High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2045/2019dismissed

Ajay Mishra v. Union Of India

2019-03-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 2045 of 2019 Ajay Mishra S/o Rakesh Mishra, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Near Shukla Gali, Gandhi Chowk, Baloda Bazar, Disrtict- Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Personal Public Grievances And Pensions, Department Of Personal And Training North Block Secretariat (New Delhi)

2. The Joint Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, Dhoulpur House Sahajahan Road, New Delhi ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. A. N. Pandey, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18/03/2019 1.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the advertisement Annexure P-1 published by respondent no.1 dated 19.02.2019. The challenge is to the age criteria fixed by the respondents in the advertisement.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the date of birth of the petitioner is 10.05.1987 and the upper age limit prescribed under the advertisement is 32 years of age. According to the petitioner, he would attain the age of 32 years only in May, 2019 and as such he has not attained the age of 32 years, therefore, he could not have refused

-2permission in filling up the form for participating in the recruitment process.

3. Perusal of the record would show that the date prescribed by the Union of India is as per the office memorandum that is prevalent since July 1988 where the date of determination of age limit has been prescribed as 01.08.1988 which is being followed since then.

4. Given the said fact, that the age criteria prescribed by respondent no.1 is in force and applicable since ages and that there is no deviation made by the respondents while publishing the advertisement Annexure P-1, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the petitioner calling for an interference with the advertisement under challenge.

5. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai