1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3376/2007 Vinod Bhaurao Yawale & anor ..vs.. State & ors =================================== Mr. A V. Gawande, Advocate for petitioners Mr. A.S. Fulzele, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 to 3 Mr. J.B. Kasat, Advocate for respondent no.4 =================================== CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR & S.R. DONGAONKAR, JJ. DATE:25.6.2008 P.C. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the documents on record. There is no substance in the grievance brought before us by the petitioners. The argument of the petitioners that they are eligible on account of criteria of working for 90 days as Seasonal Field Workers and finding place in the Seniority List of such workers maintained by the District Malariya Officer, which has been mentioned in the certificate at Annexure:D, can be no basis to consider the request of the petitioners having regard to the regulation notified by the concerned department on 13.12.2001 (Annexure:G) which provides for qualifying age as not below 18 years and not above 30 years. Admittedly, both the petitioners are above 30 years of age. If it is so, they are not eligible even for being considered. Counsel for the petitioners would however, contend that 2 if the petitioners' cases were to be considered in terms of their standing in the Wait List at serial no.1 & 2 published on 30.7.2006, instead of appointing three other candidates from outside Amravati, they would have got employment against said vacancies. Admittedly, petitioners have not impleaded the said three candidates who have been appointed pursuant to the test conducted in 2006. Assuming the stand taken on behalf of the petitioners were to be accepted, once again the petitioners would be ineligible to be considered on account of the notification dated 13.12.2001, being above 30 years of age even in the year 2006. To get over this position, counsel for the petitioners then relied on the advertisement issued by the department inviting applications which mentions that the age limit for reserved candidate is relaxed upto five years. There is nothing in the petition to indicate that the petitioners belong to reserved category. Even if five years relaxation is to be provided, the petitioners have admittedly exceeded 35 years of age, as petitioner no.1 was 38 years of age and petitioner no.2 was aged about 37 years, when the present writ petition is filed. Present writ petition is filed in June 2007. Taking any view of the matter, there is no substance in this petition. Dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE smp