ASHWINI KUMAR MISHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED of Clause 3 (b) of the advertisement published in Employment News dated 15-21. 9. 2007 under Notification No. 2/2007, Railway protection Force, Ministry of Railway, rendering the petitioner over age to participate in the selection procedure of Sub-Inspector of Railway Protection Force, the petitioner has approached this Court vide this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the respondents to: (i) Correct the irregularity shown in the advertisement; (ii) Accept the application of the petitioner allowing him to participate in selection procedure.

(2.) THE facts briefly are that the petitioner is a Constable in the Railway protection Force appointed on 16. 11. 2001. The date of birth of the petitioner is 25. 7. 1977. That, an advertisement for recruitment of Sub-Inspector was published in Rojgar Samachar dated 15-21. 9. 2007, whereunder Clause 3 (b) stipulated that, the candidate as on 1. 1. 2008 should not be less than 20 years and not more than 25 years. Since the petitioner is born on 25. 7. 1977, he was over age because even with the relaxation of 5 years stipulated under Clause 3 (iii) of the advertisement he was not eligible and therefore the petitioner could not participate in the selection.

(3.) THE contention of the petitioner is that the procedure regarding recruitment of Sub-Inspectors in RPF/rps are governed by Standing Order 79 (Revised)dated 27. 7. 2007 (Annexure P/2); wherein, under Clause 2 (b) the eligibility regarding age stipulates that the candidate should not be less than 20 years and not more than 25 years as on 1st January of the year in case the vacancies are advertised in the first half of the year or as on 1st July of the year if the vacancies are advertised in the second half of the year.