JUDGMENT T. Nandakumar Singh, J. 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner, a practicing advocate, is assailing Rule 7 of the Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003, wherein minimum age limit of 35 years is prescribed as an eligibility criteria for direct recruitment to Grade-I of the Tripura Judicial Service for that it is illegal, unconstitutional, inoperative and ultra vires Articles 14, 16 and 233 of the Constitution of India. 2. Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. N.C. Pal, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 1. As agreed to by the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, this writ petition was taken up for disposal at the Motion stage. 3. A short factual resume leading to the filing of the present writ petition is noted. The petitioner had successfully completed five years course of LL.B. in the year 1998 and, thereafter, received the Certificate of enrollment from the Bar Council of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh on 8.12.1999 and started practice in the courts. On 26.8.2009, an advertisement was published inviting applications from the practicing Advocates, belonging to Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes communities who attained the age of thirty five years and must not have attained the age of forty eight years, having at least seven years practice in the courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction, for filling up two posts of Grade-I of the Tripura Judicial Service; one post is reserved for Scheduled Tribes community and one post is reserved for Scheduled Castes community and the said two posts will be treated as unreserved if no suitable candidate is found from the reserved categories and the posts will be filled up by the candidates other than those of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In the said advertisement, it is also mentioned that the eligibility criteria for the candidates for direct recruitment to the said two posts of Grade-I of the Tripura Judicial Service are in accordance with the provision of the Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003 (as amended). 4. In exercise of the powers conferred by provisio to Article 309 read with Article 234 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Tripura was pleased to make, in consultation with the Gauhati High Court and Tripura Public Service Commission, the Rules called "Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003" ('Rules, 2003'). 4. In exercise of the powers conferred by provisio to Article 309 read with Article 234 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Tripura was pleased to make, in consultation with the Gauhati High Court and Tripura Public Service Commission, the Rules called "Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003" ('Rules, 2003'). Rule 7 of the said Rules, 2003 prescribes the method of recruitment, qualification, reservation and age limit of the candidates for the Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I, Grade-II and Grade-III. Since, the present case is concerned with the Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I only, the relevant portion of Rule 7 of the Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003 is quoted hereunder: 7. Method of recruitment, qualification, reservation and age limit. - (1) In respect of each category of posts specified in column (2) of the table below, the method of recruitment and minimum qualification, age limit etc., are specified in the corresponding entries in columns (3) and (4) thereof: Provided that the High Court shall have the power to relax the qualifying period of Judicial Officers for the purpose of promotion in case the same is considered necessary in the public interest. (2) Except as otherwise provided herein, all appointments and promotions to service shall be made against a grade and not against any specific post included in the service. Sl. No. Cadre Method of Recruitment Qualification, age limit etc. 1. 2 3 4 1. Grade-I (i) Not exceeding 25% of the posts in the Grade may be filled by direct recruitment on the basis of the aggregate marks/grade secured in a competitive examination conducted by the High Court, as specified in Schedule B of the Rules. By direct recruitment. Must be holder of degree in law of a recognized University. Must be practicing as an advocate in Courts of Civil and Criminal jurisdiction on the last date fixed for receipt of applications and must have so practiced for a period of not less than seven years as on such date. 3. Must have attained the age of thirty five years and must not have attained the age of forty eight years in the case of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and forty -five years in the case of others, as on the last date fixed for receipt of applications. 3. Must have attained the age of thirty five years and must not have attained the age of forty eight years in the case of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and forty -five years in the case of others, as on the last date fixed for receipt of applications. (ii) 50% of the posts in the Grade shall be filled by promotion from the cadre of Grade-II of the Service on the basis of merit-cum-seniority by the High Lourt, following the criteria in Schedule 'C. (iii) Remaining 25% of the posts in the Grade shall be filled up by promotion strictly on the basis of merit through limited departmental competitive examination conducted by the High Court as specified in Schedule-B of the Rules. 