Appointments to judicial services of the State should be made only in accordance with the rules made by the Governor under Article 234 of the Constitution after consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court.

Hegde, J.—In this Writ Petition under Article 229 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for a direction to the second respondent requiring it to accept the petitioner's application for being recruited as a Munsiff in the Mysore Judicial Services and proceed on the basis that the said application is a valid application.

2. The material facts of the case are very few. On 25-2-1965, a notification dated 23-2-1965 came to be published in the Official Gazette at the instance of the Second respondent calling for applications for a competitive examination as detailed in appendix I thereof, for recruitment to the cadre of Munsiffs in the Mysore Judicial Service. It was also notified that written examination would be held in the month of April 1965 and viva voce would be held in April and/or May 1965. A copy of that notification is marked as Annexure 'A'.

3. In response to that notification, the petitioner submitted his application on 24-3-1965. The Second respondent by its Order dated 8-4-1965, but served on the petitioner on 16-4-1963, rejected his application on the ground that his age as on 25-3-1965, is 35 years, 10 months and 19 days and hence he was over-aged by 10 months and 19 days. The second respondent opined that the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of Rule 6(4) (b) of the Mysore State Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1957, to be hereinafter referred to as "Rules".

4. The principal question for decision is whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Rule 6(4) (b) of the "Rules". There is no dispute that on 25-3-1965, the petitioner was 35 years 10 months and 19 days. Under the Mysore Munsiffs' (Recruitment) Rules, 1958, every candidate must have attained the age of 23 years, and not have attained, in the case of a candidate who possesses the qualification specified in stub-item (ii) of Item (4) the age of 40 years; in the case of a candidate who possess the qualification specified in sub-item (i) of Item (4) the age of 37 years if he belongs to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes; 35 years if he does not belong to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, on the last date fixed for submission of applications. It is further admitted that the petitioner does not possess the qualifications specified in sub-item (ii) of item (4) in the Table. Therefore, in his case, the 35 years rule applies. But his contention is that in view of rule 6(4) (b), referred to earlier, he was qualified for applying to the post.

5. It may be noted that the petitioner was appointed as a Temporary Munsiff and Magistrate, First Class, under Rule 1S(A) of the Munsiffs' recruitment Rules, as in force then, on 2-9-1961. He continued to hold that post till 31-8-1962. In other words, he was functioning as a temporary Munsiff for a period of 11 months and 28 days. The case for the petitioner is that in view of the temporary post held by him, he was qualified to apply even though he had passed the age of 35 years on 25-3-1965 in view of Rule 6(4) (b) of the "Rules".

6. The Mysore Munsiffs' (Recruitment) Rules, 1958, are special rules dealing with the recruitment of Munsiffs.

7. They were framed under Article 294 read with proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. There are similar rules of recruitment for some of the other departments also. But the "Rules" deal with recruitment generally for the Mysore State Civil Services. Rule 1(3) (a) provides that the "Rules" shall apply to all State Civil Services and to the holders of all posts whether temporary or permanent except to the extent otherwise expressly provided.

8. Rule 6(1) of the "Rules" prescribes the age limit of every candidate for appointment to the State Civil Services by direct recruitment in respect of any post not otherwise provided for in the Rules of Recruitment specially made and applicable in respect of that post: But Sub-rule (4) of that rule says:

"Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-rule (1) the maximum age limit for appointment shall b