S. R. Singh, J. - (1.) Certain vacancies in Class III posts in the Judgeship of Banda were publicised by means of the notification which came to be published in NAVKAAMYUG PRAKASHAN, a newspaper issuing from Banda, on 28.8.1996 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). The challenge herein is to a part of the notification fixing 1.10.1996 as the cut-off date for the purpose of computing the prescribed age-limit. The notification embodies the condition that the candidates should not be less than 18 years and more than 32 years of age on 1.10.1996.
(2.) The bottom-line of the argument advanced by petitioner's counsel is that according to Notification No. 18/2/81, Karmik-2, Lucknow dated December 11, 1984 (Annexure-3), the prescribed age-limit is to be determined with reference to 1st day of July of the year in which vacancies are notified for direct recruitment and, therefore, the District Judge, submitted the learned counsel, was not justified in fixing 1.10.1986 as the cut-off date for the purpose of determining the minimum and maximum age limits prescribed by law. In the counter-affidavit, it is posited that U. P. State Services (Age-limit) (5th Amendment) Rules, 1984, are Intended for application to U. P. State Services other than the services under the Ministerial Establishment of Subordinate Courts which services are governed by the U. P. Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947 which, it is further canvassed, do not postulate that the age-limit should be computed with reference to Ist day of July of the calendar year in which the vacancies are notified. Learned standing counsel tried to buttress the stand taken in the counter-affidavit.
(3.) I have bestowed my anxious consideration to the questions involved herein and submissions made across the bar.;