Dr. Shiv Kumar Tiwari vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Barin Ghosh, C.J.—Petitioner seeks in this writ petition parity or similarity of terms of an advertisement. On earlier occasions, when advertisements were published, inviting applications for filling up the subject posts, it was indicated that some relaxation would be granted in the upper age limit in relation to certain classes of people. Petitioner claims that he belongs to the same class. In the present advertisement, which was published on 21st February 2010, this relaxation has not been given. It is an admitted situation that without such relaxation, the petitioner is not competent to respond to the said advertisement. Despite that, the petitioner responded to the advertisement and it having been noticed that the petitioner has crossed the upper age limit as on the date mentioned in the advertisement, his response has been rejected by an order dated 30th July 2010, and hence the petitioner is before us. Grant of relaxation by the State, as it is empowered, is not a matter of course. Such power is to be exercised only in exceptional cases. Because the Government exercised such power on earlier occasions, would establish that on earlier occasions the power was exercised to meet exceptional situations. Since such power has not now been exercised, would similarly demonstrate that in present time there is no need to use such power, since no such exceptional circumstance exists. That being the situation, we find nothing further to be done in the writ petition. The same is, accordingly, disposed of.