IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13264 of 2008 Krishan Dev Singh, S/o-Sri Ram Kumar Singh, resident of village-Jhawan, P.O.-Benwaliya, P.S.-Bihiya, District-Bhojpur, Ara. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara. 3. The District Education Superintendent, Bhojpur, Ara. 4. The Block Education Officer, Sahpur, Bhojpur, Ara. 5. The Panchayat Secretary, Panchayat Sahpur, Ara. 6. The Block Development Officer, Sahpur, Ara. 7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Jhawan Benwaliaya Panchayat, Sahpur, Ara. -Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Gopal Govind Mishra. For the State : Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, AC To GP-IV. ------------ 04 21.06.2010 The petitioner had applied for appointment to the post of Panchayat Siksha Mitra, pursuant to advertisement as contained in Annexure-6, being advertisement dated 11.08.2004. His date of birth was 05.02.1974. Appointment having been made. His appointment has been cancelled by letter dated 03.06.2008, which is under challenge. The only ground for termination of petitioner is that on the date of appointment he was over age. Learned counsel for the State points out that though the advertisement was issued in the year 2004. Applications were made in the year 2004. As appointments were made pursuant to those advertisement and application in the year 2005, the cut off date for determining the age would be 01.01.2005. Petitioner submits to the contrary. He submits that the cut off date for age would be 01.01.2004, the order when advertisement for recruitment was issued. - 2 - Having heard the parties and with their consent, the writ petition is being disposed of at this stage itself. A reference to the advertisement Annexure-6 would show that it provides that the maximum age for appointment is three years. It further provides that the cut off date for determining the age would be 1st January of the year of recruitment. Here, the recruitment process was started in the year 2004, when advertisement was issued and applications were filed. Merely, because the authorities took time in completing the process and issuing appointment letters would not amount to shifting of the cut off date, as the process had started and was expected to be completed in the year 2004 itself. The cut off date as per the advertisement itself would be 01.01.2004. If we take the date of birth of the petitioner as disclosed, then on cut off date, that is 01.01.2004, he was not over age. That being so, the termination is wholly without jurisdiction. The order of termination as substituted by memo no.397 dated 29.07.2008, issued by Block Education Extension Officer is, thus, set aside. The petitioner would be deemed to be continuing in service with all consequential benefits. The writ petition is allowed. Trivedi (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)