Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

1. This judgment shall dispose of the present writ petition and its connected matters CWP Nos. 1347, 1354, 1355, 1374, 1375, 1384, 1393, 1413, 1416, 1501, 1504 to 1508, 1517 and 1524 of 2018. The petitioners in these writ petitions except in CWP No. 1501 of 2018 and respondents No. 4 to 7 in this writ petition are the children of bona fide Himachalis either employed in private sector or being in private occupation outside the State of Himachal Pradesh. The petitioner in CWP No. 1501 of 2018 and respondents No. 4 to 7 in this petition are the children of bona fide Himachalis employed either in the Central Government departments/other State Governments/local and other authorities owned and controlled by the Central Government/other State Governments. In Himachal Pradesh, in terms of item No. IV (A) 1 of the Prospectus published for the academic session 2018-19, one of the eligibility conditions is passing of two examinations out of the following four from the schools situated within the territory of Himachal Pradesh:

(a) Middle or equivalent

(b) Matric or equivalent

(c) 10+1 or equivalent

(d) 10+2 or equivalent.

2. In the recent past, the exemption from the condition of passing two examinations out of four indicated above was available to the category of the petitioners and that of the category of the petitioner in CWP No. 1501 of 2018 under clause 3(ii) and 3(iv) read with Note 1 below it as is apparent from the Prospectus up to the academic session 2017-18. However, in the Prospectus published by the respondents for admission to the MBBS/BDS courses in the colleges situated in the State for the academic session 2018-19, the provisions i.e. item No. 3(iv), words “private occupation” in Clause 3 and Note 1 stands deleted and thereby the exemption from passing the condition of two examinations from the schools situated in the State of Himachal Pradesh has been withdrawn. While clause 3 (iv) was deleted well before the publication of Prospectus, the Note 1 and words “private occupation” in clause 3 of main item No. IV (A) were deleted vide Corrigendum dated 12.6.2018 Annexure P-10 and Corrigendum-II dated 13.6.2018 Annexure P-12. Since the petitioners in these writ petitions except respondents No. 4 to 7 in this petition and petitioner in CWP No. 1501 of 2018 have assailed the decision so taken by the respondents on the grounds of being discriminatory, arbitrary, illegal, un-Constitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on several grounds, particularly that allowing such exemption to the category of the petitioner in CWP No. 1501 of 2018 and respondents No. 4 t0 7 in the main writ petition under clause 3(ii) of main item No. IV (A) in the Prospectus, therefore, the parties on both sides were heard at length on 26.6.2018 and even on 5.7.2018 also.

3. As a matter of fact, on hearing arguments on 26.6.2018, the writ petitions were posted for pronouncement of judgment to 29.6.2018, however, instead of pronouncement of judgment, a detailed order has been passed on that day for the reasons recorded therein as without hearing the candidates qualified for appearance in counseling from the exempted category 3(ii) of item No. IV (A) in the Prospectus, it was deemed appropriate not to dispose of the writ petitions finally without hearing the candidates belonging to above said exempted category. However, not only the petitioners in these writ petitions except in CWP No. 1501 of 2018 were allowed to participate in the counseling but those qualified from exempted category 3(ii) supra were also allowed to appear in counseling provisionally with a direction to the respondents not to admit them to the course without the leave of the Court.

4. The candidates belonging to the exempted category i.e. clause 3(ii) have now filed CWP No. 1501 of 2018 and also sought their impleadment in the main matter i.e. CWP No. 1353 of 2018. Though, they have not filed response to the civil writ petition but the