Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SUBRAMANIAN, G.ARUL MURUGAN, JJ
Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department – Appellant
Versus
K.Manonmani – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
Since all the Writ Petitions were disposed of by a common order, the appeals are also taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The State is on appeal against the orders of the writ Court quashing the cancellation of appointment of the respondents in all these Writ Appeals, on the ground that the respondents were over aged on the date of appointment and on the ground that the respondent in W.A.No.3809 of 2024 has produced a false Transfer Certificate.
3. All the respondents were appointed as Cooks in the hostels attached to the Adi-dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department. The appointment orders were issued on 26.02.2021. The orders impugned in the Writ Petitions came to be passed on 19.04.2023. The writ Court had found that the respondents were not over aged, on a reading of Rule 5 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service read with Section 20(8) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 .
4. It is not in dispute that the posts to which the respondents were appointed are covered by the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service. For the post of 'Cook' the educational qualification is that a person should
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.
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.
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.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment, including age limits, cannot be altered mid-process, and horizontal reservation for age relaxation is not permissible under existing rules.
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 cannot be altered mid-process, and no age relaxation beyond prescribed limits is permissible without explicit provision.
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
