- (1.) Having regard to the submissions made, while allowing the application for early hearing (I.A.No. 3900/2012), the matter has been considered finally at this stage itself. The petitioner, having offered his candidature for selection to the post of Prabodhak pursuant to the advertisement dated 31.05.2008 (Annexure-5), has filed this writ petition stating the grievance that though he was called for interview but while preparing the select list for Hanumangarh District, the concerned Education Officer chose not to declare his result. With the submissions that he made the representations to the respondent No. 3 on 30.09.2008 and 15.10.2008 seeking declaration of result but of no avail, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-- A] By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondent No. 3 may kindly be directed to declare the result of the petitioner. B] By an appropriate writ order or direction, the action of the respondents is not declaring the result of the petitioner and selecting him for appointment on the post of Prabodhak may kindly be declared illegal, unjust and arbitrary. C] By an appropriate writ order or direction the respondents authorities may kindly be directed to consider the petitioner within age as per Rules 13 of the Rules of 2008 and extend him appointment on the post of Prabodhak. D] Cost of litigation may also kindly be awarded to the petitioner.
(2.) The petitioner submits that result has been withheld while considering him ineligible essentially with reference to the requirement concerning the age limit but then, he was within the age limit when he joined as Shiksha Sahayogi. According to the petitioner, though Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 ('Rules of 2008') provides for upper age limit for the post of Prabodhak as 35 years but, as per proviso (i) to Rule 13, he is entitled for 5 years' age relaxation being the member of Other Backward Class ('OBC') and then, as per proviso (v) to Rule 13, he would be deemed to be within the age limit for being within such limit when initially engaged as Shiksha Sahayogi.
(3.) The respondents have contended in their reply that as per the applicable circulars, the maximum age prescribed for appointment on a post under the Government was 31 years and the petitioner, who had crossed the age of 31 years at the time of initial engagement as Shiksha Sahayogi, is not entitled to be considered within age limit for appointment to the post of Prabodhak. It has also been contended during the course of submissions that in any case, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief now in this writ petition as the respondents have completed the process of selection and all the vacancies have been filled up.;