RAJU KUMAR UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all the aforesaid writ petitions, respective learned counsels appearing for the petitioners have submitted that tomorrow (15th February, 2012) Jharkhand Academic Council is going to hold the examination for the posts of Higher Secondary School Teacher (+2 Teachers), in pursuance of public advertisement No. 117/11. It is further submitted that all the candidates, who are petitioners in these writ petitions, have been initially appointed as Primary School Teachers [barring the petitioner of W.P.(S) No. 4767 of 2011] and after appointment of these petitioners as Primary Teachers, they are on deputation for teaching 11th and 12th standard i.e. Higher Secondary School Standard (+2 standard). It is also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent-State of Jharkhand has prescribed the maximum age for the candidates, belonging to general category, as 40 years, for female candidates 43 years etc. and for different type of candidates, different maximum age limit has been fixed as on 1.1.2011. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, this cut-off date is absolutely arbitrary and the cases of the petitioners ought to have been considered by the respondent-State authorities relaxing the age, because they are working on deputation in Higher Secondary Schools (+2 Schools) since last 6/7 years. Learned counsel for the petitioners have also contended that there is also 50% reservation for those teachers, who are teaching in Secondary School standard i.e. teaching in Std. VIII to X. This type of reservation could not have been fixed by the respondents, ousting the Primary Teachers, who are teaching in Std. I to VII and whatever is the reservation fixed as per the advertisement for Secondary School Teachers, should also be made applicable to the Primary School Teachers. Learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon the following decisions :

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondent-State has submitted that the cut-off date, which has been fixed as 1.1.2011 is not at all arbitrary, because the advertisements have been given initially being Advertisement No. 74/11, thereafter. Advertisement No. 80/11, thereafter Advertisement No. 100/11 and cancelling all the aforesaid three advertisements, how Advertisement No. 117/11 has been finally published on 24th December, 2011 and, therefore, the year, 2011 started with the 1st day of January, 2011 and, therefore, the cut-off date has been fixed as 1.1.2011 for the total posts of teachers as 1840. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that whenever any cut-off date is fixed for calculation of the age of the candidates, certain candidates are bound to be there, who are falling on a wrong side of the cut-off date, but, that cannot be the only reason for quashing the cut-off date. Learned counsel for the State has also submitted that all the petitioners [except the petitioner of W.P.(S) No. 4767 of 2011] are appointed as Primary Teachers in the Primary Schools, who are teaching from Std. I to Std. VII and, therefore, there can not be any reservation for these candidates. Looking to the advertisement, 50% of the reservation is meant only for those teachers, who are in the Government Secondary Schools. The posts of teachers in a Higher Secondary Schools will be filled up in the ratio of 1:1 i.e. 50% will be selected by direct recruitment whereas 50% posts are reserved for those teachers, who are teaching in Secondary Schools and therefore, those, who are appointed in a Primary Schools as Teachers, cannot claim reservation of 50%, but, if they are otherwise qualified, having Master Degree etc. and are falling within the age limit, as per their category, namely, General Category, Female candidate Category etc., they can compete with other candidates by appearing in the examination and they have already been issued admit cards to appear in the examination, which is going to be held tomorrow. Thus, those candidates, who are overage, are not allowed to appear in the examination for the posts in question. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the State that it is true that there are no statutory rules for recruitment of the posts, in question, but, as per the administrative instructions, issued by the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, dated 5th July, 2011, which is at Annexure B to the counter-affidavit, filed by the respondent-State in W.P.(S) No. 4709 of 2011, the age fixed for different type of candidates are as under :

(3.) It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the State that is a policy decision of the State whereby the maximum age limit has been prescribed. This maximum age limit may not be altered by this Court, otherwise there may not be any certainty for such relaxation of age and the maximum age limit will be highly uncertain, once the age relaxation is granted by this Court. Always when cut-off date is prescribed for any examination, for calculation of the maximum age limit, there shall be few candidates, who might have crossed that age limit. The State cannot satisfy all. Few candidates are bound to remain there. who may not be eligible, because of overage, Learned counsel for the State has relying upon the decisions, rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malik Mazhar Sultan & Anr. v. U.P. Public Service Commission & Ors., 2006 9 SCC 507, and in the case of Dr. Ami Lal Bhat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 1997 6 SCC 614, submitted that the cut-off date may not be shifted by this Court, in view of the aforesaid decisions, otherwise it will be unfair for those candidates, who have never applied, though they are similarly situated like the petitioners i.e. overage candidates. Discretion vested in the State may not be altered by this Court merely because vacancies have arisen earlier than the date of advertisement or merely because there is a belated advertisement, given by the State and it is submitted on the basis of the aforesaid decisions that even though there is a delayed advertisement by the State, no age relaxation may be provided only on those grounds.