Dismissed

Dr.Ajith.Y.a. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Aug 2013WA/1167/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal challenged the dismissal of a petition seeking admission to a Post Graduate Medical Diploma Course on service quota grounds. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant, who turned 49 before the cut-off date, was ineligible despite the service argument.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed; the appellant was found ineligible for admission.

Dr.Ajith.Y.a. Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶5

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2013/10TH SRAVANA, 1935

¶6

WA.No. 1167 of 2013 (A)

¶7

WP(C) 13409/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 26-07-2013

¶8

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:

¶9

DR.AJITH.Y.A. AGED 49 YEARS

¶10

S/O.DR.A.YESHURATNAM, HOUSE NO.28A, NPP NAGAR

¶11

MOUNT SINAI, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 05.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN (SR.)

¶13

SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SRI.ALAN PAPALI

¶14

SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA

¶15

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶16

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, SECRETARIAT P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS 5TH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, HOUSING BOARD THYCAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001.

¶18

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE PO THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 011.

¶19

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ROSHAN D ALEXANDER R2 & R3 BY SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, MCI

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-082013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. & A.M.SHAFFIQUE,J.

¶22

-------------------------------------------W.A.No.1167 OF 2013 -------------------------------------------Dated this the 1^st day of August, 2013

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Manjula Chellur,C.J.

¶25

Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant.

¶26

The controversy is with regard to admission

¶27

to the Post Graduate Medical Diploma Course for service quota candidate, so far as the appellant is concerned. Clause IV (c) of the prospectus at Ext.P3, which was modified in pursuance of Ext.P4 Government Order fixing the upper age limit depending upon the department in which he was working, reads as under:

¶28

“(c). Age : Upper age limit for General Quota candidates will be 45 years as on 30/4/2013. For Service Quota candidates, other than Medical Education Services quota, upper age limit will be 48 years for Post Graduate Degree Courses and 49 years for Post Graduate Diploma Courses as on 30-4-2013. For MESQ candidates, upper age limit will be 52 years as on 30-04-2013” .

¶29

¶30

WA.1167/13

¶31

So far as the appellant is concerned he should not have completed 49 years of age as on 30-4-2013. Unfortunately, the date of birth of the appellant being 23/4/2013, he completes the age of 49 years as on 23/4/2013. Therefore, he becomes ineligible in terms of Ext.P3 prospectus. Opining so, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before us.

¶32

According to the learned Senior counsel, the appellant can be retired only on the last date of the month. Therefore, the last date of the month has to be taken as the date for fixing the upper age limit. He also contends that he has not completed 50 years, but he is aged only 49 years. Therefore, the upper age limit fixed at Ext.P3 prospectus is satisfied so far as appellant.

¶33

As on 24/3/2013 he completes 49 years and by 30/4/2013 he is 49 years, 7 days old. Therefore, definitely upper age limit fixed in the prospectus would

¶34

WA.1167/13

¶35

¶36

come in the way of the appellant in securing admission to the Post Graduate Medical Diploma Course. The contention that after completing Post Graduate Medical Diploma Course, service of the appellant for next five years could be

¶37

used by the Government is of no avail to the appellant.

¶38

Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed.

¶39

MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE.

¶40

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶41

uj.

Dr.Ajith.Y.a. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Ajith.Y.a. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs.P.B.Shaharban Vs the Southern Railway

G.Krishnakumar Vs Rajeev Sadanandan & Another

Toin Jose Vs State of Kerala

S.Shamsudeen Vs Land Revenue Commissioner

Jacob.C.John Vs Union of India

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Vs P.Kuttappa