Judgment GYAN SUDHA MISRA, J. ( 1 ) THE question that falls for consideration under the admitted facts and circumstances of this case is one of discrimination between married and unmarried girls on the ground of their domicile while granting admission into the Post-Graduate Course of Medicine. ( 2 ) THE circumstances which give rise to this question is that the petitioner Miss Sharda Meel who is a bona fide resident of Rajasthan, after having passed the MBBS from Chandigarh appeared in the Pre-P. G. Entrance Examination held in the year 1997-98 and having been declared successful in the same, appeared for the interview for admission into the course. Just on the verge of her admission, a letter was issued to her dated 2-9-97 as contained in Ex. 8 of this writ petition, whereas she was informed that although she has passed out the Pre-P. G. Entrance Test, it was detected in course of the interview that she had passed out MBBS from Chandigarh which made her ineligible for admission in P. G. Course in Rajasthan in view of the provision under Ordinance 278-E, Clause (iii ). Since the whole case hinges upon this Ordinance which is coming in the way of the petitioner, it is relevant to quote the same for facility of reference, which is as under :-"ordi. 278-E. Eligibility for admission. (iii) For seats not reserved in the sub-clause (II), candidates must have passed final MBBS Examination from the University of Rajasthan or the candidates should have been nominee of the Rajasthan Government and was admitted to the M. B. B. S. Course as State nominee in a Medical College outside the State of Rajasthan and has obtained the M. B. B. S. Degree from a Medical College from outside the State of Rajasthan, whereby they secured admission on All India Competitive basis. Besides, those lady doctor/spouse who are not born in Rajasthan and because of their marriage they have become bona fide residents of Rajasthan, shall also be eligible subject to the condition that they have passed their M. B. B. S. examination from a Medical College, recognised by Medical Council of India. Besides, those lady doctor/spouse who are not born in Rajasthan and because of their marriage they have become bona fide residents of Rajasthan, shall also be eligible subject to the condition that they have passed their M. B. B. S. examination from a Medical College, recognised by Medical Council of India. " ( 3 ) THE whole objection of the respondents while denying admission to the petitioner in the P. G. course is based on the fact that she is ineligible for a seat into the course as she is not seeking a seat in the P. G. course by virtue of her marriage in Rajasthan nor she has obtained her MBBS degree from any of the University of Rajasthan. ( 4 ) THE petitioner, therefore, has moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 2-9-97 whereby she has been held ineligible for admission in the Post-Graduate (M. D.) course as per clause (iii) of ordinance 278-E on account of her passing the MBBS Course not from a college in Rajasthan, but from Chandigarh. The background of the petitioner is that she is the daughter of a retired Jr. Warrant Officer of Indian Air Force Sri Suraj Mal Meel who retired on 31st January, 1993 from his post but he is admittedly a bona fide resident of Rajasthan. At the time of retirement of the petitioners father Sri Meel, the petitioner was studying in MBBS in Govt. Medical College at Chandigarh where she had been admitted through open competition. While pursuing her course, she continued to live with her parents at Chandigarh and did not prefer to appear in the Pre-Medical Admission Test in Rajasthan since she had already qualified in the MBBS Course at Chandigarh. The petitioners father after retirement intended to settle down in his home State at Jaipur and he applied for issuance of the Identity Card as Ex-Servicemen to the Secretary, District Sainik Board, Jaipur and the said Identity Card was issued to him in the month of February, 1993. The Pre-Post-Graduate Entrance Examination in 1997-98 was thereafter announced in Rajasthan which was held from 16-3-97. Since the petitioner by this time had completed her MBBS at Chandigarh as also Internship in January, 1997, she opted to accompany her father and preferred to shift to Rajasthan for her P. G. Course. The Pre-Post-Graduate Entrance Examination in 1997-98 was thereafter announced in Rajasthan which was held from 16-3-97. Since the petitioner by this time had completed her MBBS at Chandigarh as also Internship in January, 1997, she opted to accompany her father and preferred to shift to Rajasthan for her P. G. Course. She applied for the Entrance Test along with a bona fide resident certificate which was issued to her on 29-12-90 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Fatehpur since she intended to appear in MBBS Examination from Rajasthan. The result of the Pre-P. G. was announced on 25th May, 1997 wherein the petitioner was assigned Merit No. 181. She was thereafter interviewed on 9th August, 1997 and was offered M. D. Chest and Tuberculosis. Suddenly it struck to the