4. Must have been in the cadre of Grade-II for a period of not less than 5 years. Selection Grade Scale. (iv) 25% of the posts in Grade-I shall be in Selection Grade to be filled by promotion by the High Court from the officers in Grade-I in accordance with the procedure laid down in Schedule 'C'. Must have served in Grade-I for not less than five years. Super time Grade Scale (v) 10% of the posts in Grade-I shall be in the Super time Scale to be filled by promotion by the High Court from the officers in Selection Grade in accordance with the procedure laid down in Schedule 'C. Must have served not less than three years in the 5. Super time Grade Scale (v) 10% of the posts in Grade-I shall be in the Super time Scale to be filled by promotion by the High Court from the officers in Selection Grade in accordance with the procedure laid down in Schedule 'C. Must have served not less than three years in the 5. In the present writ petition, amongst other grounds for assailing Rule 7 of the Rules, 2003, more particularly, prescribing the minimum age limit of 35 years as the eligibility criteria for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge of the Tripura Judicial Service are- (i) Article 233 of the Constitution of India, which lays down the eligibility criteria for appointment of the District Judge does not prescribe the minimum age of the candidates for appointment of District Judge by direct recruitment and, therefore, the fixation of minimum age limit for direct recruitment under Rule 7 of the Rules, 2003 is contrary to the mandate under the Constitution of India; and (ii) Constitutional prescriptions shall prevail over legislative enactments and legislative prescriptions must conform to the provisions of the Constitution of India, and cannot act in derogation thereof and for that no minimum age limit have been prescribed for filling up the post of Grade-I on promotion and hence, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 6. It may be profitable for us to refer to the different judicial service of different States before deciding the matter in issue in the present writ petition. The relevant extracts of the Judicial Services of the different States, showing the qualification for direct recruitment to the District Judge/Judicial Service Grade-I are quoted hereunder: Extracts of the Delhi Judicial Service Rules, 1970. 7. Regular Recruitment: _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ 9. Qualification For Direct Recruits shall be as follows: (1) Must be a citizen of India. (2) Must have practiced as an advocate for not less than seven years. (3) Must have attained the age of 35 years and have not attained the age of 45 years on the 1st day of January of the year in which the applications for appointment are invited. Clause (3) of Rule 9 substituted vide Delhi Administration's Notification No. F.6/10/87-Judl., dated 21.5.1990. Extract of The Haryana State - Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963. 8. Recruitment to Service: District Judge. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ 9. Appointment of Direct Recruits. 1. Clause (3) of Rule 9 substituted vide Delhi Administration's Notification No. F.6/10/87-Judl., dated 21.5.1990. Extract of The Haryana State - Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963. 8. Recruitment to Service: District Judge. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ 9. Appointment of Direct Recruits. 1. No person shall be eligible for Direct recruitment unless he: (i) is not less than 35 years and more than 45 years of age on the first day of January next following the year in which his appointment is made. (ii) has been for not less than 10(Ten) years as advocate or a pleader and is recommended by the High Court for such appointment. Extract of The Himachal Pradesh Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1973. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ 9. (1) Appointment of Direct Recruits: (1) No person shall be eligible for direct recruitment unless he: (i) is not less than 35 years and not more than 45 years of age on the first day of January next following the year in which his appointment is made. (ii) Has been for not less than 7 years an advocate or a pleader and is recommended by the High Court, after, it has held an interview or an examination or both as may be prescribed by it, for such appointment. (iii) No person who is recommended by the High Court for appointment under Sub-rule (1) shall be appointed unless he is found physically fit by a Medical Board set up by the Governor and is also found suitable for appointment in all other respects. Extracts of the Madhya Pradesh Uchchtar Nyayik Seva Niyam 1994. 7. Qualification for Direct Recruitment: No person shall be eligible for appointment by direct recruitment unless (a) he is a citizen of India; (b) he has attained the age of 35 years and has not attained the age of 48 years on the first of January of the year in which applications for appointments are invited; (c) he has been for not less than seven years as advocate or a Pleader; (d) he has good character and is of sound health and free from any bodily defect which renders him unfit for such appointment. The procedure of selection for direct recruitment and promotion to categories (a), (b) and (d) of Rule 3(1) be such as may be prescribed by the High Court. The procedure of selection for direct recruitment and promotion to categories (a), (b) and (d) of Rule 3(1) be such as may be prescribed by the High Court. