Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Jhantu Chakraborty vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.) on 5 September, 2017
1
138 5.9.2017
jb.
W.P. 16649(W) of 2009
(Jhantu Chakraborty vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Mr. Kalyan Kr. Chakraborty
Mr. Kasinath Bhattacharyya
.... For the Petitioner
Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy
Mr. Pingal Bhattacharyya
.... For the State
In compliance of the order dated 16th August, 2017
Mr. Abhinav Chandra, Director of Employment and
Secretary, Labour Department is present and affidavit in
opposition is filed after serving copy of the same to the
learned advocate for the petitioner who also files reply
thereto.
Since pleadings are exchanged between the parties,
with the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for
hearing and is disposed of by the following order.
The petitioner who is aged about 45 years had
submitted an application for registration of his name as
exempted category candidate before the concerned
authority since the petitioner is a tenure holder of the land
in question, situated at R.S. Plot nos.321,322,442,
492/410, 325 and 323, Mouza Shibrampur, J. L. No. 110
which has been subject to acquisition. Subsequently, he
2
was granted registration by the Director of Employment,
respondent no. 3. Thereafter after accrual of vacancies in
the office of the Land Department, the name of the petitioner was recommended by the concerned employment exchange for appointment to the said office. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner since the petitioner is a tenure holder of the land which has been subject to acquisition, preference has to be given to him under Government Order being no. 295(100)-Emp dated May 12, 2000.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1-3 has placed reliance at paragraph '7.2' of Chapter VII of Registration of Employment Seekers which is reproduced hereinbelow:
"7.2 Applicants above the age of 14 years are eligible for registration but there is no maximum age limit prescribed for registration. Applicants, whose chances of getting employed are remote, being too young or too old, apply for registration the position should be tactfully explained to them and they should be discouraged from registering themselves. If they still insist, they may be registered after obtaining a written statement to the effect that though their chances of employment are remote they still desire to be registered, which will be kept in the record."3
On perusal of the aforesaid paragraph, it reflects that the applicants should be above the 14 years of age though no maximum age limit was prescribed therein and for that reason only the petitioner's application for registration to the employment exchange was considered. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1-3 submits when the vacancies are accrued for recruitment to a concerned department, recruitment rules of the concerned department are to be adhered to and since the petitioner is above the maximum age limit which has been prescribed under the recruitment rules of the Department in question, his application was not considered for appointment to the said department.
In view of the above, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned decision as the petitioner has already become overage by the time he submitted an application. Merely getting his name registered before the concerned employment exchange will not entitle a person for employment in any government department, if he does not come within the eligibility criteria including the age limit under the recruitment rules of the concerned department.
Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
(Rajiv Sharma, J.) 4