ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK
B.R. Sarangi, S.K. Mishra, JJ.
State of Odisha & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Subrat Dash & Ors. – Opposite Parties
W.P(C) NO. 15998 of 2016
Decided On : 11-08-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition to quash tribunal's directive (Para 1) |
| 2. factual background of recruitment and age relaxation (Para 2) |
| 3. tribunal's conclusion on vacancies and age relaxation (Para 3) |
| 4. arguments by both parties regarding age limit (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 5. key question of law regarding the applicability of rules (Para 8) |
| 6. application of old vs new rules on vacancies (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 7. court upholds tribunal's ruling based on prior vacancies (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
B.R. SARANGI, J.
By means of this Writ Petition, filed at the instance of the State and its functionary, prayer has been made to quash the common Order dated 13.01.2016 passed in O.A. No.109 (C) of 2012 and batch, as at Annexure-3, whereby the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack has directed the State- Petitioners to extend age relaxation to Opposite Party No.1 and other Applicants in the connected Original Applications against the vacancies in the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer occurred prior to 15.07.2011, during which period the proviso to Rule-2 of the Odisha Civil Services (Fixation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1989 (in short Rules, 1989) was in force, with an observation that in the event Opposite Party No.1 and other Applicants are found eligible to such age relaxation, their candidature may be accepted and if they have already participated in the written test, their result should be declared along with other candidates. If any of the Applicants have not appeared in the written test and are found eligible on the basis of age relaxation, a Special Recruitment Test be conducted for them within a period of one month and consequential action be taken for declaration of result and for that requisite number of posts be kept vacant. It has also been observed that the said exercise, however, shall not be a bar for publication of result and issuance of appointment order of other selected candidates.
2. The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that pursuant to an Advertisement was issued by Opposite Party No.3-Odisha Public Service Commission for filling up of the posts of Assistant Agriculture Officer, Opposite Party No.1, having requisite qualification, applied for the said post. As per criteria prescribed in the Advertisement, a candidate must be under 32 years and above 21 years of age as on 1st January, 2011, i.e., he/she must have been born not earlier than 2nd January, 1979 and not later than 1st January, 1990. As no recruitment was held for the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer for more than a decade and in the meantime, the candidates have become overage, they would be deprived of appearing the recruitment test in view of the upper age limit prescribed in the Advertisement.
2.1 As per Proviso to Rule-2 of the Orissa Civil Services (Fixation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1989, “if for any reason applications have not been invited by the Authority competent to conduct examination during any particular year to fill up the vacancies of that year, Applicants, who would have been eligible if applications were invited during that year, shall be eligible to compete at the examination held in the subsequent year”. In view of this, Rules, 1989 will be applicable to Odisha Subordinate Agriculture Service Rules, 1980 and while publishing the Advertisement, the Authorities ought to have stipulated the said Clause enabling the Applicants to appear in the recruitment test by relaxing the upper age limit.
2.2. As per information obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short “RTI Act, 2005”), out of the sanctioned strength of 552 Jr. Agriculture Officers, 277 posts were vacant during the year 2005, 319 in 2007 and 326 in 2009, when the said posts were abolished and upgraded to that of Assistant Agriculture Officer (Group- B) in 2009. In the rank of Assistant Agriculture Officer, 118 posts were vacant in 2009 and it was increased to 415 in 2010, after the cadre strength of the Assistant Agriculture Officer was increased to 1166 du
Y.V. Rangaiah v. J. Sreenivasa Rao
P. Mohanan Pillai v. State of Keral
Vacancies arising before the amendment of recruitment rules are governed by the old rules, allowing eligible candidates age relaxation.
Eligibility criteria in recruitment must be strictly followed; participation in the selection process does not confer right to appointment or age relaxation without statutory support.
The Government has power to grant relaxation in upper age limit on its own motion or upon getting intimation from any genuine or bona fide source can grant such relaxation subject to the condition th....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and applicability of the Amendment Rules 2022 and the subsequent clarifications in determining the eligibility of the petitio....
Where applications are called for prescribing a particular date as last date for filing applications, eligibility of candidates shall have to be judged with reference to that date and that date alone....
The Central Administrative Tribunal ruled that UPSC could not grant age relaxation for a recruitment process, as no explicit provisions for such concessions existed in the Recruitment Rules.
One-time relaxation of age limit for recruitment is justified in light of extraordinary circumstances caused by COVID-19, reaffirming judicial intervention to ensure fairness.
The court affirmed that exceptional circumstances may necessitate a one-time relaxation of recruitment age limits to ensure fairness, particularly due to delays caused by the pandemic.
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.