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ Extract of the Orissa Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963 _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ (2) Candidates for direct recruitment to Senior Branch of the service shall- (i) be of at least 7 years standing at the Bar on the 1st August of the year on which the advertisement for receipt of applications is published; and (ii) not be under 35 years of age and over 45 years of age on the 1st August of the year in which the advertisement receipt of applications is published. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ Extract of The Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963. 9. Appointment of Direct Recruits: (1) No person shall be eligible for Direct recruitment unless he -(i) is not less than 35 years and more than 45 years of age on the first day of January next following the year in which his appointment is made; (ii) has been for not less than 10 years an advocate or pleader and is recommended by the High Court for such appointment. (2) No person who is recommended by the High Court for appointment as under Sub-rule (1) shall be appointed unless he is found physically fit by the Medical Board set up by the Governor and is also found suitable for appointment in all other respects. West Bengal. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ (iii) Qualifications: Has been for not less than seven years an advocate or a pleader and is recommended by the High Court for such appointment. Not less than 35 years and not more than 45 years of age on such date as the State Government may fix in this behalf. _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ 7. The Shetty Commission (Commission consisting of Justice K. Jagannatha Shelly, Chairman, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India; Justice A.B. Murgod (Rtd.), Member-Secretary, Judge, Karnataka High Court and Justice P.K. Bahri (Rtd.), Member, Judge, Delhi High Court) had considered the qualification and age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge cadre and made the recommendations vide Chapter-10 of the First National Judicial. Pay Commission, the relevant portions of which, read as follows: (ii) Age Limit: 10.81 Here again we find lot of variance amongst the High Courts. It ranges from 35 to 45 years and 35 to 48 years. Pay Commission, the relevant portions of which, read as follows: (ii) Age Limit: 10.81 Here again we find lot of variance amongst the High Courts. It ranges from 35 to 45 years and 35 to 48 years. 10.82 The grievance of the promotees is that younger elements if inducted into the cadre would impair their promotional chances. There cannot be any doubt in this regard. If candidates at a relatively younger age are taken into service, they would remain longer and march over the promotees for better avenues. The grievance of the service judges in this regard deserves to be removed. 10.83 Some State High Courts have pleaded for the minimum, age of 40. The Judicial Officers' Associations have made similar submissions. It has to be borne in mind that the direct recruits must have sufficient span of service in order to enable them to make some mark and look for career progress. 10.84 Secondly, at the age of 40, people begin to "settle down" with stable commitments. They would make commitment to their family, career, friends or some special interest. When once they make firm commitment in their life, they are unlikely to switch over to service, which entails periodical transfer. They may wait for an opportunity for elevation to High Court if they are realiy busy practitioners. 10.85 Thirdly, at the age of 40, we may get persons who are mostly unsuccessful at the Bar and the very purpose of direct recruitment of young and brilliant advocates may be defeated. 10.86 We are, therefore, of the opinion that the minimum age for direct recruitment should not be kept at 40. 10.87 The next question is whether it is proper not to prescribe any minimum age for such direct recruitment as it has been the practice in some of the States. We do not think that it is a correct practice. Judicial work requires heavy responsibility at the District Judge level by matured people. They are entrusted with the important Sessions trials apart from other diverse works which involve the demand for greater professionalism in the process of judging. It requires proper development of an attitude of mind and compatible behavioral patterns. The constitution provides only the minimum standard with seven years practice at the Bar, but Advocates with seven years practice are sometimes selected as Civil Judge (Junior Division). It requires proper development of an attitude of mind and compatible behavioral patterns. The constitution provides only the minimum standard with seven years practice at the Bar, but Advocates with seven years practice are sometimes selected as Civil Judge (Junior Division). By seven years of practice, one will not get the required maturity to handle Sessions cases. The life and liberty of the persons are at stake in Sessions cases. 