COURT REFUSES TO ALTER STATUTORY CUT-OFF DATE FOR AGE ELIGIBILITY DESPITE RECRUITMENT DELAYS

The petitioners, aspirants for the post of District Judge (Entry Level) under Advertisement No. BSJS/1/2026, approached the High Court seeking a direction to fix the cut-off date for the maximum age limit as 01.01.2026.

They contended that a two-year delay in the recruitment process after the 2023 advertisement deprived them of a fair chance and that accumulated vacancies should be advertised as they arise to prevent candidates from being aged out.

Petitioner No. 2’s date of birth is 13.11.1975, while Petitioner No. 1 failed to provide supporting age documentation.

1. Whether the respondents should be directed to fix the cut-off date for calculating the maximum age limit as 01.01.2026 due to the delay in recruitment notification.

2. Whether the petitioners are eligible for the recruitment even if the requested cut-off date were to be applied.

The Court applied the Bihar Superior Judicial Service Rules (Amendment) Rules, 2026, specifically Rule 4, which substituted Clause 1 of Appendix ‘C’ of the 1951 Rules stipulating that an applicant must be between 35 and 50 years of age "as on the date of application".

The Court also relied on the principle that petitioners must substantiate claims of prejudice or procedural irregularity with evidence regarding when vacancies actually arose.

The Court observed that even if it granted the prayer to use 01.01.2026 as the cut-off date, Petitioner No. 2 would remain ineligible as he had already exceeded 50 years of age by that date.

Regarding Petitioner No. 1, the Court found the absence of supporting documents fatal to his claim.

The Court rejected the argument of arbitrary delay, noting that the petitioners failed to provide evidence that vacancies existed post-2023 which were deliberately suppressed; the advertisement itself specified the period in which the vacancies arose.

The Court strictly adhered to the amended Rule 4, which ties the age limit to the "date of application," finding no grounds to deviate from the statutory requirement.

It was held that even under the proposed cut-off, the petitioners did not meet the eligibility criteria.

The writ petition was dismissed.