Gujarat High Court
Vankar Girishkumar Hirabhai vs State Of Gujarat on 27 November, 2025
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1265 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15790 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1265 of 2025
==========================================================
VANKAR GIRISHKUMAR HIRABHAI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SHACHI G MATHUR(3069) for the Appellant(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MS SHRUTI DHRUVE, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
Date : 27/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)
1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Sachi G. Mathur for the appellant.
2. By this appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order dated Page 1 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined 03.02.2025 passed by learned Single Judge whereby prayer of the appellants to participate in the recruitment process by relaxing the age limit is rejected on the ground that the appellants failed to show any exception to interfere with administrative directions and policy matters while exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants original petitioners have made a prayer in Special Civil Application to direct the respondents to give relaxation in upper age limit and grant age relaxation upto four years in the recruitment process of the Advertisement Nos. 3 of 2024 and 4 of 2024 issued by the Page 2 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined respondent no.3 Gujarat State Primary Education Selection Committee for the post of Vidhya Sahayak in Standard 1 to 5 and Standard 6 to 8. It was also prayed to quash and set aside the recruitment process.
4. So far as prayer for granting relaxation in age limit by 4 years, it was submitted by the learned advocate Ms. Sachi Mathur appearing for the appellants original petitioners that respondent no.3 is required to conduct the recruitment process to the post of Vidhya Sahayak as per the calendar of 10 years and from 2017 to 2022, no recruitment was made and thereafter only in the year 2022, recruitment process was undertaken for only 500 posts and thereafter recruitment Page 3 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined process for 12,000 vacancies were undertaken in the year 2024. It was therefore, submitted that the age limit ought to have been relaxed to enable the appellants to participate in recruitment process of the year 2024.
5. It was further submitted that decision in case of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and others v. Sajal Kumar Roy and others reported in (2006) 8 SCC 671, referred to and relied upon by the learned Single Judge, as relied on behalf of the respondents, could not have been applied to the post of Vidhya Sahayak in Standard 1 to 5 and Standard 6 to 8 as the said decision is pertaining to recruitment of the clerical staff and not the teaching staff.
Page 4 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined
6. It was submitted that the respondents are also required to relax the age limit as the age limit for appearing in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) examination was extended, as passing of TAT examination is an eligibility criteria to participate in recruitment of Vidhya Sahayak.
7. Having heard the learned advocate for the appellant, it appears that the learned Single Judge after considering the facts of the case and decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and others (supra) has come to the conclusion that power of relaxation can be exercised in public interest only in a given case. Reliance was also made to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in case Page 5 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined of Dr. Ami Lal Bhat v. State of Rajasthan and others reported in (1997) 6 SCC 614 wherein it is held that powers of discretion of relaxation of age by the authority can be exercised in a given case in public interest only if the suitable candidates are not available for the post and to mitigate hardships in a given case.
In facts of the case, the appellants petitioners though were eligible to participate in the recruitment process conducted in 2022 but could not qualify, therefore it cannot be said that the appellants have been denied chance of availing the benefit of recruitment process.
8. The contention raised on behalf of the appellants that only because there was an Page 6 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined age relaxation given for appearing in TET examination, the respondents are bound to grant the age relaxation for the recruitment of the Vidhya Sahayak in the advertisement issued in the year 2024, is without any basis as the object and purpose of TET examination is different than the recruitment to the post of Vidhya Sahayak and when the age limit prescribed by the respondents is a policy matter.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ugar Sugar Works Ltd. v. Delhi Administration and others reported in (2001) 3 Supreme Court Cases 635 and in case of Directorate of Film Festivals and others v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain and others reported in (2007) 4 Supreme Court Cases 737 has held that High Court should not interfere in the policy matters while exercising Page 7 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. Learned Single Judge has therefore, rightly held while dismissing the petition as under :
"7. This Court put a specific query to learned advocate Mr. Chudasama that when the last time the advertisement was issued by the State Government for recruitment to the post of Vidhayasahayak, learned advocate Mr. Chudasama was fair enough to state that last time the advertisement was issued in the year 2022 but at that time only around 500 posts were advertised whereas this time around only 12,000 vacancies in all in respect of both the advertisements are issued and the petitioners are not in a position to participate only on account that they have attained the upper age limit. Therefore, in light of above submissions, the matter was considered.
8. It is true that the petitioners have crossed the upper age limit but at the same time it is equally true that in the year 2022 also an Page 8 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined advertisement was published and at that time also the petitioners should have participated in the recruitment. Further though learned advocate Mr. Chudasama had pointed out at the instances by the State Government by way of Government Resolution that the upper age limit is relaxed in respect of certain recruitment process and more particularly in respect of recruitment of Vidhasahayak as well in the year 2024 itself but at the same time, learned advocate Mr. Chudasama failed to point out that it is obligatory on the part of State to relax the age. Further learned advocate Mr. Chudasama also could not demonstrate the fact that there is any illegality or incompetence in fixing the upper age limit and therefore, the submissions of learned advocate Mr. Chudasama required to be seen in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by learned AGP Ms. Calla in case of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and others V/s. Sajal Kumar Roy and Others reported in (2006) 8 SCC 671 wherein the Hon'ble Court in paragraphs no. 11, 12 and 13 has observed as under:-
"11. The Respondents are not members of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. Age limit Page 9 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined is prescribed for appointment to the general category of employees. The upper age-limit for appointment to the post of LDC is 25 years. The advertisement also says so.