10.88 We consider that there should be minimum age for direct recruitment and it should be not less than 35 years. To put it more explicitly, the minimum age should be 35. 10.89 Incidentally, we may state that a District Judge post is equivalent to the post of Secretary in the State Service and Joint Secretary in the Central Government. In the normal course, the IAS Officers reach the post of Secretary/Joint Secretary at the age of 38 at the minimum and 46 at the maximum. We may explain it further: 10.90 The minimum age prescribed for a candidate for IAS recruitment is 21 and the maximum is 30 for general candidates with 5 years extension to SC/ST and 3 years extension for OBC. A candidate who has been selected to IAS cadre at the ago of 22 has to render service for 16 years to become Secretary to the State Government, which is an equivalent post of the District Judge. That means, he would be eligible for the post of Secretary to Government at the age of 38 at the minimum, and 46 at the maximum, depending upon the age at which he has entered the service. With regard to the upper age limit, it seems to us that it should not be more than 45, with relaxation of a few years for SC and ST candidates. Persons beyond the age of 45 will have a short span of service with no scope for any further movement in the judicial career. Such persons would lack enthusiasm for the work and would be a liability than asset to the service. 10.91 Our recommendation about the age range between 35 and 45 is in consonance with the prevailing pattern followed by some States as we have seen earlier. Such persons would lack enthusiasm for the work and would be a liability than asset to the service. 10.91 Our recommendation about the age range between 35 and 45 is in consonance with the prevailing pattern followed by some States as we have seen earlier. Besides, the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Bombay, Delhi, Gauhati, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab & Haryana and Rajasthan have also expressed the view that 35 years should be the minimum and 45 years the maximum limits for direct recruitment of District Judges. 10.92 It may also be stated that a study of job satisfaction as reported by Robertson and Smith (1985) showed hat satisfaction with work tended to increase with age, but that there is a dip in satisfaction in the 40-50 years age group, suggesting that this group is the most difficult to motivate. (See: A Handbook of Personnel Management Practice by Michael Armsrong, p. 273). 10.93 For the aforesaid, we recommend that the candidates for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judges should be between 35 and 45 years and the upper age may be relaxed by 3 years for SC/ST candidates. 8. The Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003 was framed after taking into consideration of the above recommendation of the Shetty Commission. The minimum ago limit prescribed for direct recruitment in Rules 7 of the Rules, 2003 is in conformity with the recommendation of the Shetty Commission. 9. The Apex Court in All India Judges' Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (2002) 4 SCC 247 , had accepted the recommendation of the Shetty Commission, i.e., the First National Judicial Commission with certain modifications not concerning with the minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge. Therefore, the recommendation of the Shetty Commission prescribing, the age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge had been accepted by the Apex Court in All India Judges' Association's case (supra). Para Nos. 37 and 40 of the SCC in All India Judges' Association's case (supra) read as follows: 37. Subject to the various modifications in this judgment, all other recommendations of the Shetty Commission are accepted. 40. Any clarification that may be required in respect of any matter arising out of this decision will be sought only from this Court. Para Nos. 37 and 40 of the SCC in All India Judges' Association's case (supra) read as follows: 37. Subject to the various modifications in this judgment, all other recommendations of the Shetty Commission are accepted. 40. Any clarification that may be required in respect of any matter arising out of this decision will be sought only from this Court. The proceedings, if any, for implementation of the directions given in this judgment shall be filed only in this Court and no other court shall entertain them. 10. In this factual context, we are of the considered view that if any clarification of the decision of the Apex Court in All India Judges' Association's case (supra) regarding the acceptance of the minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge recommended by the Shetty Commission is required, it should be sought only from the Apex Court. 