petition, in March 1991. Copy thereof has been filed as Annexure P-2. ( 3 ) GRIEVANCE of the petitioners is that respondents are arbitrarily taking this test and granting licence and there is no law authorising them for holding the tests and granting licence and renewing them. Therefore, they have challenged by this petition the action of the State being unreasonable, arbitrary and violative of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. ( 3 ) GRIEVANCE of the petitioners is that respondents are arbitrarily taking this test and granting licence and there is no law authorising them for holding the tests and granting licence and renewing them. Therefore, they have challenged by this petition the action of the State being unreasonable, arbitrary and violative of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. It is also pointed out that the age of superannuation has been fixed as 60 years which has no nexus. It is alleged that there is no regularity in holding the course, there are no guiding principles, there is no authority for the respondents to fix numbers, there are no fixed guidelines and there is no uniformity. It is submitted that the licence granted to such paying guides for a period of one year has to be renewed and there are no guidelines how the renewal can be withheld and for suspension. It is also said that the guidelines laid down by them are arbitrary. It is alleged that clause 2 of 1986 terms makes the travel guide liable for disciplinary action. Petitioners have also challenged clause 10 of the 1986 terms which enjoins on the tourist guides a duty to take the tourist to only establishments/shops approved by the Department of Tourism in preference to unapproved shops/establishments. They have also challenged clause 14 of the terms and conditions of 1986 which makes the guide liable for certain penalties in case of late arrival. They have also challenged clause 26 which provides that if the guide remains absent from active guiding service for a period exceeding two years due to reasons of health, absence from country etc. , he/she shall be deemed to have left the profession and in that event, the licence/identity card of the guide shall stand cancelled. Petitioners have also challenged the fee fixed for each tourist guides. In this background, the guidelines which were issued way back in 1986, are challenged in this petition. ( 4 ) RETURN has been filed by the respondents. It is pointed out in the return that the tourist industry is a growing industry and in the present day, tourism has considerably increased as the tourists all over the world are coming. There is also increase in domestic tourism. ( 4 ) RETURN has been filed by the respondents. It is pointed out in the return that the tourist industry is a growing industry and in the present day, tourism has considerably increased as the tourists all over the world are coming. There is also increase in domestic tourism. In the additional return filed by the respondents, it has been pointed out that after the guidelines of 1986, new guidelines have been issued and in that case, the Govt. of India has revised the guidelines for direct selection of guides effective from February 1996 with respect of academic qualifications, screening procedure etc. . Along with this also were issued Annexure I, syllabus for guide training course for Regional Level Guides and State Level Guides, syllabus of guide training course for State Level Guides (Annexure P-II) and terms and conditions regulating the conduct and purpose of approved guides (Annexure P-III ). It is also pointed out that grant of licence for tourist guides is regulated by the Act known as Ancient Monuments of Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, (for short, the Act of 1958 ). Section 2 (a) of the Act defines 'ancient monument' which reads as under :"2 (A ). 'ancient monument' means any structure, erection or monument, or any tumulus or place of interment, or any cave rock sculpture, inscription or monolith, which is of historical, archaeological or artistic interest and which has been in existence for not less than one hundred years, and includes- (i) the remains of an ancient monument, (ii) the site of an ancient monument, (iii) such portion of land adjoining the site of an ancient monument as may be required for fencing or covering in or otherwise preserving such monument, and (iv) the means of access to, and convenient inspection of an ancient monument. "'antiquity' has been defined in Section 2 (b) which reads as under :"2 (b ). "'antiquity' has been defined in Section 2 (b) which reads as under :"2 (b ). 'antiquity' includes - (i) any coin, sculpture, manuscript, epigraph, or other work of art or craftsmanship, (ii) any article, object or thing detached from a building or cave, (iii) any article, object or thing illustrative of science, art, crafts, literature, religion, customs, morals or politics in bygone ages, (iv) any article, object or thing of historical interest, and (v) any article, object or thing declared by the Central Government by notification in the official gazette, to be an antiquity for the purposes of this Act,which has been in existence for not less than one hundred years. "'protected area' has been defined in Section 2 (i) which reads as under :"2 (i) 'protected area' means any archaeological site and remains which is declared to be of national importance by or under this Act. "'protected monument' has been defined in Section 2 (j) which reads as under :"2 (j ). 'protected monument' means an ancient monument which is declared to be of national importance by or under this Act. "section 4 reads as under :"power of Central Government to declare ancient monuments etc. to be of national importance - (1) Where the Central Government is of opinion that any ancient monument or archeological site and remains not included in Section 3 is of national importance, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, give two months' notice of its intention to declare such ancient monument or archaeological site and remains to be of national importance; and a copy of every such notification shall be affixed in a conspicuous place near the monument or site and remains, as the case may be. (2) Any person interested in any such ancient monument or archaeological site and remains may, within two months after the issue of the notification, object to the declaration of the monument, or the archeological site and remains, to be of national importance. (3) On the expiry of the said period of two months, the Central Government may, after considering the objections, if any, received by it, declare by notification in the Official Gazette, the ancient monument or the archaeological site and remains, as the case may be, to be of national importance. (3) On the expiry of the said period of two months, the Central Government may, after considering the objections, if any, received by it, declare by notification in the Official Gazette, the ancient monument or the archaeological site and remains, as the case may be, to be of national importance. (4) A notification published under sub-Section (3) shall, unless and until it is withdrawn, be conclusive evidence of the fact that the ancient monument or the archaeological site and remains to which it relates is of national importance for the purposes of this Act. "section 3 reads as under :" 3. Certain ancient monuments etc. deemed to be of national importance -All ancient and historical monuments and all archaeological sites and remains which have been declared by the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of National Importance) Act 1951, or by Section 126 of the States Reorganisation Act 1956, to be of national importance shall be deemed to be ancient and historical monuments or archaeological sites and remains declared to be of national importance for the purposes of this Act. "in pursuance of this, the Central Government has, from time to time, declared certain monuments to beprotected ones. ( 5 ) SO far as we are concerned in the present case, Khajuraho has been declared to be a protected monument. Section 38 empowers the Central Government to frame rules. In pursuance of this power, the Central Government has framed Rules known as 'ancient Monuments of Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959. " Rule 8 deals with prohibition of certain acts within monuments which reads as under :"8. Section 38 empowers the Central Government to frame rules. In pursuance of this power, the Central Government has framed Rules known as 'ancient Monuments of Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959. " Rule 8 deals with prohibition of certain acts within monuments which reads as under :"8. Prohibition of certain acts within monuments -No person shall, within a protected monument - (a) do any act which causes or is likely to cause damage or injury to any part of the monument; or (b) discharge any fire-arms; or (c) cook or consume food except in areas, if any, permitted to be used for that purpose; or (d) hawk or sell any goods or wares of canvass any custom for such goods or wares or display any advertisement in any form or show a visitor round for monetary consideration except under the authority of or under and in accordance with the conditions of a licence granted by an archaeological officer; or (e) beg for alms; or (f) violate any practice, image or custom applicable to or observed in the monument; or (g) being, for any purpose other than the maintenance of the monument - (i) any animal, or (ii) any vehicle except in areas reserved for the parking thereof. "as per Clause (d) of Rule 8, no person unauthorised can conduct any tourist to protected monuments without licence. ( 6 ) IN order to regulate grant of licence to such guides, the Government of India has issued from time to time, guidelines. At the time when this petition was filed, the guidelines of 1986 were in force, but subsequently, the Government of India has issued fresh guidelines of 1996, known as 'revised Guidelines' in which the entire set up has been explained that there should be Regional Guides, State Level Guides and Local Guides. For selection of Regional Level Guides, minimum qualification has been prescribed. Then there are State Level Guides. Detailed procedure has been laid down that selection shall be made by a Screening Committee by advertising the post and Rule 9 says that those who are trained guides will be given identity cards valid for a period of one year by the Tourist Office for Regional Guides and this will be renewed on yearly basis and subject to performance and other conditions till they retire after attaining the age of 65 years. Condition No. 9 reads as under :"9 (a) A trained guide will be given an identity Card valid for a period of one year by the Government of India Tourist Office for Regional Guides. These would be renewed on a yearly basis and would be subject to their performance and other conditions till they retire after attaining the age of 65 years. (b) Similar procedure for issue of identity Cards to the State Level trainedguides/local guides will be followed by the State Government. "then there is syllabus for guide training course for Regional Level Guides, (Annexure 1 ). In this syllabus, they have provided for training in History of India from 16th Century to present day, India since independence and other details. Culture, Religion, Music, Sculpture, Fauna and Flora and other details have also been provided in the syllabus for State Level Guides. (Annexure II ). Annexure III deals with terms and conditions regulating conduct and performance of approved guides. Those who are approved guides after undergoing training and selection, have to be regulated and for that revised guidelines have been laid down. It says that the approved guide will be issued identity card which will not be transferable. It lays down that the guide will not seek gifts, or he will be properly dressed in a presentable manner and he will not enter into any other business, he will take tourists for sight seeing to monuments for which payments have been prescribed. In Clause (23), it is also provided that when a complaint is received against the Regional Level Guide, then the concerned Government of India Tourist Office will issue a show cause notice to the said guide giving him an opportunity to submit a representation against the allegations levelled against him and within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the show cause notice, he will have to file a reply. Thereafter action can be taken against such guide. Thus the business of tourism has also been regulated by the Act and Rules framed by Parliament. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has especially submitted that providing the age of 65 years in the rules in the guidelines is nothing but arbitrary and without any nexus. Though in the earlier guidelines, the age was 60 years, but in the new guidelines of 1996, it has been enhanced to 65 years. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has especially submitted that providing the age of 65 years in the rules in the guidelines is nothing but arbitrary and without any nexus. Though in the earlier guidelines, the age was 60 years, but in the new guidelines of 1996, it has been enhanced to 65 years. Learned counsel submitted that providing the age of superannuation has no relevance, as those licensed guides are not in service and they are not servants of the Government of India or of any department. It is submitted that by providing the age of superannuation, the respondents are regulating the right of profession and, therefore, Clause 17 of earlier 1986 guidelines which is analogous to Clause 9 (a) of the new guidelines of 1996 are ultra vires. ( 8 ) LEARNED counsel for the Government of India seriously contested the matter and submitted that as Tourist Industry is one of the growing industries in India and tourists are coming from all over the world as well as domestic tourists, therefore, this industry has to be properly regulated and for that purpose, certain rules and guidelines have been issued so that there should not be any cheating by unlicensed guides and visitors may be informed with correct historical background. If the guide is well versed in history of a particular monument in its background, intricacies, then the tourists will be properly served. Therefore, need arose to regulate and accordingly the rules of 1959 were framed and guidelines of 1986 and now 1996 have been issued. ( 9 ) LEARNED counsel for Union of India invited our attention to decisions of Allahabad High Court in case of Virendra Kumar Chadda v. Union of India, (Civil Misc. W. P. No. 10714/91, dated 10-9-92 ). As against this, learned counsel for petitioners invited our attention to the decision of Single Bench in case of Jagmohanlal Mehra v. The Union of India, (Civil Misc. W. P. No. 19141/85, decided on 21-10-1997) ( 10 ) AFTER hearing both learned counsel for parties, we are of the opinion that looking to the growing tourism traffic in our country, internationally and domestically, there is need to regulate the tourist industry. It cannot be gainsaid that large number of international tourists are visiting India and Indian culture and History are being exposed to the world through this International Tourism. It cannot be gainsaid that large number of international tourists are visiting India and Indian culture and History are being exposed to the world through this International Tourism. Likewise, there is a great increase in domestic tourism also. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate this growing industry in the country and for that, the rules and guidelines framed by the Union of India are seriously warranted. If trained guides are not available, then the tourism is going to be seriously affected and likewise there will be serious misrepresentation, about the ancient Indian History and culture by the untrained and unscrupulous guides. Therefore, it is need of the day that proper tourist guides should be made available and they should be trained in the history and culture of the monuments so that they can properly guide the tourists and inform them the historical background of those ancient monuments. ( 11 ) SO far as violation of Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution is concerned, suffice it to say that all citizens of India are entitled to profess their own business or profession. But at the same time, as per Clause (6), State can regulate this freedom for the benefit of general public. After giving our best consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel, we are of opinion that this regulation of the tourist industry nowhere violates the right of the persons who are engaged in this profession or business. Only they have been asked to be properly trained for this profession or business. Since it is a growing industry, those who are engaged in their business or profession, they need to be properly trained for discharging their profession properly and in an effective manner. Thus this reasonable restriction imposed by the State that tourist guides will have to undergo proper training and obtain licence cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said to be violative of Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. These are reasonable restrictions for larger interest of the industry and for the public at large so that tourists can take advantage of proper guide and their inquisitiveness can be properly satisfied by competent persons who are well versed about the Indian culture and history. In this view of the matter, we are of opinion that the submission of the learned counsel that these guidelines violate the right to profession or business cannot be sustained. In this view of the matter, we are of opinion that the submission of the learned counsel that these guidelines violate the right to profession or business cannot be sustained. ( 12 ) AS to the specific challenge for providing age of superannuation, suffice it to say that the State can regulate business and lay down the terms and conditions and one of the conditions is the age of the guide which is maximum 65 years. This job of guiding the tourists requires that the persons should be physically and mentally fit to discharge their duties. Therefore, the condition has further laid down that the licence shall be renewed from year to year basis so that if the incumbent is not physically and mentally fit, then his licence may not be renewed. Therefore, in order to function as an effective guide, one needs to be mentally and physically fit to discharge his duties. In case the incumbent is not physically and mentally fit, then he will not be able to discharge his duties properly. In this background, prescribing the maximum age for such guide to 65 years, in our opinion, cannot be said to be illegal or violative of Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. Since these persons are free to profess their business or profession and this profession or business is not exclusive, but is of public nature and they are serving the public, therefore, they have to be mentally and physically fit and providing age of 65 years appears to be just and reasonable and cannot be said to be violative of Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. The age of superannuation is not always necessarily related to the Government service, though the expression 'superannuation' has relevance for the incumbent who is to retire from service, but at the same time, when the specialised job like the present one where the trained tourist guide has to perform his service to the public, therefore, he needs to be properly, mentally and physically fit to discharge his duties. Thus in this view of the matter, prescribing of age is not void. ( 13 ) SIMILAR question had come up before the Allahabad High Court in case of Virendra Kumar Chadda, (1995 (1) All CJ 448) (supra) in which validity of Clause (17) of the terms and conditions was challenged. Thus in this view of the matter, prescribing of age is not void. ( 13 ) SIMILAR question had come up before the Allahabad High Court in case of Virendra Kumar Chadda, (1995 (1) All CJ 448) (supra) in which validity of Clause (17) of the terms and conditions was challenged. Earlier the terms and conditions had provided the age of 60 years and that came up before the Division Bench of Allahabad High Court and their Lordships upheld providing the age of 60 years and in this connection, reference was made to a decision of Delhi High Court in case of J. K. Agrawal v. Union of India, (Writ Petn. No. 948/70, dated 16-5-80 ). Their Lordships upheld on the basis of reasoning of the Delhi High Court that if younger guides are available, they will be more energetic and of greater assistance to the tourists. Their Lordships have upheld the fixing of age of 60 years. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners invited our attention to the single Bench of Allahabad High Court in case of Jagmohanlal Mehra (1998 (32) All LR 13) (supra) which appears to be per incuriam, as the decision of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court was not brought to its notice. As such, the view taken by the learned Single Judge of Allahabad High Court cannot be of any assistance. ( 14 ) AS a result of the above discussion, there is no merit in this Writ Petition which is dismissed. Petition dismissed. .