Jharkhand High Court
Sujit Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 5282 of 2023
Sujit Kumar Singh, son of Ashok Kumar Singh, aged about 36 years
resident of H.No.93, Chouthai Kulhi, P.O And P.S- Jharia, Dist- Dhanbad.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Chief Secretary, Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Law Secretary, Jharkhand, Ranchi
4. The Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and
Rabhasha, Ranchi
5. The Chairman, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi
6. The Secretary, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi
7. The Controller of examination, Jharkhand Public Service Commission,
Ranchi
8. Registrar General, Jharkhand high Court at Ranchi
... ... ... Respondents
---------
CORAM: SRI SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, C.J.
SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
---------
For the Petitioner: Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Advocate
For the State: Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G.
For the JPSC: Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate
Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate
For the JHC: Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate
---------
02/Dated: 21.09.2023
Let the defects, pointed out by the Office, be removed in course of
the day by filing a fresh affidavit verifying the contents of paragraph 1.
The petitioner has prayed for age relaxation in view of the fact that
for the last five years, there has been no recruitment of the Civil Judge (Jr.
Division) in the State of Jharkhand. At present, an advertisement has been
issued by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission for recruitment of Civil
Judges (Jr. Division) and the petitioner is overage. It is apparent from the
record that there has been no following of guidelines given by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) vs. U.P. Public
Service Commission, (2008) 17 SCC 703.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would rely upon the judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hirandra Kumar vs. High Court
of Judicature at Allahabad & Another, (2020) 17 SCC 401, wherein the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that it should not extend to upper age limit
by predating the cut-off date. However, the fact of that case is different from
the present bunch of cases in the sense that in The Uttar Pradesh Judicial
Service Rules, 1975, a time-limit has been provided in Rule 8 and the upper
age limit has been provided in Rule 12. However, in the rule that guide the
Jharkhand Recruitment for Civil Judges (Jr. Division), there is no such time
limit prescribed. In that view of the matter, the direction given by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan's case (supra) should be followed
by the State of Jharkhand as well as the Jharkhand Public Service
Commission. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to issue notice.
Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to learned A.G., accepts notice on behalf of
respondents-State of Jharkhand; Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel,
accepts notice on behalf of Jharkhand High Court through its Registrar
General, and; Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel, accepts notice on
behalf of Jharkhand Public Service Commission. They have already
received advance copy of the brief.
Let them file counter affidavit within six weeks.
Rejoinder, if any, two weeks thereafter.
Put up this case on 06.12.2023.
In the interregnum, we further direct that the petitioner would be
allowed to fill-in his forms in physical mode within seven days hence and if
he is found otherwise eligible, not on the question of the overage, then he
shall be allowed by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission to take the
examinations. However, the final result shall be subject to the outcome of
the writ petition, with a further stipulation that the petitioner shall not claim
any equity on the basis of the orders passed by us in the interregnum.
Let a free copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Piprawall for early
compliance.
Urgent Certified copies as per rules.
(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, C.J.)
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Manoj/MM