11. The exclusive fields occupied by Articles 233, 234 and 309 of the Constitution of India and the role played by those Articles so far as framing the Recruitment Rules to the Judicial Service had been considered and discussed by the Apex Court (Constitution Bench) in State of Bihar and Anr. v. Bal Mukund Sah and Ors. AIR 2000 SC 1296 . The Apex Court in Bal Mukund Sah's case (supra) held that no recruitment to the post of District Judge can be made by the Governor without recommendation from the High Court. Any statutory provision by passing consultation with the High Court regarding recruitment to the post of District Judge is to be held in direct conflict with the complete Code regarding recruitment and appointment to the post of District Judiciary and Subordinate Judiciary as permitted and envisaged by Articles 283 and 234 of the Constitution of India Article 309, which, on its express terms, is made subject to other provisions of the Constitution, does get circumscribed to the extent to which form its general field of operation is craved out a separate exclusive field for operation by the relevant provisions of articles dealing with Subordinate Judiciary as found in Chapter VI of Part VI of the Consideration. Para Nos. 18 and 19 of the AIR in Bal Mukund Sah's case (supra) read as follows: 18. Part XIV deals with services under the union and the States. Para Nos. 18 and 19 of the AIR in Bal Mukund Sah's case (supra) read as follows: 18. Part XIV deals with services under the union and the States. Chapter I comprising of Articles 308 to 313 deals with services, while Chapter II covering Articles 315 to 323 deals with Public Service Commissions Article308 defines the expression 'State', which shall not include the State of Jammu & Kashmir. However, the relevant article for our present purpose is Article 309 which reads as under: 309. Recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving, the union or a State. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Acts of the appropriate Legislature may regulate the recruitment, and conditions of service of persons appointed, to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the union or of any State: Provided that it shall be competent for the president or such person as he may direct in the case of services and posts in connection with the affairs of the union, and for the Governor of a State or such person as he may direct in the case of services and posts in connection with the affairs of the State, to make rules regulating the recruitment, and the conditions of service of persons appointed, to such services and posts until provision in that behalf is made by or under an Act of the appropriate Legislature under this article, and any rules so made shall have effect subject to the Provisions of any such Act. A mere look at this article shows that it is expressly made subject to other provisions of the Constitution and subject to that, an appropriate Legislature or Governor can regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the State concerned. Proviso to that article permits the Governor of the State to fill up the gap, if there is no such statutory provision governing the aforesaid topics. For that purpose, the Governor may make rules regulating the recruitment and the conditions of service of persons appointed to such services and posts until provision in that behalf is made by or under an Act of the competent Legislature which may intervene and enact appropriate statutory provisions for the same. For that purpose, the Governor may make rules regulating the recruitment and the conditions of service of persons appointed to such services and posts until provision in that behalf is made by or under an Act of the competent Legislature which may intervene and enact appropriate statutory provisions for the same. The manner of recruitment to the services contemplated by Article 309 is provided by Chapter II dealing with the Public Service Commissions. Article320 deals with Functions of Public Service Commissions enjoining them to conduct examinations for appointment to the services of the union and the services of the State respectively. That naturally has a direct linkage with the types of services contemplated by Article 309. Special Scheme for Judicial Services in Part VI (Chapters V. and VI): 19. It is pertinent to note that independently of general provisions of Article 309, the Constitution has made special provisions for certain services. Even if they may be part of public services, still separate Constitutional schemes are envisaged for regulating recruitment and conditions of services of officers governed by such services. 12. From the ratio laid down by the Apex Court (Constitution Bench) in Bal Mukund Sah's case (supra), it is clear that the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India permits the Governor of the State to fill up the gap, of there is no such statutory provision governing the concerned topics. Article 233 of the Constitution of India does not prescribe the minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge, and, therefore, in the exclusive field for operation by the relevant provision of articles dealing with the Subordinate Judiciary found in Chapter VI of Part VI of the Constitution of India, there is a gap so far as minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge is concerned. As such, there is no embargo on the Governor of the State in prescribing the minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge in exercise of his powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. 13. As such, there is no embargo on the Governor of the State in prescribing the minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge in exercise of his powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. 