SUJEET KUMAR SAH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the Order dated 13th September, 2005 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 4192 of 2005, whereby and where under, the learned Single Judge while dismissed the writ petition, upheld the order dated 31st May, 2005 passed by the superintendent of Police, Pakur in Pakur district D.P. No. 08/05, whereby the appellant was dismissed from service.

(2.) AS the case can be disposed of on a short point, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except the relevant one, as detailed hereunder:

(3.) IN the present case, learned Single Judge though noticed the aforesaid judgment reported in the case of Cosmas Bhengra (supra) but without distinguishing the same, relied on another unreported judgment rendered in W.P.(C) No. 6786 of 2004. In the said case, learned Single Judge held that the petitioner of the said case having knowing fully well the minimum age but he having applied in spite of below age than the prescribed age, cannot be given benefit as that will amount to depriving thousand of similarly situated candidates, who did not apply. We are not in agreement with such finding given in W.P.(C) No. 6786 of 2004, as any person, underage or overage, has right to apply for appointment by relaxing the age limitation, as prescribed under Relaxation Rules and a statutory rule under proviso to 309 of the Constitution of India will become redundant.