SATISH KUMAR PAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEVI Prasad Singh, J. This writ petition has been preferred under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India against the impugned order dated 29. 11. 1995, passed by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bareilly, by which the petitioner's candidature for appointment on the post of temporary Bandi Rakshak (Warder) has been rejected in spite of the fact that the petitioner was selected for the said post and his name finds place in the select list.

(2.) THE brief matrix of the case is that the Superintendent, Central Jail, had notified vacancies on 7. 9. 1995 inviting applications for appointment on the post of Jail Warder. THE last date for receipt of the application was 20. 9. 1995. According to the advertisement, the candidate must have attained the age of 18 years on 1. 7. 1995 and should not have exceeded 35 years of age on the said date. THE other qualification provided by the advertisement was High School or equivalent thereto. THE proforma of application form was also provided, a copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 2 to the writ petition.

(3.) WHILE assailing the order under challenge, the petitioner's Counsel proceeded to submit that on 1. 7. 1995, the petitioner had completed the age of 18 years. He relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in (1986) 4 SCC 59, Prabhu Dayal Sesma v. State of Rajasthan and another and proceeded to submit that in view of the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner shall be deemed to have completed the age of 18 years on 1. 7. 1995. It has been further submitted that the completion of 18 years of age is to be calculated after considering whole of the day up to 12o'clock in the mid-night.