JUDGMENT 1. - Petitioner sought admission in the First Year T.D.C. Course in respondent No. 2, College, for the academic year 1997-98. He has, however, been denied the admission because he was not given the weightage of 2% marks, which is given to the candidates who have passed the qualifying examination from the District of Jhunjhunu, where the respondent No. 2, College is situated/located, as he passed the qualifying examination from Jodhpur District. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition. 2. In the case of State of Rajasthan and another v. Dr. Ashok Kumar Gupta and others (1989)1 SCC 93 , a provision/policy of giving 5% weightage of marks to the candidates graduating from the Rajasthan University, was declared unconstitutional. Hon'ble The Supreme Court has observed as under: "The High Court has struck down as unconstitutional the impugned provisions embodied in note (d)(ii) of Ordinance 278-E mainly on the ground that coupled with the institutional preference accorded under clause (i) it would virtually amount to making 100 per cent reservation in favour of the students of the Rajasthan University in the sense that no other student of any other University would have any reasonable chance to secure admission to these courses, relying on the principle enunciated in Nidamarti Mahesh Kumar v. State of Maharashtra . The reasoning is reflected in the following passage extracted from paragraph 25 of the judgment under appeal: Thus, after having given 5 per cent weightage on the ground of institutional preference that a candidate has passed his final MBBS examination from the University of Rajasthan, further 5 per cent weightage on the ground that he has passed his MBBS final examination from the Medical College where he seeks admission, in post-graduate course, is unreasonable and arbitrary and does not stand the touchstone of Article 14 of the Constitution. If 10 per cent weightage is given as aforesaid it will come to 275 marks and with this increase in marks no candidate from University other than University of Rajasthan can get admission to post-graduate course in any one of the medical colleges. It is against the equality clause as it amounts to cent per cent reservation as 10 per cent weightage in admission to post graduate course to a student, 5% weightage, on the University basis and 5 per cent on the institutional basis, amounts to total exclusion of candidates of other Universities. It is against the equality clause as it amounts to cent per cent reservation as 10 per cent weightage in admission to post graduate course to a student, 5% weightage, on the University basis and 5 per cent on the institutional basis, amounts to total exclusion of candidates of other Universities. We have already referred to the admissions for the years 1986 and 1987 and at the cost of repetition we may say that a look at Schedules 'A' and 'B' regarding admissions in SMS Medical College, Jaipur in post-graduate courses for the year 1986 and 1987 respectively will show that not a single candidate from the University of Rajasthan could seek admission." 3. In the case of Miss Nirmala Agrawal v. University of Rajasthan & another 1992(3) WLC (Raj.) 508 , this Court has held the policy of giving additional weightage of 5% marks to those belonging to the Colleges in Jaipur City, to be arbitrary and unconstitutional. 4. The contention of the respondents that provision/policy that if a candidate seeking admission has passed the eligibility examination from a district which is not within the area of the College where the admission is sought, then a candidate is required minimum 55% marks while a candidate of the same district is required to secure lesser percentage of marks, having been followed, would not make any difference because consequence is the same. Giving preference to the candidates belonging to a particular district and giving additional weightage to the candidates of that district, amount to the same consequence, and as such, the provisions of 55% marks cannot be said to be reasonable and constitutional. 5. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. The proposition of giving 2% weightage to the candidates belonging to the concerned district and fixing higher percentage of marks to the candidates belonging to the particular district, is declared unconstitutional and is struck down. However, since the academic session 1997-98 is over, no purpose would be served by giving admission to the petitioner. The respondents, are, therefore, directed to admit the petitioner in the next academic session.Writ Petition Allowed - Respondents Directed to Admit Petitioner Next Year, Current Session Having Been over. *******