Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ram Prasad Gadariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 12 May, 2014
W.A. 414/14 12.5.2014
Shri V.D.S.Chouhan, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Government Advocate for the State. This is an appeal under Section 2(1) of M.P.Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 challenging an order dated 24/2/2014 passed by the Writ court in W.P.No.16249/2013.
The petitioner appeared in the eligibility test conducted for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III. The petitioner qualified in the examination and was empaneled for appointment. Thereafter, an advertisement was issued for appointment to the post but on the ground that petitioner was overage the candidature of the petitioner was rejected. Therefore, the petitioner approached this court in W.P. 11506/13 making a compliant that his candidature has been illegally rejected. When the petitioner's candidature was not considered, he filed a writ petition before this court being W.P.No.11506/13 and finally when his representation was rejected on 13/8/2013 he filed the second writ petition W.P.No. 16249/13, and the same having been dismissed on 24/2/2014, this appeal.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the record, it is clear that Clause 8 and 9 of eligibility test and recruitment rules contemplates that a person who has qualified in the eligibility test should not have crossed the maximum age limit and the cut of date fixed is 1st January of the year when the vacancies are notified and the advertisement issued. The matter of the petitioner has been examined by the competent authority and so also by the writ court and it is found that the advertisement was issued in the year 2013 when the vacancies arose and therefore under Clause -9 the cut off date for assessing the maximum and minimum age criteria is 1/1/2013 and petitioner date of birth being 11/6/1967 as on 1/1/2013 he has crossed the age of 45 years which is the maximum age for the recruitment to the post. The petitioner having crossed the maximum age limit as on the cut off date, the writ petition has been dismissed. Even though various averments are made in the petition and Shri V.D.S.Chouhan emphasized petitioner is entitled for relaxation under one time concession in the matter of age relaxation we are unable to accept or repeal to the aforesaid request. Once the petitioner is found to be ineligible having crossed the maximum age limit as on the cut off date as on 1/1/2013, the competent authority and the writ court has not committed any error in dismissing the writ petition. There is no merits in the contention made, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
(Rajendra Menon) (A.K.Sharma)
Judge Judge
sb