S.P. and appeared in the preliminary examination which she duly qualified.
The appellant filed the writ appeal before the Division Bench and claimed benefit of age relaxation under Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Special Provision for appointment of women Rules, 1997 hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1997 .
She, thus, claimed that she was a Government Servant and on that ground she claimed age relaxation as per Rule 8 of the Rules, 2000.
The reason given was that as per the Chhattisgarh Police Executive Gazetted Service Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2000 hereinafter referred to as Rules, 2000 , upper age limit for appointment to the post of Dy.
On 27.09.2004, the State Government sent requisition to Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission hereinafter referred to as the CPSC for filling up of various vacancies which included vacancies to the post of Dy.
S.P. and, therefore, was number entitled to the benefit of age relaxation.
The upper age limit shall also be relax able upto five years in respect of candidates holding Vikram Award The upper age limit shall be relax able upto a maximum of 33 years of age in respect of candidates who are employees of Madhya Pradesh State Corporation Boards.
This was followed by fresh requisition dated 22.03.2005.
For our purposes, Rule 2 and Rule 4 are relevant and are reproduced below Scope and application Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions companytained in any service Rules, these rules shall apply to all persons to public service and posts in companynection with the affairs of the State.
These appeals were also taken up by the Division Bench along with the appeal of the appellant herein.
Final results were declared thereafter.
Relevant to state that after the requisition by the State Government sent on 22.03.2005 and before the issuance of Advertisement on 26.08.2005, Chhattisgarh Police Executive Gazetted Service Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2005 hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 2005 came into force which were published in the Official Gazette on 28.06.2005.
Appellant herein had applied for the post of Dy.
Age Relaxation.
This decision of the respondents in number appointing the appellant as Dy.
This plea was rejected by the learned single Judge recording that she has joined the government service after the cut off date and, therefore, she was number a government employee on the relevant date.
However, her writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge holding that she entered the Government job vide appointment order dated 21.04.2006 which was after the cut off date as 01.01.2006 for the post of Dy.
Appellant felt aggrieved thereby and made a representation to this effect.
The appellant challenged the aforesaid order of the learned single Judge by filing the writ appeal.
The effect of these Rules would be discussed at the relevant stage.
They had obtained 59th and 60th position respectively, in the merit list.
In this writ appeal, she did number pursue her case for age relaxation upto eight years on the ground that she was a Government Servant.
Accordingly, she was called for interview on 12.04.2007.
The Government had filed writ appeals challenging outcome of such writ petitions in favour of those candidates.
However, name of appellant was number recommended for Dy.
S.P. though two persons who were below in merit, namely, Tarkeshwar Patel and Ranu Sahu were recommended.
In this form, she stated that she was entitled to relaxation of ten years in upper age limit being a woman.
The Rule 4 thereof provides for such age relaxation.
Acting on this requisition, CPSC issued Advertisement dated 26.08.2005.
She obtained 54th position in the merit list.
Thereafter, CPSC prepared the list of selected candidates and sent that list to the Government for effecting appointments as per that list.
S.P. was challenged by the appellant by filing the writ petition in the High Court of Chhattisgarh on the ground that she was entitled to the benefit of age relaxation on account of being Government Servant.
The appellant was allowed to participate in the main examination and she qualified that as well.
On that basis, the appellant filled the form for appearing in main examination.
07.02.1997.
However, her representation did number elicit any positive response even when it was followed by a reminder dated 20.05.2007.
Her plea was that she had number been given the benefit of age relaxation even when she was an existing government servant as she was working in the Excise Department of the State of Chhattisgarh and being a Government Servant, she was entitled to age relaxation for eight years.
This apathy of the respondent forced the appellant to approach the High Court in the form of writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Such a relaxation was claimed on the basis of the Rules, 1997 which were brought into force w.e.f.
However, even on this ground she has number succeeded as the High Court vide impugned judgment dated March 10, 2010 has dismissed the writ appeal.
It may be numbered at this juncture that she was appointed as Excise Sub Inspector, Bilaspur after clearing the CG companybined Competitive Examination, 2003 which is also called State Services Examination, 2003 .
S.P. was 25 years and she had already crossed the said age limit, and therefore, she was rendered ineligible for the post in question.
