AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
By Hon’ble Mr. Anand Mathur, Member (A)
Learned counsel for the applicants states that the applicants are aspirants for J&K Combined Competitive Examination (JKAS) for which they have been preparing for a long time and have appeared on certain earlier occasions also but could not qualify the same. These aspirants were expecting relaxation in the upper age limit, as has been done by other States, in view of the Covid situation. Moreover, as may be seen from the contents of the O.A, some other States have, even in the normal course also, prescribed a much higher upper age limit than 32 or even 35 years which has been prescribed by the respondents. He further states that the applicants are allowed six chances for appearing in the said examination and they have a right to exhaust all the chances but are constrained having crossed the upper age limit prescribed by the respondents. Certain citations of Hon’ble Supreme Court and also certain orders passed by this Tribunal in similar cases have been mentioned by the learned counsel for the applicants. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, brings to my notice order dated 11th May 2022 No:GAD-SERVOKAS/103/2022-02, wherein the respondents have already taken care of the issue and have increased the upper age limit by 3 years for all categories . The increase is as follows:-
Open merit candidates from existing 32 years to 35 years,
ii) Reserved category candidates and in-service candidates from 34 years to 37 years,
iii) Physically challenged candidates from existing 35 years to 38 years.
He further states that 3 years relaxation which has already been provided in terms of orders dated 11.05.2022 (supra) takes care of Covid situation. Regarding the allegation that the examination is not being held regularly, he states that during the years 2019 and 2020, it was not held but was certainly held in the year 2021 and the candidates could have taken their chance at that time. Therefore, if they were aggrieved, at that time, they could have filed the present O.A. much earlier.
Keeping in view the arguments of both the sides, it is felt that the respondents have taken care of the Covid situation by increasing the upper age limit by 3 years across the board.
As far as comparison with other States is concerned, where the normal upper age limit is also higher, reasons may differ from State to State and if at all the applicants were aggrieved by that, what prevented them from approaching the Tribunal or any other forum much earlier.
It is also of importance that the last date for submission of applications, has been extended from 15th May to 26th May 2022.
In view of the very limited time available from today, I am constrained to direct the respondents to consider the averments made by the applicants in the present O.A. as a representation from their side and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a short period of 4 days i.e. by 23rd May, 2022. Copy of this order be given dasti to both the learned counsel for parties today itself.
I have not entered into the merit of the case.
O.A. 436/2022 is disposed off accordingly.
No order as to costs.