IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.Karthikeyan, J
P. Veera Muthur – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Principal Secretary to Government Higher Education Department Secretariat – Respondent
ORDER :
(C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.)
Originally the Writ Petitions have been filed seeking a Mandamus and seeking direction against the respondents to relax the Government order in G.O.Ms.No. 233, Law (LS) Department, dated 11.04.2022 and consequently also relax the age criteria in the Notification No.01/2025 dated 24.01.2025 in so far as the posts of Assistant Professor (Law) and Assistant Professor (Pre-Law).
2. The writ petitioner in W.P.No. 5165 of 2025 R.Ghunasekaran, is aged about 45 years as seen from the affidavit filed by him. The writ petitioner in W.P.No. 5860 of 2025 P.Veera Muthu is aged 50 years as seen from the affidavit filed by him. They had both intended to apply for the post of Assistant Professor (Pre-Law) consequent to the notification issued by the Teacher Recruitment Board dated 24.01.2025. They are both otherwise eligible to be considered for the appointment so far as their educational qualification is concerned.
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 stip
The court upheld the age limit for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to established recruitment guidelines and the prohibition against arbitrary changes mid-process.
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....
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.
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 Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to UGC guidelines as a binding standard for recruitment pro....
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 age limit of 40 years for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to established guidelines to prevent arbitrariness and ensure equality in public employment.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioner to age relaxation similar to other candidates, as supported by the Constitution of India, Article 226, and rel....
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.