#age relaxation

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that temporary employees who were within the prescribed age limit at the time of their initial appointment are entitled to age relaxation when applying for permanent posts, even if they exceed the upper age limit at the time of interview. This sets a critical precedent for thousands of contractual government workers across Rajasthan, ensuring that prior service tenure is not penalized by rigid age criteria during recruitment.

Himachal Pradesh High Court rules that candidates who avail age relaxation under reserved categories are disqualified from migrating to general category posts. The judgment reinforces strict compliance with recruitment rules, impacting merit list preparation and reservation policies.

Gauhati HC rules that repeated appointments to a clan based on land ownership donations violate Articles 14 and 16, mandating open advertisement for public posts. The court directed age relaxation for the petitioner due to litigation delays, setting a precedent against hereditary public employment.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that while candidates have no vested right to appointment, the State must grant age relaxation to mitigate hardship caused by administrative delays in cancelled recruitment processes. The judgment balances administrative discretion with fairness, ensuring affected candidates are not unduly penalized for procedural lapses.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that age relaxation granted under a time-bound circular expires on the specified date and cannot be claimed in subsequent recruitments. The judgment clarifies that candidates have no legal right to demand extended concessions beyond the circular's validity period, reinforcing administrative discretion in recruitment rules.

Delhi High Court holds that ex-servicemen availing age relaxation cannot claim migration to unreserved category, even with higher marks, if recruitment rules explicitly bar such migration.