interviewing authorities that she had passed out her MBBS from Govt. College, Chandigarh and hence it was enquired from her whether she is married or unmarried. Since she was unmarried, she disclosed it but also informed them that she is a bona fide resident of Rajasthan and is the daughter of a retired Defence Personnel who had settled in Jaipur and she had been accompanying her father for her studies wherever he was posted. This information came as a stumbling block in the way of the petitioners admission in the P. G. Course since the Convenor of the Admission Board informed the petitioner that her case would be referred to the Vice-Chancellor for seeking clarification with regard to Clause (iii) to Ordinance 278-E as to whether she was eligible for admission. She then submitted an application to the Vice-Chancellor clarifying the entire position and requesting for early decision but the same did not meet with any response. She further followed up the matter by another application on 19th August, 1997 to the Principal, S. M. S. Medical College and again on 23rd August, 1997 to the Vice-Chancellor. Her case was then referred to the Principal-cum-Controller-cum-Convenor of P. G. Admission Board on 2-9-97 and thereafter the impugned letter dated 2-9-97 was sent to her informing her that she was not qualified for a P. G. seat in medicine since Ordinance 278-E, Clause (iii) holds her ineligible for a seat. Her case was then referred to the Principal-cum-Controller-cum-Convenor of P. G. Admission Board on 2-9-97 and thereafter the impugned letter dated 2-9-97 was sent to her informing her that she was not qualified for a P. G. seat in medicine since Ordinance 278-E, Clause (iii) holds her ineligible for a seat. According to the interpretation of the concerned authorities, a girl student although may be a bona fide resident of Rajasthan, she is not eligible for P. G. seat in Rajasthan unless she has passed out the MBBS course from Rajasthan. Exception, however, has been made in case of male/female students who have studied in a Medical College from outside Rajasthan on a seat under State quota and relaxation has also been made in case of girl students who although may have passed out MBBS from a Medical College other than Rajasthan State, but have migrated to Rajasthan by virtue of her marriage to someone in Rajasthan. ( 5 ) THE petitioner on receipt of the letter dated 2-9-97 holding her ineligible, had no choice than to assail it before this Court. ( 6 ) CHALLENGING the impugned letter dated 2-9-97, it has been contended that Clause (iii) of Ordinance 278-E does not restrict a natural born bona fide resident lady doctor of Rajasthan for admission in a P. G. Course on passing MBBS from a Medical College other than the State of Rajasthan. According to the petitioner, the said clause creates no bar for those women doctors who are bona fide residents of Rajasthan from getting admission into the course. She has further relied upon her factual background and it has been submitted on her behalf that she had been living out of Rajasthan by virtue of her fathers transfer and if a concession can be made in case of those lady doctors who although have studied from a Medical College outside the State of Rajasthan, but due to her marriage has migrated to Rajasthan, there is no reason why a girl like the petitioner, who is a bona fide resident of Rajasthan, should be held disqualified for admission merely because she has obtained her M. B. B. S. Degree from a Medical College of a different State. It has further been emphasised that she is eligible for admission even as per Clause (iii) of Ordinance 278-E since it is implied therein that it does not operate as a bar for the bona fide residents of girl students of Rajasthan from seeking admission in the P. G. Course. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the State of Rajasthan as also the University of Rajasthan, however, have supported the interpretation made by the respondent-authorities of the Ordinance 278-E, Clause (iii) and have contended that Clause (iii) of Ordinance 278-E makes it amply clear that only those lady doctors/spouse, who although are not born in Rajasthan and have not done M. B. B. S. from Rajasthan but because of their marriage have become bona fide resident of Rajasthan are only eligible for admission into the P. G. Course and the bona fide resident of Rajasthan can lay their claim for a seat into the P. G. Course provided they have passed out their MBBS from the State of Rajasthan. They have further tried to impress upon that such reservation is clearly permissible and is not against any constitutional provision. In support of this assertion reliance has been placed on AIR 1995 SC 955 : (1995 AIR SCW 914), Anant Madan v. State of Haryana, which had been decided along with 3 other cases. This decision, in turn, had relied upon a case, reported in AIR 1984 SC 1428, Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India, decided along with a group of several other writ petitions. ( 8 ) IT is no doubt true that in these decisions reservation on basis of