Sharwan Kumar vs Union of India and Others

Instant petition is directed against order of the ld. Central Administrative Tribunal dt. 16.08.2012 whereby the request of petitioner for consideration of his candidature against the vacancies for the year 2006, 2007 & 2008 was turned down as he crossed the upper age limit on 01.07.2009, relying upon the earlier view expressed in various judgments of the ld. Tribunals, reference of which has been made in the order impugned. As per GSR-86, for Extra Departmental Agents the upper age limit is 50 years as on 1st July of the year in which examination is held and the incumbent should have completed a minimum of 5 years satisfactory service as on 1st January of the year in which examination is held.

In the instant case, it is not disputed that the petitioner has crossed the upper age limit of 50 years as on 01.07.2009 and placed reliance on the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench in the case of A. Ganesan Vs. UOI & Others reported in 2006 (3) ATJ 420 and the judgment of ld. Tribunal in Hari Shankar Gurjar Vs. UOI & Others and the ld. Tribunal in the order impugned held that since the petitioner has crossed the upper age limit of 50 years as on 01.07.2009, he was ineligible to participate in the selection process, held by the respondent for the post of Extra Departmental Staff.

The main thrust of submission of the petitioner is that the vacancy pertains to the year 2006, 2007 & 2008 and his eligibility was to be looked into by the authorities on the year of vacancies and indisputably he was within the age limit of 50 years but merely filled in the later year 2009, he could not be considered ineligible and this fact has not been properly appreciated and considered by the ld. Tribunal while passing the order impugned.

The scheme of Rules, which the ld. Tribunal has taken note of, makes it self-explicit that candidature of such of the incumbents should be considered for participation in the selection process who did not attain age of 50 years in the year in which examination is to be held and in the instant case, the vacancies of 2006, 2007 & 2008 were approved by the competent authority vide letter dt. 19.10.2009 and soon thereafter the process was initiated of holding examination and accordingly the eligibility, as regards upper age limit of the incumbent, was to be looked into as on 01.07.2009, the year in which the examination was held and indisputably the petitioner had crossed the upper age limit of 50 years, as per his date of birth, recorded in the service record, was not considered eligible to participate in the selection process.

As regards, submissions made for vacancies of 2006, 2007 & 2008, suffice it to say that if the requirement of Rule is to look into upper age limit of the incumbent on 1st July of the year of examination to be held, availability of vacancies of 2006, 2007 & 2008 may not be of relevance and the question remains is the year in which such approval was granted by the competent authority of holding examination, in the instant case - year 2009, is in accordance with the scheme of Rules and taking note of the approval, the upper age limit of the incumbent is to be looked into as on 1st July of the year of examination i.e. 2009 which makes the petitioner ineligible to participate in the selection process and this what the ld. Tribunal has considered in the order impugned while dismissing the Original Application filed by the petitioner.

We have gone through the order of the ld. Tribunal and do not find any apparent error in the order impugned which requires interference. Consequently, the instant petition being devoid of merit stands dismissed.