Upper Primary Teacher Recruitment UP / Allahabad Highcourt : Age Related Matter Old Petition Where Age Relaxation Demanded and No Relief, However after that Candidates are allowed to Apply till 40 Yrs Age By Making Changes in Online Advt by Basic Edu Dept.
Note - Below is case before 20th Sept. 2013, And in last week of Sept Govt. gives necessary relaxation
**********
If I am not correct at any stage/point then you may brought to my notice relevant and correct information.
**********
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 1
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 50723 of 2013
Petitioner :- Anshul Kumar Agarwal And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K.Singh,Ajay Singh Maurya,Babu Lal Ram
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K.Yadav
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioners who are two in number have approached this Court with a request to quash the impugned advertisement dated 11.7.2013 and 27.8.2013 issued by the Principal Secretary Basic Education Government of U.P. in consonance with the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Services (16th Amendment) Rules, 2012 regarding fixation of age.
As per advertisement in question, which has been so published, inviting application for consideration of candidature of candidates, for being appointed as teachers in the subject of Maths and Science, requisite age limit has been prescribed as� 21 years as on 1.7.2013 and not more 35 years as on 1.7.2013. Accepted position is that both the petitioners have crossed 35 years of age on 1.7.2013 and this has impelled the petitioners to be before this Court questioning the validity of aforementioned rule in question by contending that at various places, age has been extended upto 40 years, and in view of this such a� restriction for consideration of candidature of candidate only upto 35 years as on 1.7.2013 is bad and State should be directed to extend the age for consideration of candidature upto 40 years for being appointed as Assistant Teacher in Junior High School.
Request made by the petitioners cannot be accepted for the simple reason that once rule making authority has proceeded to frame rule known as U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Services Rules, 1981, and in the aforementioned rules in question, once age which a candidate is required to possess has been provided for and thereafter, is in consonance with the same advertisement, has been published on 11.7.2013 and 27.8.2013 fixing minimum and maximum age of candidate has to have on 1.7.2013, then in case claim of petitioners is accepted, then same� would be in violation of Rules in question. Once validity of rules has not been questioned by the petitioners, and reason appears to be is obvious� as competence of authority� to frame Rules, perhaps can not be� disputed by the petitioners. Once rule making authority� has framed rule and has chosen to fix minimum and maximum age limit for appointment,� and in view of the same, petitioners are out of zone of consideration, then petitioners cannot� claim, that their claim should be� considered as a matter of right for extension of age.
Petitioners have tried to contend before this Court that in other government services, State Government has taken policy decision and has introduced the amendment known as Uttar Pradesh� Recruitment to Service ( Age Limit) (10th Amendment), Rules, 2012 and therein age prescribed as 35� has been extended to� 40 years and based on the same benefits be extended to them also. Said rule cannot be� pressed and invoked, said rules are applicable qua the� incumbents whose service rules are to be framed by the Governor under� the proviso of Article 309 of the Constitution, in view of this no benefit or advantage can be derived� by the petitioners of the� aforementioned Rule.
Once such is the factual situation that� selection/appointment is governed by statutory rules in question known as Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Services� Rules, 1981 as amended� till date� and minimum and maximum age limit has been prescribed,� therein in view of this,� once petitioners are not at all� falling within the zone of consideration then no relief or reprieve can be accorded to them, as law on the subject is clear that fixation of eligibility criteria and fixation of age limit� all are in the realm of policy making of State Government.
Consequently, present writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 18.9.2013
T.S.
Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2804658
