Petitioner challenged refusal due to age limit in District Court appointment. Court noted selection had already been cancelled, rendering relief impossible, and closed the writ petition without protection and order. Pending miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.31878 of 2015
ORDER: (per VRS, J)
The petitioner has come up with the above Writ Petition challenging the refusal of the respondents to accept his application for appointment to the post of Office Subordinate in the District Court, Nalgonda.
Heard Sri K.S.Murthy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. P. Ravi Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 4.
By a notification, dated 03.09.2015, the fourth respondent invited applications for appointment to the posts of Office Subordinates (Attenders). The petitioner applied, but his application was not accepted on the ground that he had crossed the upper age limit of 39 years as on 01.07.2015. Therefore, he has come up with the present Writ Petition.
But as on date, the selection made in at least five different districts, pursuant to the notification, dated 03.09.2015, stands cancelled. The selection in respect of Nalgonda District was also cancelled by a notification issued
VRS, J & JUD, J W.P.No.31878 of 2015
2
by the Registry of this Court on 23.08.2016. Even if the petitioner succeeds, since the selection has already been cancelled, no relief can be granted to him.
Therefore, the Writ Petition is closed as no orders are
necessary.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed. No order as to costs.
___________
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J
15 th FEBRUARY, 2017.
J. UMA DEVI, J
kvni
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to entertain a writ petition challenging age limit in a recruitment notice when the selection process has already been cancelled.
Whether the Court can grant any relief in the present circumstances.
The Petitioner
The Fourth Respondent
V. Ramasubramanian
J. Uma Devi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
