/ 8W51E BEHCft C^ ) IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. W^P.(S) No. 15°)^ OF 2010 PETITIONER ^ ^y <^ >y ^^ ^^ ^i^^}'"" Manoj Roy Choudhary, son of Shri D.K.Rai Choudhary, aged about 36 years, R/o. House No. K-15, Kranti Nagar, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS yl) State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Panchayat and Rural Welfare Departraent Mantralaya, DKS Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2) Zila Panchayat, Janjgir-Champa, through Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Janjgir Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Sl N0. 1593 of2010 Petitioner Manoj Roy Choudhary Versus Respondent State of Chhattisgarh & another WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri Abhay Tiawari, Advocate forthe petitioner Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondent. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on 12th day of April, 2010) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitsthat pursuant to the advertisement dated 14.01.2008, the petitioner made an application for seiection and appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-11 in Maths subject. The age criteria prescribed in the advertisement was 21 years as on 01.01.2009 and not more than 35 years of age as on 01.01 .2009. 2. In normal course, the date of making application should be the cut off date for eligibility and age criteria. This issue came up for consideration before this Court in Sandeep Kumar Shrivstava & Another v. State of Chhattisgarh & others . 3. On carefully consideration of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and documents appended thereto in the case of Sandeep Kumar (supra) decided on 22 day of February, 2010, this Court has observed as under: "Thus, the cut-off date for the purpose of those candidates, who have applied for selection on the post 1 W.P. (S) No. 4829 of2008(decided on 22.02.2010) 6. of Shiksha Karmi would be the lest dated for filing the application form in the concemed subject advertisement, as the cut-off date mentioned in the model advertisement cannot be considered as the cut-off dated on the ground that firstly, the same was internal circular and secondly, it was not brought to the notice of the candidates, who, pursuant to the advertisement, responded and applied for selection on the post of Shiksha Karmis". In the present case, it was clearly stated in the advertisement that the age of the candidate should be minimum 21 years and not more than 35 years of age on 01.01.2009. Thus, no other date can be considered for determination of age limit of the petitioner. It was well settled principles of law that the cut off date fixed in the advertisement should be final cutoff date, but in absence of any specific date in the advertisement the last date of filing of the application would be cut off date. The petitioner admittedlywas more than 35 years of age on 01.01.2009 and, as such, he was ineligible to make application for selection and appointment toe the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-11 pursuant to the advertisement dated 14.01.2008. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself. Arun Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge