VIJAY KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Amit Srivastava for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No: 1, Sri S. P. Shukla for respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 and Sri P. P. Chaudhary for respondent No. 5.

(2.) THE petitioner aggrieved by order dated 31. 8. 2005 (Annexure-ll to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 4 cancelling his appointment and appointing respondent No. 5 on the post of draftsman in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-100-6000 has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) SRI Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended, firstly, that the post in question was not reserved and, therefore, no benefit of relaxation of age was admissible to respondent No. 5. Secondly, he contended that under Rule 10 of U. P. Zila Parishad Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 1970 Rules) read with Appendix, Schedule-A, item 28, minimum and maximum age for direct recruitment in respect to the post of draftsman is 18 to 30 years and even if five years relaxation is made available to a reserved category candidate, that would not go beyond 35 years. Since respondent No. 5 was already above 36 years on the cut-off date, he was in any case overage and could not have been appointed. Therefore, relaxation of age to respondent No. 5 vide Government Order dated 4. 11. 2004 had no concern in this matter.