SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Raj) 1532

B.S.CHAUHAN
Bhoodev – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Parveen Balwada, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - The instant writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner treating him to be within the age limit for the post of Lecturer (Hindi) if he is otherwise found suitable; and also for declaring rule 10 of the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970 as unconstitutional so far as it provides the cut off date mentioned in the advertisement.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that an advertisement dated 20.1.97 was issued to fill up the vacancies of Teachers Grade III under the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970 (for short, "the Rules, 1970"). However,the selection process could not proceed in view thereof. No advertisement could be issued in 1998, 1999 and 2000. However, the respondents issued Advertisement No. 1/2001-02 on 31.5.2001, inviting applications upto 1.8.2001, fixing the maximum age limit of 33 years as on 1.7.2001 (Annx.4). As the petitioner had become over-aged, he claimed that as the advertisement was not issued for three/four consecutive years and the Rules provide for determination of year-wise vacancies, he should be held eligible for the post.

3. As per the provisio
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top