residence requirement within the State and institutional preference have been protected to a certain extent and has been held that :"a certain percentage of reservation on the basis of residence requirement may legitimately be made in order to equalize opportunities for medical admission on a broader basis, to bring about real not formal, actual and not merely legal equality. " ( 9 ) HOWEVER, it has been further held therein that such reservation should in no event exceed the outer limit of 70% of the total number of open seats after taking into account other kinds of reservation validly made and in Pradeep Jains case (AIR 1984 SC 1428) (supra) wholesale reservation made by some of the State Governments on the basis of domicile or residence requirement within the State or on the basis of institutional preference for students who have passed the qualifying examination held by the University or the State excluding all students not satisfying these requirements regardless of merit have been held unconstitutional and void as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It is also equally true that in Anant Madans case ( AIR 1995 SC 955 ) (supra), the criteria requiring that the candidates should have studied their 10, 10+1 and 10+2 classes as regular candidates in recognised institutions of the State of Haryana itself before seeking admission to a Medical College in that State has been upheld by the Apex Court but in the instant case, the question under challenge is not against reservation but is one of broadening the scope of reservation to a bona fide resident of Rajasthan who is a girl student on the interpretation of Ordinance 278-E of the University of Rajasthan as to whether a bona fide resident of Rajasthan can be held ineligible for admission in P. G. Course merely because she has obtained her MBBS Degree from a Medical College from outside the State of Rajasthan. The relevant portion of Clause (iii) of Ordinance 278-E may be reiterated :-"besides those lady doctors/spouse who are not born in Rajasthan and because of their marriage they have become bona fide residents of Rajasthan, shall also be eligible subject to the condition that they have passed their M. B. B. S. examination from a Medical College, recognised by Medical Council of India. " ( 10 ) THE thrust of the Ordinance no doubt is on the fact that if a student has obtained MBBS Degree from outside the State of Rajasthan, he would be eligible to secure admission in P. G. Course on All India Competitive basis, nevertheless a concession has been made in case of all those lady doctors who although are neither born in Rajasthan nor studied in Rajasthan but because of their marriage have become bona fide residents of Rajasthan have also been held eligible for admission into P. G. Course provided they have obtained MBBS Degree from a Medical College recognised by the Medical Council of India. Protection has also been granted to those students who are nominees of Rajasthan Government and admitted to MBBS Course as State nominee in a Medical College outside the State of Rajasthan and thus obtained MBBS Degree from a Medical College from outside the State of Rajasthan since they failed to secure admission on All India Competitive basis. Thus it cannot be construed that the ground of domicile/residence has not been granted protection under Ordinance 278-E (iii ). As already stated the Ordinance further stretches benefit to married lady doctors who are not born in Rajasthan and grants them protection so that they should not be put to inconvenience by virtue of the change of their residence and migration to Rajasthan on account of their marriage to a boy settled in Rajasthan. ( 11 ) IN my opinion, if protection can be granted to married girl student who become bona fide resident of Rajasthan by virtue of her marriage by granting her exemption from condition of obtaining the M. B. B. S. Degree from Rajasthan, then an unmarried girl student who is already a bona fide resident of Rajasthan, but who by virtue of her fathers transfer has studied outside the State of Rajasthan and after the retirement of her father, repatriates to Rajasthan, will have to be treated into one and the same category as that of the married girl student who settles in Rajasthan by marriage so that she can be put to minimum inconvenience by virtue of the fact that she had not much choice in the matter while leaving the State of Rajasthan. Discrimination between married girls and unmarried girls who usually is forced by the circumstances to accompany her parents in the event of their transfer, is clearly arbitrary and no such inference can be clearly drawn from Ordinance 278-E (iii) nor the same appears to be the intention of the Ordinance. My view finds support also from AIR 1989 SC 1568 , Meenakshi Mallick v. University of Delhi, wherein a Bench of 3-Judges of the Apex Court had an occasion to deal with a similar situation as in this case. In that matter Rule for admission into the Medical College in Delhi laid down a condition of schooling for last 2 years in a school in Delhi. The