In letters patent appeal challenging the rejection based on age limit 35 years versus State resolution of 65 years, the High Court held that the resolution fixed superannuation age not recruitment age, following Rajeev Ranjan Chaudhary and overruling Raj Kishore Roy.
The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
.... .... Appellants
Versus
.... .... Respondents
=========================================================== Appearance:
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Kumari Amita, GP-3.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, AC to GP-3.
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 05-10-2016
The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to
an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 05.05.2014 in C.W.J.C. No. 441 of 2014, whereby the challenge of the appellant to the advertisement (Annexure-4) issued by the Bihar Rural Development Society for appointment on contract basis fixing
Patna High Court LPA No.861 of 2014 dt.05-10-2016
2/4
the maximum age limit as 35 years remained unsuccessful.
Patna High Court LPA No.861 of 2014 dt.05-10-2016
3/4
contract basis shall be 65 years. In other words, it fixed the cap of the maximum age limit of the working age of the contractual employees and not the age limit for engagement on contract basis. It is something like the age of superannuation for contractual employees. Therefore, the argument raised by the appellant that the candidate who is 65 years of age is liable for appointment on contract basis is completely untenable and cannot be accepted.
Patna High Court LPA No.861 of 2014 dt.05-10-2016
4/4
permitted to work. In view thereof, we do not find any merit in the claim of the appellant. Accordingly, the present Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.
(Hemant Gupta, J)
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Mishra
AFR/NAFR A.F.R CAV DATE N.A. Uploading Date06.10.2016 Transmission Date
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the State Government resolution fixing superannuation age at 65 years mandates recruitment age also to be fixed at 65 years.
Whether the Single Bench order in Raj Kishore Roy Vs. State of Bihar lays down a principle of law binding on the present appeal.
Whether the maximum age limit of 65 years can be made a benchmark for recruitment by every department across the board.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Raj Kishore Roy Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.Overruled¶5
C.W.J.C. No. 16920 of 2012 (Raj Kishore Roy Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.)
Rajeev Ranjan Chaudhary & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.Followed¶6
C.W.J.C. No. 23619 of 2013 (Rajeev Ranjan Chaudhary & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.)
Satyendra Kumar Sinha & Ors.
The State of Bihar
The Secretary, Rural Development Department
The Rural Development Society
Hemant Gupta
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
