1. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. By this application, the petitioner prays for quashing of order, as contained in annexure 3 dated 4.1.2000, whereby and whereunder his claim for regularisation on the post of Dafadar has been rejected.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was working as substitute Dafadar since 30th October, 1988 and after serving under the respondents for more than ten years now his claim for regularisation has been rejected.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein it is stated that while considering the case of the petitioner for his regularisation on the post of Dafadar, he was medically examined to determine his age and the Civil Surgeon on 23.7.1999 determined the age of the petitioner as 50 years and the claim of the petitioner, thus, was considered by the Establishment Committee of the Chowkidar and Dafadar on 4.1.2000. It is also mentioned in the counter affidavit that the committee, however, resolved that since the petitioner is 50 years old, he is not eligible for the post of Dafadar as per the Rule of the State Government, and, accordingly, his claim was rejected. It has further been mentioned in the counter affidavit that the petitioner belonged to general category and the maximum age limit for appointment on the post of Dafadar is 35 years.

5. It appears that the claim of the petitioner was examined by the authorities and since he was found overage, his claim for appointment was rejected by the Establishment Committee aforesaid.

6. The action of the respondent, in that view of the matter, cannot be said to be arbitrary, unreasonable and without jurisdiction.

7. It is not the case of the petitioner that he has not been paid his remuneration for the period he has rendered his services.

8. For the reasons and discussions aforementioned, I do not find any merit in this application.

9. It is, accordingly, dismissed.