petitioner-Meenakshi Mallick in the said case although had studied in Delhi all through, she was held ineligible for admission on the ground that last 2 years of study in the school before seeking admission in the Medical College was not in Delhi. This was so because she had been compelled to leave India for a foreign country by reason of the posting of her parent by the Government to a foreign country, as a result of which she was denied admission for not fulfilling the condition that she should have received the last 2 years of education in a school in Delhi. The condition was held to be unreasonable by the Apex Court when applied in the case of candidates who could not fulfil the condition due to transfer of her parent. It was held therein that the condition in prescription of qualification for admission to a Medical College in Delhi providing the last 2 years of education to be in a school in Delhi should be construed as not applicable to a student who had to leave India on account of their parents or the parent being posted to a foreign country by the Government. The learned Judges therein had taken into account that the rigour of the condition prescribing that the last 2 years of education should be received in a school in Delhi should be relaxed and there should be no insistence on the fulfilment of that condition in the case of students of parents who are transferred to a foreign country by the Government and who are, therefore, required to leave India along with them the learned Judges had held as follows :-"rules are intended to be reasonable, and should take into account the variety of circumstances in which those whom the rules seek to govern find themselves. We are of the opinion that the condition in the prescription of qualifications for admission to a Medical College in Delhi providing that the last 2 years of education should be in a school in Delhi should be construed as not applicable to students who have to leave India with their parents on the parent being posted to a foreign country by the Government. " ( 12 ) I find complete identity in the situation of Meenakshi Mallick with the case of the petitioner, besides the fact that the thrust of Ordinance 278-E, Clause (iii) is to protect a girl candidate to meet the force of circumstances in case she has to migrate to Rajasthan due to her marriage. If protection has been granted to married girl student who although has not done her M. B. B. S. from Rajasthan by allowing her to seek admission in P. G. Course treating her a bona fide resident of Rajasthan then I see no reason why a girl who is already a bona fide resident of Rajasthan but is unmarried and had to repatriate to Rajasthan along with her retired parents should not be kept on par with married girls migrating to Rajasthan by virtue of marriage. Interpretation of the Ordinance and absence of such consideration in regard to unmarried girl students who are already bona fide residents of Rajasthan but were forced to leave the State by virtue of the transfer of her parents, clearly results into unjust discrimination by creating artificial barrier. Interpretation of the Ordinance and absence of such consideration in regard to unmarried girl students who are already bona fide residents of Rajasthan but were forced to leave the State by virtue of the transfer of her parents, clearly results into unjust discrimination by creating artificial barrier. The Ordinance has further taken care to protect even those students who had failed to qualify for a seat in the State of Rajasthan and studied out of Rajasthan on a seat falling under the State quota but a student who is bona fide resident of Rajasthan and had succeeded in acquiring a seat outside the State of Rajasthan is sought to be disqualified on the basis of an interpretation of the Ordinance which clearly results in arbitrary and unjust discrimination. The interpretation made by the respondents of Clause (iii) to Ordinance 278-E of the University of Rajasthan, in my view, therefore, is clearly erroneous as it suffers from the vice of discrimination and denial of equal opportunity to similarly situated girl candidates who have to be repatriated due to their circumstances. In my considered opinion, therefore, a girl student migrating to Rajasthan by virtue of marriage and an unmarried girl repatriating to Rajasthan by virtue of her parents retirement will have to be placed into one and the same category and two yardsticks cannot be applied for married and unmarried girls where both have to meet with a situation where she is hardly left with any choice as already held by the learned Judge of the Supreme Court in Meenakshi Mallicks case holding that "rules are intended to be reasonable and should take into account the variety of circumstances. " ( 13 ) THE petitioner, therefore, who was already qualified for a seat in the M. D. Course will be entitled to a seat in the M. D. Chest and Tuberculosis or in any of the subjects wherein she is fit to be admitted. The writ petition thus stands allowed but in the circumstances without any order as to costs. Petition allowed. .