MC 3347/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P.K. SAIKIA Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. M. Khatani ar, learned counsel representing the appellant/ applicant as well as Mr. D. Sai kia, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam. We have also heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned counsel representing the respondent No. 1. By means of this application, the applicant has prayed for stay of the i mpugned judgment and order dated 19.10.2011 passed in W.P.(C) No. 5064/2011 by w hich it has been provided that the upper age limit of 50 years as prescribed in the relevant Rules should be adhered to. According to the applicant, there shall not be any upper age limit for selection and appointment of the Principal in th e Provincialised colleges. Challenging the Rules, the applicant has already pref erred a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6031/2011 in which this Court by order d ated 05.12.2011 has formulated the following issue: The issue raised in this petition is whether fixing of upper age limit for recr uitment to the post of Principal in various Provincialised Degree Colleges of th e State to 50 years is rational as the post is normally to be given to people wi th experience. The Assam Education Service Rules, 1982, require at least 15 year s total teaching experience and the candidate must be working as an Associate Pr ofessor. In view of the Rule, experienced and senior persons who have crossed th e age of 50 years will be left out of consideration and juniors will steal a mar ch over the seniors. It is also pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners that the t enure of Principal is to be for five years and if upper age limit is 55 years, t he Rule prescribing upper age limit would be in harmony with the tenure for 5 ye ars. He also submits that in other States including West Bengal, upper age limit has been prescribed to be 55 years. Though primarily the issue pertains to policy matter, the rational of th e policy can always be tested on touchstone of reasonableness. As per the own declaration of the applicant, his present age is 57 year s. If that be so, even if his argument that the upper age limit should be fixed at 55 years is accepted, he will not be eligible to offer candidature for appoin tment as Principal which is by way of direct recruitment. Situated thus, we are not inclined to stay the impugned order. Consequently, the prayer made in this application stands rejected. Misc. case stands disposed of.