Rajasthan High Court Directs State to Consider Age Relaxation for SI Aspirants Amidst Tainted 2021 Exam Fallout

Jaipur: In a significant ruling offering a ray of hope to thousands of government job aspirants, the Rajasthan High Court has directed the state government to consider granting age relaxation to candidates applying for the Sub Inspector (SI) recruitment of 2025. The bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Jain issued the directive while hearing a batch of writ petitions filed by candidates who had appeared in the controversial 2021 SI examination and were now over the age limit for the new recruitment drive.

The court acknowledged the "limbo" and "uncertainty" faced by students due to the previous recruitment process being marred by allegations of mass-scale paper leaks, corruption, and cheating, which led to a single-judge bench recommending its cancellation.

Background of the Case

The petitioners, led by Suraj Mal Meena, were candidates in the Sub Inspector Recruitment Examination, 2021. This recruitment process became embroiled in controversy, with a coordinate bench of the High Court terming it "tainted," "shameful," and "bogus" due to widespread malpractices, allegedly involving members of the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC). While that matter is pending before a Division Bench, the state initiated a fresh recruitment process through an advertisement dated July 17, 2025.

The petitioners argued that due to the significant time gap of over four years between the 2021 and 2025 advertisements, they had become over-aged. The 2025 advertisement provided a standard three-year relaxation, but this was insufficient for many who were eligible in 2021. They sought an additional age relaxation to be considered eligible for the new examination.

Arguments and Court's Observations

The state government, represented by AAG Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, cited precedent arguing that age relaxation is within the employer's domain and cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

However, the court took a sympathetic view of the candidates' plight, highlighting the state's failure to conduct fair and transparent examinations. Justice Jain made pointed observations about the loss of public faith in the examination system, citing international media reports on organized crime exploiting the desperation for government jobs in India.

> "The candidates particularly youth and students have a right of fair chance as enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 read with Article 21 of the Constitution of India and they are entitled to demand a fair competition on recruitment of public post," the court observed.

Legal Principles Applied

The court's decision hinged on the interpretation of Rule 46 of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 . This rule empowers the administrative department of the government to relax rules concerning age and experience based on the circumstances and hardship faced by candidates.

The court identified several compelling reasons for the government to exercise this power:

1. The 2021 recruitment process remains under a legal cloud, having been deemed "bogus" by a single-judge bench.

2. Candidates are constitutionally entitled to a "fair chance" at public employment.

3. Rule 46 explicitly provides a mechanism for the government to grant relaxation in such circumstances.

4. The time gap between the two advertisements is nearly four years, while the provided relaxation is only for three years.

5. A government-constituted sub-committee had already recommended considering age relaxation in future exams.

Final Decision and Directions

While refraining from directly ordering the age relaxation, which it noted is a policy matter for the executive, the High Court disposed of the petitions with a series of directions:

• Consideration by State: The government is directed to consider granting age relaxation to candidates who appeared in the 2021 SI exam and have applied for the 2025 exam, taking the court's observations into account. A decision must be made within eight weeks .
• Provisional Appearance: Affirming its interim orders, the court directed the RPSC to allow all petitioners to provisionally appear in the upcoming examination.
• Declaration of Results: The RPSC is also directed to declare the results of these candidates.
• Right to Re-approach Court: If any successful candidate is aggrieved by the government's final decision on age relaxation, they will have the right to file a fresh writ petition.

The court clarified that it has not expressed a final opinion on the merits of the legal issue, leaving it open for future consideration if necessary. This order provides a crucial interim relief, ensuring that deserving candidates are not disqualified from the recruitment process due to administrative delays and a flawed past examination.