PENGR /''^Q, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P. No....^S.:^^......./2005 PETITIONER: Gajendra Kuinar Kashyap Aged about 18 years S/0 Shri Santosh Kumar Kashyap, R/0 Village Birra, P.0. Birra Tehsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS JEiSPONDENTS: .. •• 1. /r^ " e^A^y / ,^lr4 ."^/ifi/^ / ^iy ')y^v' .^,/pix -<!'•' .<^* .••" °^/" l^ ^J^ y ^.0^ ^' ^^ \!^^\^" •:^ ^ 1>- Q ^"' ^ o^'^ ^>--^/ C^T'^f-^ 3. 5. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretaiy Department of Panchayat 8s Rural Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Director Department of Panchayat & Rural Development, D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Janpad Panchayat, Bamhnidih Through the Chief Executive Officer, Bamhnidih District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) Head Master Purva Madhyamik Shala, Siladehi Tehsil Bamhnidih District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) Block Education Officer Block Bamhnidih District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) PETLTIPN JUNDER ARTICLES 226 QF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA l''0;R_ ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOROTHER SUITABLE^WRI'ILS^ND DIRECTIONS:- ^ ^"T^ :'..<s&. ' ^. KSlf' a&'^ 'ly'\.,'v l" W.P. No. 2928 of 2005 Gaiendra Kumar KashvaD 'jSOgr!-) §Ofhgrs Writ Petition under Artide 226 of the ConstitBtion of India DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice i.M. Quddusi 8. Hon'bie Shri Justic^ N. K. Agarwal. 'T : Shri Jitendra Paii, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate Generai for tl State/1,2 & 5. Shri Roshan Dubey, Advocate for respondent No.3. (Passed on 4 day of August, 2010) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner cha'lenges the iegaiity and validity of order dated 01 .07.2005, whereby and whereunder his joining report on the post of Shlksha Karmi Grarie !1! has been cancelled. 2. The petttloner, who was a candidate in the recruitment made forthe post of Shiksha Karmi, Grade IH in Janpad Panchayat Bamhnidih, has filed the instant writ petition with the facts that he appeared in that se!ection process and was setected and appointed but subsequently he was terminated from sen/ice on the pretext that he did not compiete the age of 18 years on 01.01.2005. 3. In fact, different advertisements were made to fil! up the post ofShiksha Karmi Grade 1!1 byjanpad Panchayat Bamhnidih, Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh, Nagar Paiika Parishad Deepika, Distt. Korba, Janpad Panchayat Patharia, Distt. Bilaspur and Janpad Panchayat Manora, Distt. ..Jashpur. The advertisement for Janpad Panchayat Bamhnidih, in which the petitioner participated, was made on 20.04.05, Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh was madeDn 21.04.05, Nagar Palika Parishad Deepika was made on 05.05.05, Janpad Panchayat Patharia & Janpad Panchayat Manora was made on 19.04.05. 4. Reaarding aae limit in the advertisement of Janpad Panchayat, Bamhnidih, it was mentloned as minlmum 18 years and maximum 35 years as on 01.01.05, whereas in the advertisement of Janpad Panchayst, Sarangarh & Nagar Paiika Parishad, Deeplka, it Is 18 and 35 years on 01.04.05, and in Janpad Panchayat; Patharia & Janpad Panchayat Manora, no cut off date was mentioned, meaning thereby, on the date of advertisement, the age should be between 18 and 35 years. 5. in Ruie 9:1 of The Chhattlsgarh Panchayat Service (Recruitment and General Conditions of Services) Rules, 1999 (for short 'the Rules, 1999'), the age limit has been mentloned as under: -"Age. (a) He must have attained the age specified Th column (3) of Schedule-1!! and not attained the age specified in column (4) of the said Schedule on the first day of January next following the date of CQmmencement of the selection." In column 3 of Schedute III It is 18 vears i.e. minlmum age limit and column 4 is 33 years i.e. maximum age limit. 6. !n the Rules, 1999, if interpretation of the rule 9(1)(a) is considered, then, there may be two interpretstions because of the reason in the absence of ^ormation of sentence grammaticaily. It can be "on the Urst day of January, next following the date of commencement ofthe seiection", and it can also be "on fhe firsf day of January next, following ttie date of commencement of the selection". Therefore, there are dlscrepancies in the different advertisements as discussed above. 7. The Date of Birth of the petitioner is 13.03.1987, therefore, he compteted 18 years on 12.03.2005. The advertisement of Janpad Panchayat, Bamhnidih was made on 20,04.2005 on which date he was more than 18 years old. Even if, as per advertisement of Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh and Nagar Palika Parishad Deepika, if the age is counted from 01.04.2005, in that situation a!so, he had completed 1 years of age on 01.04.2005. Further, he was aHowed to participate in th.e selection process, he was declared selected and sybsequently appointed and joined aiso, these farts are not in dispute. 8. In view of above, it cannot be said that on 01.04.2005 the petitioner was not crossed 18 years of age, and on the date of advertisement also the situation is same. •'-•^ 10. 11 In view of above, we are of the opinion that Janpad Panchayat Bamhnidih may consider the above aspects of the matter and take a decision regarding retent'on of the petitioner in service and withdrawa! of the terminat'on order on moving a representation along with a copy of thte order. However, this order will not be a precedent in future as we have discussed the matter in respect of pecu'iar facts and circumstances of the casaexisting at present. !n the facts and circumstances ofthe case, there shafl be no orderastocosts. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge Rahnu ^!tJ