13. This being the settled position of law, we are of the considered view that Rule 7 of the Rules, 2003 wherein minimum age limit for direct recruitment to the Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I is prescribed is not in conflict with the mandate so provided in Article 233 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the case of the petitioner that Rule 7 of the Rules, 2003 is in conflict with Article 233 of the Constitution of India holds little water and, accordingly, not accepted. 14. Regarding the second ground of infringing the equality clause of the Constitution of India, as provided in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India for that in the case of appointment by promotion to the post of District Judge of the Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I, no minimum age limit had been prescribed while prescribing the minimum age limit for appointment by direct recruitment under Rule 7 of the Rules, 2003. It is required to see as to whether the candidate for direct recruitment and the judicial officers for promotion to the post of Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I belonged to the same class or not. The Apex Court (Constitution Bench) in State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa and Ors. AIR 1974 SC 1 , held (para Nos. 35 and 36 of the AIR) as follows: 35. This argument, as presented, is attractive but it assumes in the court a right of scrutiny somewhat wider than is generally recognized. Article 16 of the Constitution which ensures to all citizens equality of opportunity in matters relating to employment is but an instance or incident of the guarantee of equality contained in Article 14. The concept of equal opportunity undoubtedly permeates the whole spectrum of an individual's employment from appointment through promotion and termination to the payment of gratuity and pension. But the concept of equality has an inherent limitation arising from the very nature of the constitutional guarantee. Equality is for equals. That is to say that those; who are similarly circumstanced are entitled to an equal treatment. 36. But the concept of equality has an inherent limitation arising from the very nature of the constitutional guarantee. Equality is for equals. That is to say that those; who are similarly circumstanced are entitled to an equal treatment. 36. Since the constitutional code of equality and equal opportunity is a charter for equals, equality of opportunity in matters of promotion means an equal promotional opportunity for persons who fall, substantially, within the same class. A classification of employees can, therefore, be made for first identifying and then distinguishing members of one class from those of another. 15. It is clear beyond reasonable doubt that the candidates for direct recruitment and officers for promotion to the Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I belonged to different class and they cannot be treated as equal. 16. The Apex Court (Constitution Bench) in Mohammad Shujat All and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 1974 SC 1 631, held (para Nos. 23 of the AIR) as follows: 23. Now we proceed to consider the challenge based on infraction of Articles14 and 16 of the Constitution. Article 14 ensures to every person equality before law and equal protection of the laws and Article 16 lays down that there shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Article 16 is only an instance or incident of the guarantee of equality enshrined in Article 14, it gives effect to the doctrine of equality in the sphere of public employment. The concept of equal opportunity to be found in Article 16 permeates the whole spectrum of an individual's employment from appointment through promotion and termination to the payment of gratuity and pension and gives expression to the ideal of equality of opportunity which is one of the great socio-economic objectives set out in the preamble of the Constitution. The constitutional code of equality and equal opportunity, however, does not mean that the same laws must be applicable to all persons. It does not compel the State to run "all its laws in the channels of general legislation". It recognizes that having regard to differences and disparities which exist among men and things, they cannot all be treated alike by the application of the same laws. It does not compel the State to run "all its laws in the channels of general legislation". It recognizes that having regard to differences and disparities which exist among men and things, they cannot all be treated alike by the application of the same laws. "To recognize marked differences that exist in fact is living law; to disregard practical differences and concentrate on some abstract identities is lifeless logic." Morey v. Baud 354 US 457. The Legislature must necessarily, if it is to be effective at all in solving the manifold problems which continually come before it, enact special legislation directed towards specific ends and limited in its application to special classes of persons or things. "Indeed, the greater part of all legislation is special, either in the extent to which it operates, or the objects sought to be attained by it."(1889) 134 US 594. 17. For the foregoing reasons and discussions, we are of the considered view that this writ petition is devoid of merit and, accordingly, dismissed. Petition dismissed