The judgment establishes the importance of meeting eligibility criteria and the applicability of age limits in the appointment and regularization of Class IV employees.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri A.P. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Amarendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional C.S.C. for the respondent - State.

2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 03.09.2009, contained as Annexure-1 to the writ petition with a further prayer for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents, particularly, respondent No.2 to consider afresh and appoint the petitioner on the post of Collection Peon under 50% quota by counting the service rendered by him as Seasonal Collection Peon in Tehsil Malihabad, District Lucknow from the due date with all benefits of service.

3. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as under:

4. Submission of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 03.09.2009 has been passed without any rhyme and reason and is malafide in nature and without any authority of law. He submitted that the impugned order is not legally sustainable as respondent No.2 has not computed the service rendered by the petitioner as Seasonal Collection Peon in Tehsil Malihabad, District Lucknow, however, the same is obligatory in view of Rule 15 of U.P. Collection Peon Service Rules, 2004.

5. He next submitted that the impugned order dated 03.09.2009 has been passed on surmises and conjectures and on the basis of imagination. He submitted that the petitioner is entitled for consideration of his claim for regular appointment on the post of Collection Peon under 50% quota by counting the services rendered by him as Seasonal Collection Peon.

6. He further submitted that the persons junior to the petitioner have been considered and appointed on the post of Collection Peon under 50% quota, however, regular appointment has been denied to the petitioner on extraneous consideration.

7. On the other hand, learned Additional CSC submitted that on 03.09.2009, a selection committee was constituted, which considered the cases of Seasonal Collection Peons for selection as Collection Peons and passed the impugned order dated 03.09.2009, which is just and valid.

8. He further submitted that in Tehsil BKT and District Lucknow, there are 29 sanctioned posts of Collection Peons out of which, 18 Collection Peons were working at the time of