ORDER :

The present case is taken up through video conferencing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the cut-off date for counting upper age limit of 35 years as on 01.08.2021 fixed for the candidates belonging to general category for appointment on the post of Dental Doctors within the State of Jharkhand in Advertisement No. 01/2022 issued by the respondent no.4-Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC). Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to fix the upper age limit as 42 years for appointment on the said post with respect to the candidates belonging to general category as has been fixed in Advertisement No. 09/2022 issued by the respondent-JPSC for appointment of Ayurvedic Doctors. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondent- JPSC to issue fresh advertisement fixing cut-off date regarding upper age limit for appointment on the said post as 01.08.2017 since examination for the said post has not been conducted after the year 2016.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent-JPSC has invited online application of recruitment examination for appointment on regular post of Dental Doctors within the State of Jharkhand vide Advertisement No. 01 of 2022 fixing the maximum age limit for the candidates of general category as 35 years as on 01.08.2021. The respondent-JPSC has also invited the application for appointment on regular post of Ayurvedic Doctors within the State of Jharkhand vide Advertisement No. 09 of 2022 fixing the upper age limit for the candidates of general category as 42 years on 01.08.2021. Thus, the respondent- JPSC has adopted two different criteria for fixing the upper age limit to the candidates of general category. It is further submitted that the respondent- JPSC lastly issued advertisement in the year 2016 being Advertisement No. 02 of 2016 inviting applications of recruitment examination for appointment on the post of Dental Doctors, however it did not conduct the said examination. It is also submitted that by fixing the upper age limit of unreserved category as 35 years to be calculated from the cut-off date of 01.08.2021, the respondents have caused serious prejudice to the candidates belonging to the said category who crossed the age of 35 years between 2017 and 2021.

4. Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, learned A.C to A.G. appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 3 while opposing the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, refers a judgment of learned Division Bench of this Court rendered in the case of Krishna Kumar Mishra Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Others reported in 2018 Supreme (Jhk) 130.

5. For better appreciation of this case, the relevant part of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

“XXVIII. On the basis of the aforesaid decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the law can be summarized as under:-

(i) The choice of date as a basis for classification fixed by the legislature or its delegate cannot always be dubbed as arbitrary, even if, no particular reason is forthcoming for the choice unless, it is shown to be capricious or whimsical in the circumstances,

(ii) The cut-off date, to attain the minimum or maximum age, must be specific and determinate on a particular date and it cannot be allowed to depend upon any fluctuating or uncertain date, because it may lead to consequences, anomalies and uncertainties.

(iii) Mere errors of government in fixing of cutoff date, which may be unjust and oppressive are not subject to judicial review, it is only its palpable arbitrary exercise which can be declared void.

(iv) It is the discretion of the rule-making authority or employer, to fix a cut-off date for determining the maximum or minimum age prescribed for a post and it cannot be, per se arbitrary, unless the cut-off date, is as wide off the mark, as to make it wholly unreasonable.

(v) A cut-off date cannot be fixed with any mathematical precision. As soon as a cut-off dat