- (1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Amit Srivastava for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No: 1, Sri S. P. Shukla for respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 and Sri P. P. Chaudhary for respondent No. 5.
(2.) THE petitioner aggrieved by order dated 31. 8. 2005 (Annexure-ll to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 4 cancelling his appointment and appointing respondent No. 5 on the post of draftsman in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-100-6000 has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition, in brief, are that among other posts, one post of draftsman, in the pay-scale of Rs. 4000-6000, had been advertised in daily newspaper 'rashtriya Sahara' by Zila Panchayat, Sant Kabir Nagar on 23rd March, 2005. The post of Draftsman was advertised under the general category, i. e. unreserved. The petitioner, respondent No. 5 and others applied for the said post and after holding interview, the appointment letter was ultimately issued to the petitioner on 6. 6. 2005. It appears that Zila Panchayat in the meantime also referred the matter to the State Government making enquiry as to whether 'relaxation of age' would be available to reserved category candidates since respondent No. 5 belong to the category of 'other Backward Class' and aged about 36 years, was overage, on the cut-off date. The State Government by letter dated 7th July, 2005 clarified that reserved category candidates are entitled to be considered upto upper age limit of 40 years in view of Government Order dated 4. 11. 2004. Although respondent No. 5 had secured highest marks, but as he was found overage on the cut-off date, he was not selected and the petitioner was appointed, but, in view of clarification issued by State Government, respondent No. 5 was appointed and appointment of the petitioner was cancelled by the impugned order.
(3.) SRI Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended, firstly, that the post in question was not reserved and, therefore, no benefit of relaxation of age was admissible to respondent No. 5. Secondly, he contended that under Rule 10 of U. P. Zila Parishad Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 1970 Rules) read with Appendix, Schedule-A, item 28, minimum and maximum age for direct recruitment in respect to the post of draftsman is 18 to 30 years and even if five years relaxation is made available to a reserved category candidate, that would not go beyond 35 years. Since respondent No. 5 was already above 36 years on the cut-off date, he was in any case overage and could not have been appointed. Therefore, relaxation of age to respondent No. 5 vide Government Order dated 4. 11. 2004 had no concern in this matter. Supporting the order of appointment, learned Standing Counsel has filed counter affidavit on behalf of the State authorities, referring to the Government Order dated 21. 1. 2000. It is contended that maximum age was altered in respect of Government Servants for direct recruitment, from 32 years to 35 years by amending U. P. Recruitment in Services (Age Limit) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "1972 Rules" ). On the basis of said Government Order, respondent No. 5 is eligible for direct recruitment for the post of draftsman. It is further contended that by Government Order dated 4. 11. 2004, it was clarified that previous Government orders issued by the Government were applicable to the employees of Zila Panchayat also and, therefore, the minimum and maximum age for direct recruitment for the post of draftsman in question is 18 to 35 years. It is relaxable for 5 years in respect of reserved category candidates. Respondent No. 5 is a reserved category candidate and he was entitled to be considered for recruitment till the age of 40 years.;