The court affirmed that special age limits for specific categories, like Ex-Servicemen, cannot be combined with general relaxations, maintaining the prescribed upper age of 50 years.

JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. The present D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) has been preferred claiming the following relief:

“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that their D.B. Special Appeal writ petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 11.10.2022 passed by Hon’ble Singh judge in S.B.C.W.P.No. 13347/2017 (Bheem Singh Udawat V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors.) may kindly be set aside.

Any other appropriate order or relief which their Hon’ble court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of their case may kindly also be passed in favour of the humble appellant.”

2. The brief facts of the case, as emerging from the record, are that the Rajasthan Subordinate and Ministerial Service Selection Board issued an advertisement dated 21.09.2016 for direct recruitment to the post of Librarian Grade-III. The advertisement prescribed the general upper-age limit of 35 years as on 01.01.2017, with a further relaxation of three years in terms of the State Government notification dated 23.09.2008. In respect of certain special categories, including Ex-Servicemen, separate upper-age limits were notified under clause 8 of the advertisement, wherein the maximum age prescribed for Ex-Servicemen was 50 years.

2.1. The respondent–writ petitioner applied under the Ex- Servicemen category and appeared in the written examination held on 13.11.2016. Upon declaration of the result dated 28.06.2017, the respondent secured 124.1072 marks, which was the exact cut-off prescribed for the Ex-Servicemen category, and his roll number appeared in the list of provisionally selected candidates.

2.2. The respondent was thereafter called for document verification on 11.07.2017. During the verification process, the Board found the respondent to be 51 years and 6 months of age as on 01.01.2017, and therefore beyond the upper-age limit of 50 years prescribed for Ex-Servicemen under clause 8(8) of the advertisement. On such ground, his candidature was not included in the final select list.

2.3. Aggrieved thereof, the respondent–writ petitioner preferred S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13347/2017 challenging the denial of appointment, inter alia contending that the relaxation of three years—granted to all applicants on account of no recruitment being held in the preceding three years—was also available to Ex- Servicemen, thereby extending their upper-age limit from 50 to 53 years.

2.4. The learned Single Judge, upon consideration of the advertisement and the appended clarification, held that the relaxation of three years was applicable to all candidates irrespective of category, and consequently held the respondent– writ petitioner to be within the permissible age limit. The writ petition was accordingly allowed and a direction was issued to accord appointment, subject to eligibility, with notional benefits.

3. Mr. Priyansh Gopa, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant–Board submitted that the learned Single Judge has failed to correctly appreciate clause 8 of the advertisement dated 21.09.2016, particularly the scheme of age relaxation. It was submitted that the advertisement clearly prescribed a general upper-age limit of 35 years as on 01.01.2017, extendable to 38 years only by virtue of the notification dated 23.09.2008; however, for certain special categories, including Ex-Servicemen, a distinct and independent upper-age limit was separately provided.

3.1. It was further submitted that clause 8(8) of the advertisement explicitly fixes the upper-age limit for Ex- Servicemen at 50 years, subject only to an additional two-year relaxation for recipients of war/Valour distinctions, and that such upper-age limit constitutes a complete code for the said category. The appellant as