WPSB/627/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 3677 UK

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
               AT NAINITAL
          HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI

                                AND

                   HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE

                       17TH NOVEMBER, 2022
         WRIT PETITION (S/B) No. 627 OF 2022

Between:
Suresh Chandra Tamta                                  ........Petitioner.

and

State of Uttarakhand and others.                      ......Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner      :   Ms. Deepa Arya.

Counsel for the respondents     :   Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy
                                    Advocate General for the State of
                                    Uttarakhand / respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
                                    Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for
                                    respondent No. 3.



Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made
the following

JUDGMENT : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)

              The petitioner has filed the Supplementary

Affidavit in terms of the last order disclosing that the

date of birth of the petitioner is 30th June, 1973.                This

means that as on 01.07.2021, he was 48 years and 2

days' old.         The age limit for the General category

candidates is 42 years. However, on account of Covid-

19 pandemic, the age relaxation of one year was given

to all the candidates.        Therefore, the general category

candidates, who were upto 43 years of age as on
 01.07.2021, were entitled to participate in the selection

process. Five years' age relaxation was granted to the

Scheduled Caste category candidates vide order dated

21.05.2005 issued by the State Government. Therefore,

the Scheduled Caste candidates, who were 48 years or

less on 01.07.2021, were entitled to participate in the

selection process.   The petitioner was, therefore, over-

aged by two days.

2.        We are informed that there is no provision for

grant of further age relaxation in the rules or in the

Advertisement.

3.        The case of the petitioner is that in the

previous selection process, which was initiated in the

year 2017, the petitioner was declared successful in the

written examination, but the selection process was

dropped mid-way, and his viva-voce was not conducted.

4.        Be that as it may, that does not vest a right in

the petitioner to seek age relaxation when the same is

not provided for in the rules.

5.        Since the petitioner crossed the age bar of 48

years on 01.07.2021, the petitioner is not entitled to

participate in the selection process in question initiated

vide Advertisement dated 04.12.2021.



                             2
 6.        We, therefore, do not find any merit in this

petition. The writ petition stands dismissed.




                                   ________________
                                    VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.


                                       _____________
                                        R.C. KHULBE, J.

Dt: 17th November, 2022 Rathour