RAMILABEN M PATEL Vs. GUJARAT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.D.G.Shukla, learned advocate, waives service of notice of RULE for the respondent. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is heard and finally decided.

(2.) BY preferring this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 29.12.2010, rendered by the respondent No.1Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC), whereby the petitioner is informed that her candidature for the personal interview for the post of Lecturer, Class-II, in the discipline of Mathematics, has been cancelled as she exceeds the prescribed upper age bar.

(3.) ON the strength of the above submissions, the learned advocate for the petitioner has prayed that the petition be allowed and the respondent-GPSC be directed to permit the petitioner to appear for the personal interview after quashing and setting aside the impugned communication. In support of the submission regarding the doctrine of continuous officiation, the learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in S.Sumnyan and Others v. Limi Niri and Others - (2010)6 SCC 791 which shall be referred to hereinafter.