DHARMINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed with a prayer that direction be issued to respondents to appoint the petitioner against the post of Pharmacist. It is an admitted fact that 20 posts of Pharmacists, reserved for handicapped candidates, were advertised on 30.9.2006. In that advertisement it was mentioned that age limit will be as per instructions of the government. Selection was made on the basis of interview conducted on 13.10.2006. As per the select list petitioner was put at Sr. No. 18. However, when appointment was not offered to him, he filed this writ petition. Date of birth of the petitioner is 8.9.1966 i.e. more than 40 years.

(2.) IT is apparent from the records that appointment was not given to the petitioner on the ground that he has already crossed the age of 40 years i.e. the age fixed by the government for entry into government service. In this writ petition the petitioner has claimed appointment by placing reliance upon instructions dated 4.5.1966 (Annexure P -2) and letter written by Director General, Health Services Haryana to the Financial Commissioner, recommending relaxation of age in favour of the petitioner, on the basis of instructions, referred to above. After notice, reply has been filed.

(3.) PERUSAL of document Annexure P -2 (instructions dated 4.5.1966) indicates that the government has taken a conscious decision to give age relaxation of 10 years to handicapped persons for their entry into government service. Some posts have been mentioned in that document, for which this age relaxation can be given to the handicapped persons. Admittedly, post of Pharmacist is not mentioned therein.