The High Court of Nagpur held that the petitioner's challenge to the CLAT score requirement for the JAG Entry Scheme was academic as he had crossed the age limit. The court disposed of the petition without deciding merits due to lack of consequent relief.
null
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 1-WP-893-2023.odt
2023:BHC-NAG:15786-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 893 OF 2023
(Kshitij s/o Vijay Kothale Vs. Union of India & Anr.)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order
and Registrar's orders.
Petitioner in-person.
Shri N.S. Deshpande, Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondents.
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2023
Heard.
2]The petitioner in-person prays for a declaration that the prescription of
additional educational qualification of furnishing Common Law Admission Test
(CLAT) score of the preceding year as qualification for being eligible to appear at
the Judge Advocate General (JAG) Entry Scheme is unsustainable in law.
According to the petitioner, such qualification was not prescribed earlier and the
petitioner could participate in the selection process for the 28th and 29th Course.
However, the requirement of furnishing CLAT score of the preceding year was
introduced only for the first time at the JAG Entry Scheme – 30th Course.
Principally, it is urged that there is no nexus whatsoever with requiring an
applicant seeking participation through the JAG Entry Scheme to indicate the
score secured in the preceding year at CLAT PG, especially since requirement of
securing any marks has not been prescribed therein.
3]By an interim order dated 13/2/2023, the petitioner was permitted to
participate in the JAG Entry Scheme, 2023 without being required to furnish his
CLAT PG score of the preceding year. Pursuant to this order, the petitioner
participated in the recruitment process. In the affidavit dated 31/7/2023 filed on
behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the petitioner was permitted to
appear at the Service Selection Board Interview held at Jalandhar on
26/5/2023. The screening test prescribed was conducted. It was however found
that the petitioner could not qualify in the said test and was thus screened-out.
4]It is to be noted that under the JAG Entry Scheme - 31st Course, the age
limit of the candidates has been prescribed to be between 21 to 27 years as on
2 1-WP-893-2023.odt
1/7/2023. It is indicated that the candidates should be born not earlier than
2/7/1996 and not later than 1/7/2002. The very same age limit has been
prescribed for the JAG Entry Scheme - 32nd Course. This process of recruitment is
to be conducted in April-2024 and the candidates born between 2/1/1997 to
1/1/2003 can participate therein. The petitioner’s date of birth as indicated in
his application (at page 79 of the record) is 30/8/1996. This would indicate that
in the next recruitment process, which is the 32nd Course, the petitioner would
not be eligible to participate.
5]In these facts therefore we find that the challenge as raised to the
requirement of furnishing CLAT PG score of the preceding year for participation
in the JAG Entry Scheme has become academic insofar as the petitioner is
concerned as he has crossed the age of 27 years. The petitioner would not be
able to participate in the next recruitment process. It is pertinent to note that by
virtue of the interim order dated 13/2/2023, the petitioner could participate in
the JAG Entry Scheme - 31st Course without having appeared in CLAT PG in the
preceding year. In other words, the object of the petitioner participating in the
said process has been achieved by virtue of the interim order. The candidature of
the petitioner was considered on merits but he was then screened-out.
6]In the aforesaid facts, no useful purpose would be served by deciding the
challenge as raised in the Writ Petition as no consequential relief can be granted
to the petitioner even if he succeeds. It is therefore not felt appropriate to decide
the prayers on their merit. By keeping the challenge as raised open for being
agitated and considered in an appropriate case, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
The parties shall bear their own costs.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.)
SUMIT
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a declaration regarding the presumption of Common Law Admission Test score for JAG Entry Scheme is maintainable when the petitioner exceeded the age limit.
Kshitij s/o Vijay Kothale
Union of India
A. S. Chandurkar
Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court