SANDEEP SINGH Vs. THE DEPUTY REGIONAL DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved of the action of the respondent - Authority in rejecting his candidature for the post of Constable (GD) in the Assam Rifles on the ground of being over -age. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the Staff Selection Commission published a notice in the Employment News/Rozgar Samachar dated 3.12.2011 for recruitment of Constables (GD) and Rifleman (GD) in ITBPF, BSF, CSF, CRPF and Assam Rifles. Matriculation or 10th Class pass was prescribed as the minimum educational qualification. The recruitment process comprised of physical standards test, physical efficiency test, written examination and medical examination. The age limit prescribed was 18 -23 years to be reckoned as on 1.8.2012. The closing date for submission of application forms was stipulated as 4.1.2012.

(2.) IT has been pleaded that the petitioner possessed the essential educational qualification and submitted his application for the post of Constable (GD) in Assam Rifles on 23.12.2011 i.e. within the stipulated time -frame. It has further been pleaded that the petitioner had been permitted to participate in the selection process and, accordingly, he had cleared the physical test in March 2012 and even the written examination on 22.4.2012. The petitioner thereafter was even called for the medical examination vide letter dated 12.6.2012 and his name was even recommended for appointment to the post in question at Serial No. 1477. However, the respondent -Authority has rejected the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Constable (GD) stating him to be over -age. Such order of rejection stands appended as Annexure P5 along with the petition. Apparently, the petitioner served a notice dated 17.1.2013 upon the Deputy Director, Staff Selection Commission, Kendriya Sadan, Sector 9, Chandigarh through counsel. Such legal notice stands responded in terms of communication dated 19.1.2013, Annexure P7, reiterating the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner on the ground of being over -age stating that the petitioner was 23 years, 3 months and 21 days as on the crucial date i.e. 1.8.2012. In the communication dated 19.1.2013, the petitioner has further been informed that there is no age relaxation for the Border District candidates.

(3.) DURING the course of arguments, this Court apprised the learned counsel that it is only an extract of the public notice issued by the Commission that had been appended and placed on record as Annexure P8. In response, Mr. R.C. Chaudhary, learned counsel made available the complete copy of the notice issued by the Staff Selection Commission published in the Employment News/Rozgar Samachar dated 3.12.2011 for the perusal of this Court.