(1.) IN this petition, the petitioner challenges vires of Rule 5 of the Haryana Industrial Training and Vocational Education Department (Group A) Service Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Rule). Such Rule, inter alia, provides minimum age for recruitment to the post of Assistant Director (Technical)/Principal, ITI, (Group A) Junior in Industrial Training Department, Haryana by way of direct recruitment. In fact, 50% quota is assigned for direct recruits and 50% for promotes. As far as the direct recruits are concerned, minimum age of 30 years has been fixed and the cut off date is 31st December of the year for reckoning the age of 30 years. We are of the opinion that the petitioner has no case on merits for challenging the fixation of 30 years of age as minimum for direct recruitment, because it is the prerogative of the rule making authorities. The Rule in question is framed in exercise of power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India which shall have the statutory force. The Rules framed in exercise of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution of India are not ultra vires/arbitrary unless it is shown that the Rules are violative of any constitutional provision or the rule making authorities do not have any power to frame such a Rule and the Court cannot interfere therewith. It is also to be borne in mind that it is the prerogative of the rule making authorities to lay down the provisions for recruitment to a particular post.
(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out as to how the fixation of the minimum age of 30 years for the said post is arbitrary. It may be highlighted at this stage that in so far as the promotes are concerned, Assistant Director (Technical) Group B having minimum service of 05 years is to be considered eligible for the aforesaid post of Group A. It appears that the provision of Rule framed for direct recruitment in so far as age of the candidate is concerned, that has been fixed keeping in view the experience period required for the promotes.