HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
Suraj Mal Meena S/o Nathu Lal Meena – Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16031 of 2025
Decided On : 30-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. entitlement to age relaxation for examination eligibility. (Para 1 , 2 , 5 , 6 , 19) |
| 2. previous recruitment irregularities affecting current processes. (Para 8 , 10 , 12 , 18) |
| 3. the need for credible examination processes. (Para 9 , 13 , 14 , 16) |
| 4. public perception and trust in examination systems. (Para 15 , 17) |
| 5. legal grounding for age relaxation considerations. (Para 20 , 21 , 24) |
| 6. judicial discretion in age relaxation is limited. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 7. government directed to consider age relaxation. (Para 25 , 28) |
ORDER :
1. These writ petitions were filed by the petitioners who have appeared in Sub Inspector Recruitment Examination, 2021, and further have applied in pursuant to advertisement dated 17.07.2025 issued by RPSC for recruitment on post of Sub Inspectors and Platoon Commander (RAC).
2. The core question before us is whether the petitioners are entitled for appropriate age relaxation so that they may appear in examination to be held in pursuant to advertisement dated 17.07.2025.
3. Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, AAG put in appearance on behalf of Home Department and DGP whereas Mr. M.F. Baig put in appearance on behalf of RPSC in all matters.
4. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, we are deciding these writ petitions at this stage. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. The lead matter is Suraj Mal Meena and Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16031/2025 and for ready reference we are reproducing the prayer as under:-
“(i) the impugned advertisement dated 17.07.2025 to the extent of not providing age relaxation to the candidates who appeared in SI Recruitment Examination-2021 in pursuance to advertisement no. 08/2020-21 dated 03.02.2021 may kindly be declared illegal and arbitrary and same may kindly be quashed and set aside;
(ii) The respondents may kindly be directed by issuing appropriate, writ, order or direction in the nature thereof:
(a) to issue corrigendum advertisement for granting appropriate age relaxation to the candidates who appeared in SI Recruitment Examination 2021 in pursuance to advertisement no. 08/2020-21 dated 03.02.2021.
(b) to grant appropriate age relaxation in the impugned advertisement dated 17.07.2025 to the candidates who appeared in SI Recruitment Examination 2021 in pursuance to advertisement no 08/2020-21 dated 03.02.2021;
(c) to treat humble petitioners eligible and within age limit for the post of Sub- Inspector/Platoon Commander in pursuance to advertisement dated 17.07 2025,
(d) to grant appointment to humble petitioners, if they are found in merit, on the post of Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander in pursuance to advertisement dated 17.07.2025 with all consequential benefits.
iii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case may kindly also be passed in favour of the Petitioner.”
6. After filing of these writ petitions and service of notice, an interim order is issued on basis of submissions of learned counsel for the parties and learned counsel appearing for the RPSC whereby a provisional permission has been granted to the petitioners to appear in the examination subject to outcome of these writ petitions. The RPSC has already accepted the application forms of the petitioners who claimed themselves as to be over aged due to time span between two advertisement dated 03.02.2021 and 17.07.2025. This matter can be resolved if the Government allows age relaxation of four years instead of three years as per advertisement dated 17.07.2025. The issue which we are considering is in larger interest but it is not a public interest litigation rather the petitioners are candidates and they are aggrieved persons.
7. The material on record clearly indicate that an interim order is already issued in favour of the petitioners that their candidature shall be considered provisionally by the RPSC and the RPSC considering the provisional candidature shall permit the peti
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams vs K. Jotheeswara Pillai (D) by LRs. & Others
Mallikarjuna Rao and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
AI
The court directed the Government to consider age relaxation for candidates due to delays and irregularities in the recruitment process, affirming the need for fairness and transparency in public exa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that petitioners cannot claim age relaxation based on alleged promises or inaction of the Government, and the court emphasized that the action of t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State's decision in fixing the cut-off date for maximum age in accordance with the rules and the date of advertisement cannot be interfere....
Eligibility criteria for recruitment posts cannot be altered for age relaxation without governmental approval, especially for Group-B posts, which necessitate UPSC's concurrence.
Right of the petitioners to claim age relaxation as they were within age and had applied for recruitment pursuant to the earlier advertisement which got cancelled.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.