Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The question now comes in reference to the Notification dated 23.9.2008. It is contended that though advertisement was issued in the month of July, 2008, giving out last date of submission of application forms by 20.8.2008, which is prior to the notification dated 23.9.2008 but the age of a candidate is to be determined as on 1.1.2009 thus aforesaid date is subsequent to the issuance of the notification granting three years' relaxation in age.

The aforesaid issue has been answered by this court in the case of Inder Bhan Singh Gujar (supra). In the aforesaid case, a candidate was required to be not less than 20 years and more than 23 years of age as on 1.1.1997. Petitioner, therein, completed age of 23 years in October, 1996 thus was treated as ineligible. The advertisement therein was issued on 23.1.1996 and, subsequently, vide notification dated 13.11.1996, two years' age relaxation was provided for the candidates belonging to OBC category. It was thus argued that age of the candidates to be determined as on 1.1.1997 hence notification should be applied to his case as it has been issued prior to the crucial date for determination of age i.e. 1.1.1997. Therein, even cut off date of 1.1.1997 was also challenged. The Division Bench of this court did not accept the aforesaid argument. For ready reference, relevant para of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereasunder-

Having heard learned counsel and having perused the record, we find no force in this appeal. Apart from the reasons given by the learned Single Judge in his order, we find that the writ petition could be thrown out on the sole ground of the appellant not coming to the court with clean hands. The appellant's conduct in applying for the post fully knowing that he was not eligible because of his having become overage, by itself was sufficient to deny any equitable or discretionary relief to him. When the appellant applied for the post, the notification relaxing the age for OBC candidates was not in existence. It came 7-8 months after the last date for submission of application forms and five months after the examination was held. Even the result of the examination was declared two months prior to the date of notification relaxing the age limit for OBC candidates. Granting relief to the appellant would be nothing else but rewarding him for his audacity in applying for a post fully knowing that he had become over age for the post and was not eligible for making application. It will also set a bad example because a candidate who abides by the rules in force for the time being and respecting the rules does not apply when he knows that he is not eligible for the post and has become overage, would feel cheated and think that if he had also applied for the post, he could have taken advantage of notification subsequently issued relaxing the age limit. The responsible, self-disciplined and law abiding citizens would be put in a disadvantageous position and those who do not care for the rules and apply for a post knowing fully well that they are ineligible, would be in an advantageous position. Such a thing cannot be allowed to happen.