High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ajay Kumar Yadav vs Haryana Public Service … on 3 August, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ajay Kumar Yadav vs Haryana Public Service … on 3 August, 2009
Civil Writ Petition No. 9886 of 2009                    1

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                                       Civil Writ Petition No. 9886 of 2009
                                       Date of decision: 3.8.2009

Ajay Kumar Yadav                                             ...petitioner
                             Versus

Haryana Public Service Commission                            ...respondent.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

                       *****
Present:      Mr. S.K. Rana, Advocate
              for the petitioner.

              Mr. H.N. Mehtani, Advocate
              for the respondent/Commission.

                     *****

RANJIT SINGH J.


              Haryana        Public       Service   Commission      issued    an

advertisement, Annexure P-1, for recruitment to the post of Fisheries

Officer/Distt. Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer etc. In all

3 posts were advertised, one of which is reserved for physically

handicapped (blind). The closing date of this advertisement was

27.2.2009, which in case of applicants from Forward Remote Areas

i.e. States/Union Territories of North-East Region, Lakshadweep,

Andaman and Nicobar Island etc. was 6.3.2009. The eligible age for

apply as given in the advertisement was between 17 to 40 years as

on 27.2.2009. In the advertisement itself it was also mentioned that

it shall be 45 years for Scheduled Castes/Tribes, Backward Classes

of Haryana only.

The petitioner being eligible applied for the post meant for

reserved category of backward class. The petitioner, however, was
Civil Writ Petition No. 9886 of 2009 2

informed through communication dated 24.4.2009 that he was

disqualified on the ground that he was over 40 years of age. The

petitioner was also informed that the age in his case could not be

relaxed as per the Government instructions dated 22.7.1997. The

petitioner represented against this order rejecting his candidature on

the ground of age. The petitioner pleaded that he was entitled to be

called for interview as age in his case was relaxable up to 45 years,

he being a backward class category candidate in terms of the

conditions contained in the advertisement, Anneuxre P-1.

Notice of motion was issued. Copy of the reply is handed

over in the Court today and is taken on record. The copy has already

been supplied to counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Mehtani, counsel for the Commission would rely upon

the instructions, Annexure P-4, attached with the petition.

Instructions, Anneuxre P-4 have been issued while amending the

department’s instructions issued on 25.3.1975, to provide that if any

member/members belonging to Scheduled casts/Backward Classes

is/are selected in the open competition for direct recruitment on the

basis of their own merit they will not be counted against the quota

reserved for Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes and that they will

be treated as open competition candidates. It is further mentioned

that such candidate should fulfill conditions of eligibility regarding age

etc. as are meant for general category candidates. No doubt these

instructions would give an indication that a candidate belonging to

reserved category when are to compete in an open competition, the

age which is meant for open category candidate will be applicable to

him as well to see his eligibility. These instructions apparently are
Civil Writ Petition No. 9886 of 2009 3

applicable in those cases where candidates belonging to S.C. and

B.C. are selected on the basis of their merit and not by virtue they

being for reserved category. These instructions apparently were

given go bye in the advertisement, Annexure P-1. The Commission

was fully conscious of this fact that there was no reservation made

for Backward Classes/Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. The

reservation in the advertisement was only for physically handicapped

category. Still no age relaxation was provided for physically

handicapped category. Rather age relaxation apparently has been

provided for in the case of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and

Backward Classes of Haryana only. The advertisement is indicative

of the fact that though scheduled castes/scheduled tribes or

backward classes candidates would compete in the open general

category but would have the relaxation of age by 5 years. They

would thus be considered eligible upto the age of 45 years. There

was no other purpose for prescribing this as a condition in the

advertisement.

The instructions relied upon by Mr. Mehtani apparently

would not apply to the situation at hand. These instructions are

applicable to an eventuality where all reserved category candidates

competing with all comes in overall merit, while considering him in

the general category and not in reserved category. These

instructions would apply to say that his age is to be considered as

that of general category candidate. That is not the situation here.

Here age of the general category candidate was to be between 17 to

40 years whereas in case of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes/

Backward Class of Haryana the age prescribed was 45 years. The
Civil Writ Petition No. 9886 of 2009 4

advertisement thus does not give any indication that this age was not

to be taken into consideration for allowing the candidates of

Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes or Backward Classes of

Haryana.

In the reply, it is not even mentioned that this part of the

advertisement has been so issued by some mistake. The stand,

however, is that this will not make any material difference in view of

the instructions. The conditions in the advertisement will not be

regulated by the instructions that may be available with the

respondent-Commission. Since the petitioner is less than 45 years

of age and is a backward class candidate, he will be eligible to

appointment to the post advertised and cannot be disqualified only

on the ground of being over age.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed. The directions are

hereby issued to respondent-Commission to consider the case of

the petitioner for appointment. Needless to mention that the

petitioner shall be considered on the basis of merit as determined by

the Board if eligible otherwise.

August 03, 2009                                  ( RANJIT SINGH )
rts                                                   JUDGE