RAJKUMAR S/O MOTIRAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.

(2.) IN this petition the grievance of the petitioner relates to refusal on the part of the respondents to consider his claim for appointment in the post of peon solely on the ground that he had crossed the maximum age requirement on the date of the interview and that the same is contrary to the eligibility criteria in that regard disclosed in the advertisement inviting the applications and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Shankar K. Mandal and others v. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in AIR 2003 SC 4043.

(3.) IN the course of the hearing of the matter, the learned Asst. Government Pleader appearing for the respondents fairly conceded that there is no specific provision 01 a rule, in relation to filling -up the post attached to the Labour and the Industrial Courts, requiring the age factor of the candidate to be considered as on the date of the interview. It is a matter of record that at no point of time the candidates were informed that the age factor would be considered as on the date of the interview. On the other hand, the candidature of the petitioner and others for the purpose of the post of peon in the Civil Courts was considered solely on the basis of the application filed by them in answer to the advertisement issued on 2.2002 which apparently discloses that the age factor could have been considered as on the date of publication of the advertisement.