Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 129 (MP)

Raginee Patel v. State of M. P.

2020-01-23

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA

body2020
ORDER 1. The petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the minimum age prescribed for a candidate to appear in the Primary Teacher Eligibility Examination, 2020 as 21 years. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fixation of the minimum age of 21 years is contrary to the circular dated 4.7.2019 issued by the General Administration Department of the State of M.P whereby the minimum age is prescribed for the direct recruitment to the Class-III and Class-IV is 18 years and other than the aforesaid post, the minimum age is 21 years. In the advertisement, the minimum age for eligibility test has been fixed which is in consonance with the minimum age prescribed for recruitment to the post of Teacher in the School Education Department is governed by the Rules called Madhya Pradesh School Education Service (Teacher Cadre) Service Conditions and Recruitment Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred as "Rules, 2018"). The Rule 8 provides for conditions of eligibility for direct recruitment. The 'Age' is prescribed under Rule 8(1) which reads as under : "8. Conditions of eligibility for direct recruitment - In order to be eligible for participating in the Teacher Eligibility Examination, a candidate must fulfill the 2 following conditions, namely : (1) Age - (a) The candidate must have attained the age as specified in column (3) of Schedule III, but must not have attained the age as specified in column (4) of the said Schedule, on the first day of January that comes after the date of commencement of the selection process. 3. In schedule III of the Rules, 2018, the minimum age for appointment to the post of teacher is prescribed as 21 years. Thus, the age prescribed in the advertisement for eligibility test and Examination Conduction Rules, 2020 is in consonance with the minimum age prescribed for appointment to the said post. 4. We do not find any merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the minimum age prescribed under Rules is for appointment and not for eligibility test and therefore, minimum age for eligibility ought to have been prescribed as per the circular dated 4.7.2019 issued by the General Administration Department of the State of M.P. Once the recruitment rules prescribe minimum age for recruitment 21 years then the respondents are fully justified in fixing the same age for eligibility test. 5. Even otherwise it would not be proper to fix two different minimum age for recruitment and eligibility test. In that event a situation would arise that a candidate shall appear at the age of 18 years for eligibility test and thereafter, the employer will wait for a period of three years for his eligibility for appointment. Please see : Kashiram Patel v. State of M.P. and others, decided by Division Bench of this Court on 8.5.2018; Vishnu Mutiya and others v. State of M.P. and others, 2006(1) JLJ 14 = 2006(1) MPLJ 23 ; (2010)7 SCC 643 ; M.P. Vidyut Karmachari Sangh v. M.P. Electricity Board - AIR 2004 SC 2974 ; 2007(2) MPLJ 340. 6. The law relating to fixation of age in the recruitment rules is 3 within the absolute domain of the employer and we do not find any arbitrariness in fixation of the minimum age of 21 years in the eligibility test rules which has been prescribed in conformity with the recruitment rules. 7. In view of aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the petition, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. ...................