S.N. Deedwania, J.-These writ petitions at the stage of admission are being decided by this order. The facts need not be given except that non-petitioner No. 1 plaintiff filed the two suits alleging a right of pre-emotion on the basis of easement. Petitioner-defendant No 1 is the purchaser of these two properties and non-petitioner No. 2 is the seller. It appears that non-petitioner No. 2 was a dominant owner and non -petitioner No. 1 plaintiff was a servant owner. The writ petitions are filed presumably under Article 228 of the Constitution. The vires of Section 6 (1) (iii) is sought to be challenged, which reads as under “Section 6. Persons to whom pre-emption accrues-

(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the right of pre-emption in respect of any immovable property transferred shall accrue to and vest in, the following classes of persons, namely -

(i) and (ii)

(iii) owners of property servient or dominant to the property transferred.” It is argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the react of pre-emption is a personal right and is discriminatory against the petitioner as Article 14 of the Constitution prohibits the discrimination against any cit