SUJATA DEB ROY Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner admittedly had been appointed as Assistant Teacher on temporary basis on a consolidated pay of Rs. 1000/-, likewise respondent No. 4 too had been appointed on 16.08.2010.

(2.) One sanctioned post of Assistant Teacher became available in the year 2014, advertisement notice was issued on 11.03.2014. Amongst the others, petitioner and respondent No. 4 had also applied. In the list, petitioner in the order of merit stood at Sl. No. 1 whereas, respondent No. 4 at Sl. No. 2. The case of the petitioner for appointment against the said sanction post was forwarded for approval for respondent No. 2 who declined on the ground that the petitioner in the year 2014 was +35 years of age, faced with the same position, petitioner filed WP(C) No. 40 of 2015, which was disposed of vide judgment dated 01.06.2016 with a direction to respondent No. 2. In the said petition, respondent No. 4 was not a party, the respondent No. 4 filed a writ appeal against the said judgment bearing No. 16 of 2017 which was allowed vide judgment dated 11.10.2017. The order dated 01.06.2016 was set aside, WP(C) No. 40 of 2015 as such was to be reconsidered by the learned Single Judge. This is how this petition has come up for consideration.

(3.) Admittedly, as per "Fundamental Rules" the candidate must be not above 35 years of age at the time of advertisement viz-a-viz general category. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not show any rule empowering relaxation of age.