Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.Karthikeyan, J
R.Thamil Mani – Appellant
Versus
State Of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
ORDER :
The Writ Petitions have been filed in the nature of a Mandamus seeking a direction against the respondents to accept the application of the petitioners for the post of Assistant Professor (Pre-Law) in the Notification No.01 of 2025 dated 24.01.2025 and to allow the petitioners to appear for the examination.
2.The petitioners had applied for the post of Assistant Professor (Pre- Law) consequent to notification issued by the 2nd respondent / Teachers Recruitment Board dated 24.01.2025. They claim relaxation of the age. Similar matters had come up for consideration before this Court in W.P.Nos.5860 & 5165 of 2025 and by common order dated 27.02.2025, this Court had held as follows:
“3. The only issue raised in these Writ Petition is with respect to the criteria relating to the age within which the candidate could be considered eligible to apply for the said post. Under the notification dated 24.01.2025, the Teacher Recruitment Board stipulated the age as on 01.07.2025. It had been contended that no person shall be eligible for appointment by direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor and Assistant Professor (Pre-Law), if he / she had completed the age of 40 years as on
The court upheld the age limit of 40 years for Assistant Professor (Pre-Law) positions, allowing a maximum extension of 5 years for teaching experience, emphasizing adherence to established guideline....
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....
The court upheld the age limit for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to established recruitment guidelines and the prohibition against arbitrary changes mid-process.
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.
The court upheld the age limit of 40 years for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to established guidelines to prevent arbitrariness and ensure equality in public employment.
A recruitment notification's eligibility criteria must align with established regulations, and any restrictions not prescribed by the UGC guidelines are impermissible.
The court upheld the validity of the age limit and subject-specific qualifications for Assistant Professors, affirming adherence to UGC guidelines and judicial directives.
The court upheld the validity of the age limit and subject-specific qualifications for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to UGC guidelines as a binding standard for recruitment pro....
Point of Law : Respondent authority has failed to exercise its power while dealing with the application for relaxation of the age, preferred by the petitioners.
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
