Judicial Review Of State Policy “Very Narrow”: Sikkim HC Rejects Challenge To Removal Of SC/ST/OBC Age Relaxation For Post Of Fisheries Block Officer
Case: Tshering Samdup Bhutia and Ors. v. State of Sikkim and Ors.
Coram: Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan
Case No.: W.P. (C) No. 01 of 2022
Court Observation: “The issue whether the State has the power to frame rules under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India to prescribe age limits or the extent of relaxation to be given has been lucidly explained by the Supreme Court holding inter alia that it is open for the government while framing rules under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India to prescribe such age limits or to prescribe the extent to which any relaxation can be given. The Supreme Court further held that prescription of such limit or the extent of relaxation to be given cannot be termed as arbitrary or unreasonable. Thus, the challenge to the Amendment Rules, 2019 is rejected.”
“The burden laid down by Section 101 and 102 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 has not substituted by the petitioners. Neither in the pleadings in the writ petition nor during arguments by the learned counsel for the petitioners it was shown that the Amendment Rules, 2019 was ultra vires the Constitution of India or any other law.”
“The Amendment Rules, 2019 which amended the schedule seems to be in line with the policy decision of the Government when it prescribed that the incumbent should have attained the age of 21 years and should not have exceeded 30 years for all communities. The prayer of the petitioners for a direction upon the State respondents to relax the age prescribed in the Amendment Rules, 2019 with the strength of the judgment passed by the Jharkhand High Court cannot also be accepted as the circumstances prevailing in the State of Jharkhand when the judgment was passed cannot be equated with what has been pleaded in the present proceedings.”
Previous Posts
Keywords
Judicial Review Of State Policy, Fisheries Block Officer
