DEVENDRA SINGH SIHMAR Vs. HARYANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a candidate for selection against nine posts of HCS (Executive Branch) and Other Allied Services, which had been advertised in the year 2004. The last date for submission of the application form was 9.7.2004. The essential qualifications provided the upper age as 40 years with relaxation upto 45 years in case of candidates belonging to the reserved categories of SC/ST/BC and Haryana Government Employees with four years of service. (The employees of Boards/Corporations/Universities/Banks etc. are not eligible for this concession in the upper age limit). At the relevant time, even though the petitioner was 42 years of age, he submitted his application for preliminary examination. Being a government servant he would have been entitled to relaxation, upto the age of 45 years. On the basis of the application submitted by the petitioner, he was permitted to provisionally appear in the preliminary examination. He was also allowed to sit in the main examination with the following conditions :-

(2.) Subsequently, the petitioner failed to produce the required proof. The candidature of the petitioner has been rejected by the HPSC on the ground that he is over age and, therefore, ineligible. Mr. J.S. Manipur, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that once the petitioner had been permitted to appear in the preliminary examination, final examination and the viva voce, the respondents could not possibly now reject the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that he is over age. In support of the submission, learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sanatam Gauda v. Berhampur University and others, 1990 2 RSJ 55, in which it has been observed as follows :-

(3.) Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel, we are of the opinion that the observations of the Supreme Court quoted above, would not be applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In that case, a student had been permitted to study in the Law College. He had submitted the mark-sheet along with the application for admission. He had studied for two years and he was studying in the final year when the University refused to declare his result for the Pre-Law and Intermediate Law Examinations. The Supreme Court came to the rescue of, and protected the career of a young law student and directed the respondents to declare his result.