The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by a teacher challenging age bar eligibility. The court held that the appellant was not eligible for the 2017 recruitment as he was overage then, and consequently could not claim deemed eligibility for the 2018 recruitment under Rule 265.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1816/2018
Gajendra Upadhyay S/o Sh. Prabha Shankar Upadhyay, Aged 42 Years, resident of village and post Anjana, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara, Rajasthan.
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
| For Appellant(s) | : Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Rathore on |
|---|---|
| behalf of Mr. Sandeep Shah | |
| For Respondent(s) | : --- |
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
14/12/2018
(2 of 2)
[SAW-1816/2018]
“If a candidate would have been entitled in respect of his/her age for direct recruitment in any year in which no such recruitment was held, he/she shall be deemed to be eligible in the next following recruitment, if he/she is not overage by more than 3 years.”
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ
13-MohitTak/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appellant who crossed the age limit for a recruitment year where no recruitment was held can claim eligibility under a rule providing deemed eligibility for the next recruitment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gajendra Upadhyay
State of Rajasthan
Pradeep Nandrajog
Pushpendra Singh Bhati
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
