https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200195 The age prescription for appointment as District Judge was treated as an additional qualification within the rule-making power and not as inconsistent with Article 233(2) of the Constitution, so it was valid. The later amendment was held to operate prospectively, not retrospectively, and therefore could not disqualify candidates who had applied and written the examination under the unamended notification. A plea based on age relaxation and prior litigation also failed, as it did not override the candidates' right to be considered under the rules in force when the recruitment process began. The selection was to continue on that basis. en-us Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Mar 2018 12:38:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200195 The age prescription for appointment as District Judge was treated as an additional qualification within the rule-making power and not as inconsistent with Article 233(2) of the Constitution, so it was valid. The later amendment was held to operate prospectively, not retrospectively, and therefore could not disqualify candidates who had applied and written the examination under the unamended notification. A plea based on age relaxation and prior litigation also failed, as it did not override the candidates' right to be considered under the rules in force when the recruitment process began. The selection was to continue on that basis. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200195