Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Mr.G.Parthiban vs The District Employment Office

Madras High Court|02 January, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.K.Dhananjayan, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
2 The petitioner claims that he belongs to Hindu Adi Dravidar Community which is included in the List of Schedule Caste Community and he has completed SSLC through Tamil Medium in the year 1991. But, he could not pass the examination. The petitioner would further claim that he has also completed Diploma relating to Dress Making and Tailoring [Sewing and Dressmaking] and also registered his name in the District Employment Exchange office in the category of Unskilled vide Registration No.CHU1991M00006713 dated 15.07.1991. It is the claim of the petitioner that though the age limit prescribed for public employment is 40 years for people belonging to Schedule Caste community, in the light of the ban order, he could not enter the public service and subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.NO.98, P&AR [P] Department dated 17.07.2006, the upper age relaxation was given for five years and as such, the petitioner is eligible to be considered for selection to any public employment in the light of his qualification. In this regard, the petitioner had approached the 2nd respondent, who vide communication dated 30.09.2015, has stated that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.44, Labour and Employment Department dated 11.03.2015, his claim cannot be considered as he is age barred. Challenging the legality of the same, the petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition.
3 The learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 to bring to their knowledge about G.O.Ms.No.98, P&AR Department, dated 17.07.2006 as to the age relaxation and that, they may be directed to consider the said representation on merits and in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders.
4 This Court has considered the submissions of Mr.K.Dhananjayan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials placed before this Court.
5 In the light of the plea made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions, this Court permits the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 as to the relaxation of the age limit for securing public employment in terms of G.O.Ms.NO.98, P&AR Department, dated 17.07.2006, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the respondents 1 and 2, on receipt of the same, are directed to consider the said representation on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a further period of eight weeks thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner.
6 The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
02.01.2017 Index : No Internet : Yes AP To
1.The District Employment Office Entrepreneur Empowerment, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.
2.The Department of Employment and Training District Employment Office [Unskilled] Chennai.
M.SATHYANARAYANAN. J AP W.P.No.44189/2016 02.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mr.G.Parthiban vs The District Employment Office

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
02 January, 2017