P&H HC Directs HSSC To Consider Overage Group-D Applicant Who Had Applied Under Cancelled 2019 Recruitment

In brief

The question

Whether the petitioner was entitled to age relaxation under the cancellation notice for Advertisement No. 4/2019 and the terms of Advertisement No. 1/2023.

The court held

The Court held that rejecting the petitioner as overage was not sustainable.

It also directed

It allowed the writ petition, set aside HSSC’s reply dated 18 November 2024, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to a Group-D post in accordance with law and the terms of Advertisement No. 4/2019 and/or Advertisement No. 1/2023.

The Court directed consideration, not appointment.

01Facts

The petitioner applied for a Group-D post under HSSC Advertisement No. 4/2019. After that advertisement was cancelled, the cancellation notice stated that candidates who had already applied would be entitled to age relaxation and would be exempt from the application fee.

p. 2 · p. 5

The petitioner later applied under Advertisement No. 1/2023, appeared for the examination, and scored 39.35 marks against a reserved-category cut-off of 38 marks.

pp. 2–3

HSSC rejected his claim on the ground that he did not meet the minimum age criteria.

pp. 3–4

In the writ proceedings, HSSC maintained that Advertisement No. 1/2023 did not provide age relaxation for candidates who had applied under Advertisement No. 4/2019.

pp. 6–7

02Issues

i.Whether the petitioner was entitled to age relaxation under the cancellation notice for Advertisement No. 4/2019 and the terms of Advertisement No. 1/2023.

pp. 5–6

ii.Whether HSSC’s rejection of the petitioner’s claim as overage was sustainable.

p. 4 · p. 7

03Law Applied

The Court applied the express terms of the cancellation notice dated 27 May 2019, which entitled candidates who had applied under Advertisement No. 4/2019 to age relaxation.

p. 5

It also applied Advertisement No. 1/2023, which stated that eligibility would be assessed as of the closing date and that a candidate who had already applied but had since become overage would be considered eligible.

pp. 5–6

No statute or judicial precedent was relied upon.

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151

04Reasoning

The Court read the cancellation notice and Advertisement No. 1/2023 together and concluded that the petitioner, having applied under the cancelled 2019 advertisement, fell within the class entitled to age relaxation.

pp. 5–6

It held that HSSC’s contrary position—that the 2023 advertisement contained no such provision—misread both documents and conflicted with the respondent’s own terms.

pp. 6–7

The petitioner’s score above the stated cut-off further supported the Court’s finding that the rejection on age grounds was arbitrary and illegal.

p. 7