1. Writ petitions challenge age relaxation conditions in recruitment advertisements for Ayurvedic Chikitsak posts under the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules, 1973. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Raj) 697
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
Smt. Beena Sharma, W/o. Rajesh Chaturvedi – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15810 of 2023 Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11906 of 2021
Decided On : 04-02-2026
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rishabh Khandelwal Mr. Rajendra Kumar Soni Dr. Nitin Soni
For the Respondent: Mr. Vishesh Sharma Ms. Karishma Soni for Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, AGC
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rishabh Khandelwal Mr. Rajendra Kumar Soni Dr. Nitin Soni
For the Respondent: Mr. Vishesh Sharma Ms. Karishma Soni for Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, AGC
Where service rules are silent and a recruitment advertisement explicitly stipulates that age relaxations are non-cumulative, candidates cannot claim cumulative relaxation. Express stipulation in either the rules or the advertisement is necessary to extend cumulative age relaxation benefits.
Headnote:(A) Service Law - Recruitment - Age relaxation - Whether age relaxations provided in a recruitment advertisement can be applied on a cumulative basis when the advertisement explicitly specifies they are non-cumulative and the governing service rules are silent on the matter (Paras 9, 14).
(B) Legal principles governing age relaxation in public employment: (i) If the statutory rules provide for cumulative relaxation, that must be followed; (ii) If the rules prescribe non-cumulative relaxation, the rules prevail; (iii) If the rules are silent, the advertisement governs the recruitment; (iv) If both the rules and advertisement are silent, the default position is that relaxation is non-cumulative; (v) Cumulative benefit requires express stipulation in either the rules or the advertisement. The rules of the game cannot be changed midway after the process of appointment has begun (Para 14).
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, who were working as doctors on a contractual basis under health schemes, challenged the age relaxation conditions in advertisements for regular appointments. They sought the benefit of cumulative age relaxation, arguing that relaxations (such as those for female candidates and contractual experience) should be additive to allow them to exceed the fixed upper age limit. They contended that the non-cumulative condition in the advertisement was erroneous and sought a direction to allow their participation in the selection process.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the governing service rules are silent regarding the cumulative application of age relaxations. Since the recruitment advertisement explicitly stipulated that relaxations shall be non-cumulative, the binding terms of the advertisement cannot be disregarded. The petitioners failed to produce any rule providing for cumulative age relaxation.
Issues: Whether the court can interpret age relaxation provisions as cumulative when the governing service rules are silent and the recruitment advertisement explicitly rules out such aggregation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that statutory rules prevail over contrary conditions in an advertisement, but where the rules are silent, the advertisement governs. In the absence of express stipulation in the rules or the advertisement to provide cumulative benefits, the default and specified position of non-cumulative relaxation must be respected. The court's function is to interpret the law, not to legislate by extending relaxations not provided for in the framework.
Result: Writ petitions dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Petitioners claim cumulative age relaxation; respondents contend rules provide non-cumulative relaxation, supported by Division Bench precedent. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 )
3. Court held Rules of 1973 are silent and advertisement explicitly non-cumulative; Division Bench in Ali Taqi affirmed non-cumulative relaxation consistent with statutory framework. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 )
4. If rules are silent, advertisement governs; non-cumulative age relaxation provisions prevail and cannot be judicially altered. (Para 14 , 15 )
5. Writ petitions dismissed; petitioners not entitled to cumulative age relaxation or any relief. (Para 16 , 17 )
6. Can age relaxation benefits under recruitment rules be cumulative if not expressly provided?
No. If rules are silent, the advertisement's non-cumulative stipulation governs; court cannot imply cumulative relaxation. (Para 14 , 15 )
7. Does the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules, 1973 provide for cumulative age relaxation?
No. Rule 9 relaxations apply independently; no cumulative aggregation is envisaged by the rules. (Para 14 , 15 )
8. When can a court direct cumulative age relaxation contrary to an advertisement?
Only if the statutory rule itself expressly provides for cumulative relaxation; otherwise the advertisement's terms are binding. (Para 14 )
ORDER :
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
1. These writ petitions are preferred by petitioners with following prayers:
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15810/2023:
“(i) Pass an appropriate, writ order or direction directing that the age relaxation benefit of 5 years for already working Contractual Ayurvedic Chakastaks under NHM Scheme, as provided under condition No. 12 of the advertisement shall be in addition to the other age relaxation benefit conditions as provided in the advertisement no.2/2023.
(ii) Pass an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, setting aside condition no. 1 of the notes in the Advertisement No.2/2023, whereby the age relaxation benefits have been made as non- cumulative, i.e. only one age relaxation benefit condition shall be available to a Candidate.
(iii) Pass an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents to allow the petitioners to participate in the Selection Process for Ayurvedic Chikitsak and appoint the petitioners on the posts of Ayurvedic Chikitsak, if selected in the merit list, pursuant to the advertisement.
(iv) Alternatively, Pass an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents to remove / relax the upper age limit criteria of less than 45 years on 1.1.2024 as fixed under the Advertisement for the continuously working Ayurvedic Chikitsaks as Contractual appointees under the National Rural Mission Scheme, appointed through a Public Advertisement.”
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11906/2021:
By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction quash the final provisional merit list dated 12 October 2021 and provisional merit list 4th of October 2021 in so far as it relates to deleting the name of petitioner from provisional merit list dated 27 October 2021 is concerned be set asides and the petitioner be considered for appointment on the post of Ayurveda Chikitsadhikari in M.B.C. category according to his merit treating him within age against the advertisement dated 22nd of December 2020, with all consequential benefits.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Smt. Beena Sharma and Sheela Gupta submitted that pursuant to advertisement dated 28.01.2016 issued for recruitment under the NHM on contractual basis, the petitioners have filed application and they were selected wherein upper age limit for selection was 55 years. He further submitted that since then, petitioners are working as Ayurvedic doctors on contractual basis. He further submitted that respondent have issued an advertisement dated 20.04.2023 for regular selection under the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules, 1973, (hereinafter referred as "Rule of 1973"), for recruitment of Ayurvedic doctors on 639 posts. He further submitted that petitioners have challenged the certain conditions of the advertisement by filing a writ petition wherein this Hon'ble Court has passed an interim order dated 26.05.2023 whereby the petitioners were allowed to submit their application form and participate in the recruitment process provisionally.
3. He further submitted that the advertisement dated 20.04.2023 was revoked by the respondent and now a new advertisement for selection on 652 posts of Ayurvedic doctors have been issued for inviting applications. He further submitted that the upper age limit for determining eligibility for selection has been fixed as 45 years as on 01.01.2024 but certain age relaxations provisions were made in the advertisement, but same are insufficient unless their writ is allowed. He further submitted that in the advertisement issued in the year 2016, the upper age limit was fixed as 55 years but in the current advertisement, the upper age limit after availing relaxation is fixed 50 years, which would oust the petitioners.
4. He also submitted that petitioners are female candidates and they are entitled for cumulative benefit of relaxation, being female candidate and additionally age relaxation of 3 years as provided under the advertisement. He further referred the grounds and submi
