Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice C.V. KARTHIKEYAN
Munirathinam – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government – Respondent
ORDER :
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records relating to an order of the 3rd respondent dated 26.09.2024 and to quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to pass necessary orders on the representation given by the petitioner on 18.09.2024. The petitioner seeks relaxation of the age of the petitioner to continue in the post of 'Cook'.
2. The petitioner belong to Schedule Caste community. She had completed her 12th standard. She had registered her name in the Employment Exchange. She was then recruited as Cook and appointed in the Government Adi-Dravidar Welfare Residential Middle School, Mannur. Thereafter, the appointment was cancelled, since it is contended that she had crossed the age of 35 years. This Writ Petition has been filed questioning that particular cancellation of the order.
3. The issue is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court in a batch of writ appeal in W.A.No.3809 of 2024 and batch, the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department , Chennai Vs. K.Manonmai, had held as follows:
“2. The State is on appeal against the orders of the writ Court quashing the
Age limit for appointment can be relaxed for Scheduled Caste candidates, allowing for a maximum age of 40 years, thus quashing the cancellation of appointment.
The age limit for appointment can be extended for Scheduled Caste candidates, allowing eligibility despite being over the standard age limit.
The age limit for appointment can be extended for Scheduled Caste candidates, and the production of a Transfer Certificate is not a mandatory requirement for eligibility.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment, including age limits, cannot be altered mid-process, and horizontal reservation for age relaxation is not permissible under existing rules.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment cannot be altered mid-process, and no age relaxation beyond prescribed limits is permissible without explicit provision.
Irregular appointments without fraud may be permitted to continue under sympathetic circumstances, despite age limit breaches in eligibility. Appointments declared void-ab-initio in accord with U.P. ....
The court ruled that appointments exceeding statutory age limits are void, yet if no fraud occurs, longstanding service may warrant equitable relief despite technical violations.
Employment cannot be claimed as legal if the appointment violated established recruitment age criteria, regardless of prior service or the rules governing age relaxations.
The court upheld the age limit for Assistant Professor positions as per established guidelines, emphasizing adherence to prior judicial directions and preventing arbitrary changes in recruitment crit....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
