BHUPENDRA SINGH RAWAT Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Mahendra Pateriya, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.11580/2016. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.12043/2016. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondents/State. Petitioners serving as Constables in the Police Department have approached this Court challenging the advertisement issued by the Professional Examination Board for appointment to posts in the cadre of Subedar, Sub-Inspector and Platoon Commander through competitive Examination, 2016.

(2.) The solitary ground of challenge relates to upper age limit with reference to provision as contained under Clauses 1.6.2 and 1.6.11.1 of the advertisement and Clauses 2.3 and 3 of the circular dated 12.07.2016. For ready reference relevant Clauses are reproduced below :- Advertisement :-

(3.) Petitioners claim to be Green Card holders and, therefore, according to the petitioners, the conjoint reading of aforesaid Clauses 1.6.2 and 1.6.11.1 of advertisement provide for maximum age limit of 38 (36 + 2) years for them as per the advertisement. However, in terms of the circular issued by the State Government dated 12.07.2016 (Annexure P-9) since the maximum age limit has been further increased to 38 years, for the categories of applicants belonging to General Police Force Department, therefore, according to the petitioners, with addition to two years by virtue of Green Card Holder, (38+2) maximum upper age limit comes to 40 years. Therefore, petitioners fulfil the eligibility conditions as regards the age of the candidate. Hence, eligible for appearing in the competitive examination under reference for appointment to posts in cadres of Subedar, Sub-Inspector and Platoon Commander. Learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.12043/2016 additionally made submissions in the context of Rule 21 of the Recruitment Rules. For ready reference the said Rule is reproduced below :-