The Selection Board Appealed On Age, And The Division Bench Agreed
A writ petitioner was treated as eligible up to 53 years. A coordinate Bench had already decided the point the other way, and these appeals follow it.
The Court held that treating the writ petitioner as eligible up to 53 years meant the judgment suffered from an error of law and could not be allowed to stand. Following a coordinate Bench, the appeals were allowed and the Single Judge's order quashed and set aside.
- An upper age limit is a matter of law, not discretion, and reading it up is an error.
- A coordinate Bench had already decided it, and these appeals were allowed in view of that judgment.
- The Selection Board was the appellant, defending the limit it had applied.
- The writ order goes entirely, quashed and set aside.
- Court
- High Court of Rajasthan
- Bench
- Justice INDERJEET SINGH, Justice SANDEEP TANEJA
- Citation
- D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 718 of 2023
- Case
- D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 718 of 2023
- Decided
- September 2026
- Outcome
- Special appeals allowed; Single Judge's order quashed and set aside
What was decided below
The Single Judge's judgment treated the respondent writ petitioner as eligible up to 53 years of age.
Why it was set aside
To that extent the judgment suffered from an error of law and could not be allowed to stand.
A coordinate Bench of the Court had already decided the point in an appeal by the Rajasthan Subordinate and Ministerial Service Selection Board, and these appeals were allowed in view of that judgment.
The Single Judge's order was quashed and set aside, and all pending applications disposed of.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Can a court extend an upper age limit for a candidate?
Not by reading it up. The Division Bench held doing so was an error of law.
Why did these appeals succeed without a fresh hearing on merits?
A coordinate Bench had already decided the same question, and the appeals were allowed in view of that judgment.
Defending or attacking an age eligibility finding
- Set out the limit in the advertisement and the rule that fixes it before arguing relaxation.
- Search for a coordinate Bench decision on the same limit; it will usually decide the appeal.
- Distinguish relaxation granted by the State from relaxation read in by a court — only the first survives.
- Where an order is set aside on one point only, say so precisely; here it was to that extent.
Source. High Court of Rajasthan, D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 718 of 2023, decided September 2026 by Justice INDERJEET SINGH, Justice SANDEEP TANEJA. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks High Court of Rajasthan and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in