Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
Ritu Garg - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1178 of 2021
Decided On : 29-01-2021
The court affirmed that recruitment criteria, including age reckoning for examinations, fall within the discretion of administrative authorities and are not inherently arbitrary.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 and Article 21 - Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Petitioners sought to challenge the age reckoning for the CGL 2020 examination as unconstitutional - The court held that recruitment conditions, including age limits, are within the employer’s discretion and not arbitrarily set away from public interest. (Paras 3, 6, 11, 17)
(B) Recruitment Policy - Court will not interfere unless action is arbitrary or contrary to constitutional provisions - Eligibility criteria are subject to administrative authority and their discretion is respected. (Paras 12, 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners contended they were deprived of the chance to sit for the CGL 2020 exam due to age reckoning from 1st January 2021, making them ineligible. They argued this was a change from past patterns and sought relief.
Findings of Court:
The fixed age reckoning is lawful, and the petitioners' request for change lacks merit.
Issues: The main issues were the legality of the age reckoning date and its constitutionality.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the autonomy of the employer in fixing recruitment criteria, stating that mere prejudice to candidates isn’t sufficient for judicial interference.
Result: Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts about recruitment and examination notification (Para 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioners argue age reckoning is unfair (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 12) |
| 3. court's analysis on age reckoning legality and discretion (Para 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. petition dismissed with no costs (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT
[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. Nos. 3318/2021 & 3319/2021 (for exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 1178/2021 & CM APPL. 3317/2021 (for ad-interim ex parte relief)
3. The present petition has been listed before us in the post-lunch session, on urgent mentioning. The Petitioners have approached this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, impugning the final order dated 28th January, 2021 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A./100/122/2021 dismissing the Original Application (hereinafter referred to as `O.A.') filed by them. First and foremost, we may note that the transcript of the impugned order is not on record and the present petition has been filed stating that, as noted by the counsel, the Tribunal has pronounced the order orally and dismissed the O.A. filed by the Petitioners.
4. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present petition are as follows. The Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms has constituted a Subordinate Services Commission, subsequently re-designated as the Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter referred to as `SSC') to make recruitment to various class III (now Group "C") posts in various Ministries/Departments of the Government of India and its subordinate offices. The recruitment by the SSC for the vacant post(s) is notified for each year be way of open/public examinations for the respective years. One such examination is Combined Graduate Level Examination [hereinafter referred to as `CGL'], held annually for recruitment to various posts as notified in the notice of examination for each respective year.
5. The SSC issued a notification dated 29th December, 2020 for the Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as `CGL 2020') for filling up of various Group `B' and Group `C' posts in different Ministries/Departments/Organizations. The schedule thereto prescribed dates for the conduct of examination in 2021. The date of age reckoning has been prescribed to be 1st January, 2021 and the last date of applying for such examination is 31st January, 2021.
6. Petitioners contend that due to the non-conduct of the CGL examination in the year 2020, and the subsequent determination of age limit (by fixation of 1st January 2021 as the date of age reckoning vide notification dated 29th December, 2020) for the CGL 2020, they are being deprived of their last opportunity to appear for the said examination, on account of being overage on the said date, and thus, rendered ineligible to appear for the same.
7. In this background, the petitioners first filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No.458/2021 before this Court inter alia seeking urgent reliefs as well as seeking relaxation in the age reckoning as per the notification dated 29th December, 2020. The said petition was however withdrawn, with liberty to avail the alternate remedy by approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
8. Accordingly, the Petitioners filed the afore-stated O.A. before the Tribunal and challenged the CGL 2020, to the extent it fixed the age reckoning date as 1st January 2021 to determine the eligibility of the aspirants, on the ground that it is unconstitutional, discriminatory, arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Tribunal has dismissed the O.A. vide the order impugned in the present petition. Aggrieved with the dismissal, the Petitioners by way of present petition seek a writ of mandamus directing the Re
