Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(v) Pleased to direct the respondents to make provision for relaxation of upper age limit by 5 years for the candidates belonging to reserved category of EWS, in the Rules of 2010 as well in the notification dated 05.01.2021 (Annexure 1) by issuing appropriate order and corrigendum.

(vi) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit may also be passed in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the humble petitioners."

2. The facts relevant are that the direct recruitment to the District Judge Cadre in the State of Rajasthan is governed by Rules of 2010. Eligibility for direct recruitment to the posts of District Judge Cadre from amongst the advocates is provided under Rule 33 of the Rules of 2010. The High Court under the Rules of 2010 issued an advertisement dated 05.01.2021 inviting applications from the eligible candidates in the prescribed online format for direct recruitment to 60 vacant posts in the cadre of District Judge in accordance with the Rules of 2010. The (3 of 12) [CW-6646/2021] particulars of the total vacancies and the vacancies reserved for various categories including the category of EWS were duly notified. As per the notification issued, 6 posts are reserved for EWS category, which include 1 post for women.

(a) the upper age limit mentioned above shall be relaxed by 5 years, in case of candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, "More Backward Classes and Women Candidates.

....x.xxxxxx........"

4. Apparently, Rule 33 (i)(a) did not provide for relaxation of age in case of candidate belonging to EWS category though, the provision for reservation of the vacancies for Economically Weaker (4 of 12) [CW-6646/2021] Sections was inserted by way of sub-rule (6) of Rule 10 of the Rules of 2010 vide notification dated 21.08.2020 and thus, in the advertisement issued, the relaxation in age was rightly not provided for EWS category.

5. Precisely, the case of the petitioner is that when the relaxation in age is provided for Other Reserved Category candidates i.e. the candidates belonging to SC, ST, OBC, MBC and Women categories, EWS category could not have been picked up for a different treatment being given, particularly when, the required amendment providing 5 years relaxation in upper age limit has already been made in relevant recruitment rules governing other State services in the State of Rajasthan.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the present petition, vide notification dated 30.06.2021 issued by the State Government in consultation with the Rajasthan Public Service Commission and the Rajasthan High Court, has already amended Rule 33 of the Rules of 2010, whereby the expression "Economically Weaker Sections" has been inserted in proviso (a) of sub-rule (i) of Rule 33 after the expression "More Backward Classes" and before the expression "and Women Candidates" and thus, the relaxation in upper age limit stands extended to EWS category as well. Learned counsel submitted that the State Government vide circular dated 07.04.2021 in contemplation of the amendment had directed to defer the recruitment process so as to extend the benefit of the age relaxation to EWS category in the pending recruitment as well where the examination has not been conducted and thus, there is no reason as to why the provision providing for relaxation in upper age limit to EWS category should not be made applicable to the (5 of 12) [CW-6646/2021] recruitment process initiated by the High Court vide notification dated 05.01.2021 issued under the Rules of 2010. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the amendment made, the directions deserve to be issued to the respondents to issue the corrigendum and invite the applications from the candidates belonging to EWS category, who are eligible to apply for recruitment to the post availing the age relaxation. In support of the contention, learned counsel relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Richa Mishra vs. State of Chhatisgarh & Ors.:

9. It is noticed that the provision reserving 10% of vacancies for EWS in the direct recruitment in addition to the existing reservation was incorporated in the Rules of 2010 vide notification dated 21.8.20 but, no relaxation in upper age limit was provided for candidates belonging to the said category. Thus, apparently, the notification inviting applications issued by the respondent not providing for age relaxation to the candidates belonging to EWS category is in conformity with the provisions of Rules of 2010.