O R D E R

The recruitment notification for selection and appointment to the posts of Grade II Police Constable / Grade II Jail Warder / Fireman-2019 is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. According to the petitioner, the cutoff date fixed in the notification for age criteria is not proper and the date of notification i.e. 06.03.2019 is to be fixed as the cutoff date for age criteria. However, the recruitment notification states the cutoff date as 01.07.2019 for age criteria.

3. Fixing a cutoff date for selection is the prerogative of the employer. Such cutoff date cannot be challenged in a routine manner. As per the cutoff date, the petitioner is not eligible to participate in the selection process. The issues regarding fixing cutoff date has been elaborately considered by this Court, by order dated 25.04.2017 in W.P.(MD) Nos.2982 and 2081 of 2017 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:

“16.In the case of Shankar k. Mandal and others v. State of Bihar and others reported in (2003) 9 SCC 519, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the position clear after taking support from earlier judgment in the following lines:

“What happens when a cut off date is fixed for fulfilling the prescribed qualification relating to age by a candidate for appointment and the effect of any non-prescription has been considered by this Court in several cases. The principles culled out from the decisions of this Court (See Ashok Kumar Sharma and Ors.v. Chander Shekhar and Anr. (1997 (4) SCC 18, Bhupinderpal Singh v. State of Punjab (2000 (5) SCC 262 and Jasbir Rani and ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. (2002 (1) SCC 124)

are as follows:

(1) The cut off date by reference to which the eligibility requirement must be satisfied by the candidate seeking a public employment is the date appointed by the relevant service rules;

(2) If there is no cut off date appointed by the rules then such date shall be as appointed for the purpose in the advertisement calling for applications; and (3) If there is no such date appointed then the eligibility criteria shall be applied by reference to the last date appointed by which the applications were to be received by the competent authority.”

17.In another judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A.P. Public Service Commission, Hyderabad and another v. B.Sarat Chandra and others reported in (1990) 2 SCC 669 similar issue arose for consideration. Recruitment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in 15 the State of Andhra Pradesh where Rule 5 of Andhra Pradesh Police Service Rules which is similar to the Rule in Tamil Nadu as regards qualifications. A candidate who was not qualified as on the date of 1st July of the year of recruitment claimed that the relevant date ought to be the date of preparation of list of selected candidates. Though the Tribunal accepted the contention of the candidates, the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the Civil Appeal and held as follows:

“The Tribunal in fact does not dispute that the process of selection begins with the issuance of advertisement and ends with the preparation of select list for appointment. Indeed, it consists of various steps like inviting applications, scrutiny of applications, rejection of defective applications or elimination of ineligible candidates, conducting examinations, calling for interview or viva voce and preparation of list of successful candidates for appointment. Rule 3 of the Rules of Procedure of the Public Service Commission is also indicative of all these steps. When such are the different steps in the process of selection, the minimum or maximum age for suitability of a candidate for appointment cannot be allowed to depend upon any fluctuating or uncertain date. If the final stage of selection is delayed and more often it happens for various reasons, the candidates who are eligible on the date of application may find themselves eliminated at the final stage for no fault of theirs. The date to attain the minimum or maximum age must,