INDRA KUMAR MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE , all the aforesaid writ petitions involve common question of fact and law, therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and are being decided by this common order.

(2.) IN all the writ petitions, claim is of age relaxation to in -service prospective candidates for the post of Junior Marketing Officer and further, challenge to subsequent denial of relaxation of the age by the State Govt.

(3.) AS per Rule 13 of the Rules of 2001, vacancies are to be determined year wise and the same are further required to be fulfilled yearwise but in the instant case, no advertisement has been issued and no selection has been made since 1996 i.e. for 12 years and selection for 1996. The relevant date for calculation was 1.1.1997 and on 1.1.1997 all the petitioners were within the age -limit. The further grievance of the petitioners is that they have been made to suffer on account of inaction on the part of Government not to make yearwise selection. Although the advertisement was issued subsequently also in the year 2004 yet no selection has been made. It has also been stated in the writ petition that as per Schedule 25% quota is prescribed for the in -service candidates and out of 84 advertised posts 25% quota comes to 21 and the candidates in the ratio 1:3 for interview are not available. The non -advertisement of vacancies has resulted in rendering the petitioners ineligible.