NARENDRA KUMAR CHHANGANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case validity of certain words of Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Subordinate Court (Ministerial Establishment Rules of 1986) has been challenged which provides that a candidate must not have attained the age of 31 years on the first of January of the year following the date of application. Mr. Singhvi submits that this case is squarely covered by a Division Bench decision rendered in Dr. Rajeev Mathur vs. State of Rajasthan, D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1059/88 along with two other petitions decided on 14. 2. 91, whereby the words" the first day of January of the next following year" as it appears in Rule 11 (1) of the Raj. Medical Service (Collegiate Branch) Rules, 1962 has been held to be violative of Article 14 and 16 (1) of the Constitution. For the reasons mentioned in that Judgment, which fully applied to the facts of this case, we hold that the words in the Rule 9 of the Rules of Rajasthan Subordinate Court Ministerial Establishment Rules 1986 "the first day of January of year following" will be deleted from Rule 9 and after deletion the Rule shall read as under : "a candidate for direct recruitment to any cadre must have attained the age of 18 years and must not have attained the age of 31 years on the date of application. " Thus the words "the first of January of the year following" are violative of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution and are declared ultra-vires.

(2.) MR. Vyas submits that the writ petition is highly delayed. That hardly matters. Delay cannot be set up when the validity of Rules is under challenge, we, therefore, held that this contention has no force.