The Rules, as noticed
hereinbefore, are in two
parts. The first part talks about the age-limit. The second part provides for relaxation. Such relaxation can be granted for the purpose specified i.e., in favour of those who answered the descriptions stated therein. Relaxation of age- limit even in relation to the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribe candidates or the retrenched Central Government employees, including the defence personnel is, however, not automatic. The appointing authorities are required to apply their mind while exercising their discretionary jurisdiction to relax the age- limits. Discretion of the authorities is required to be exercised only for deserving candidates and upon recommendations of the Appointing Committee/Selection Committee. The requirements to comply with the rules, it is trite, were required to be complied with fairly and Page 10 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined reasonably. They were bound by the rules. The discretionary jurisdiction could be exercised for relaxation of age provided for in the rules and within the four corners thereof. As the respondents do not come within the purview of the exception contained in Article 45 of the Education Code, in our opinion, the Tribunal and consequently, the High Court committed a manifest error in issuing the aforementioned directions.
12. In Food Corporation of India v. Bhanu Lodh this Court stated the law thus : (SCC p. 628, para 23) "....While the maximum age prescribed under the Recruitment Rules is 35/40 years for the posts concerned, departmental candidates in the age of 52-53 years were proposed to be appointed. Even assuming that there is a power of relaxation under the Regulations, we think that the power of relaxation cannot be exercised in such a manner that it completely distorts the Regulations. The power of relaxation is Page 11 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined intended to be used in marginal cases where exceptionally qualified candidates are available. We do not think that they are intended as an 'open sesame' for all and sundry. The wholesale go-
by given to the
Regulations, and the
manner in which the
recruitment process was
being done, was very much reviewable as a policy directive, in exercise of the power of the Central Government under Section 6(2) of the Act."
13. Yet again in Dr. Ami Lal Bhat (Dr.) v. State of Rajasthan the law is stated in the following terms : (SCC pp. 620-21, paras 10-11) "10.... In other words, what is contended is that if on the date when the vacancy occurred, the candidates were within the maximum age prescribed by reference to the cut-off date, then if the advertisement is delayed, their age should be considered with reference to the cut-off date of 1st January following the date Page 12 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined of occurrence of vacancy.
For example, if the vacancy has occurred on 1st of April of a given year, and the applicant would be within the maximum age on the 1st of January of the following year, then such a candidate will be considered as eligible even if the advertisement is issued not in April of that year but say February of the following year. All the candidates will get age relaxation of one year.
11. In our view this kind of an interpretation cannot be given to a rule for relaxation of age. The power of relaxation is required to be exercised in public interest in a given case; as for example, if other suitable candidates are not available for the post, and the only candidate who is suitable has crossed the maximum age-limit; or to mitigate hardship in a given case. Such a relaxation in special circumstances of a given case is to be exercised by Page 13 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined the administration after referring that case to the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. There cannot be any wholesale relaxation because the advertisement is delayed or because the vacancy occurred earlier especially when there is no allegation of any mala fides in connection with any delay in issuing an advertisement. This kind of power of wholesale relaxation would make for total uncertainty in determining the maximum age of a candidate. It might be unfair to a large number of candidates who might be similarly situated, but who may not apply, thinking that they are age-barred. We fail to see how the power of relaxation can be exercised in the manner contended."
The above paragraphs would indicate that the power of relaxation is required to be exercised in public interest only in a given case and not in every case. Further Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. Amitlal Bhat V/s. State of Rajsthan reported in Page 14 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined 1997 6 SCC 614 held that the power of relaxation of age is required to be exercised in public interest in a given case and only when if the suitable candidates are not available for the post and all to mitigate hardship in a given case.
9. In view of above decisions, when the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically stated that only in a given case, considering the special circumstances, the upper age limit can be relaxed and as in the instant case, the advertisement for recruitment to the post of Vidhayasahayak was issued in the year 2022 and Government Resolution dated 30.07.2024 indicates that even in the year 2024 also such advertisement for recruitment to the post of Vidhyasahayak was issued and learned advocate Mr. Chudasama also could not deny the aforesaid fact which would indicate that the recruitment process for appointment to the post of Vidhyasahayak is a regular process that Government is carried out every year, no exceptional case is made out or no case is made out by learned advocate Mr. Chudasama to indicate that there is any delay in issuing the advertisement by the State Government once the number of posts fell vacant."
Page 15 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1265/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined
10. In view of the foregoing reasons, we do not see any reason to interfere in the impugned judgment and order. Hence, the advertisement for recruitment to the post of Vidhya Sahayak issued by respondents is in regular course of its recruitment process and the appellants have failed to make out any special case for age relaxation which may be granted by the respondents.
11. Appeal therefore, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.
12. Civil Application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) (L. S. PIRZADA, J) RAGHUNATH R NAIR Page 16 of 16 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Mon Dec 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 01 21:01:44 IST 2025