SHAILESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts in short are that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Jr. Instructors on temporary basis. At the time of appointment, they were stated to be within age limit.

(2.) Vide advertisement dated 5.6.2012, applications were invited for filling up the posts of Group Instructor/Surveyor/Assistant Apprentice Gr.II. Petitioners applied as 'departmental employee' under General category for the post in question. After succeeding in the written examination, they were called for interview. However, vide order dated 29.5.2014, their application forms were rejected.

(3.) While praying for setting aside the impugned order with a further prayer to appoint them on the respective posts, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the advertisement for the post in question has been issued after a long time whereas the vacancies were available in the year 1991 and 1997. It was further contended that they are entitled for age relaxation as per para 6 of the advertisement and therefore, age relaxation should have been given to them.