https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307141 A one-time age relaxation granted in a specific recruitment year did not create a continuing right to similar relaxation in later recruitments. The Court held that the applicable recruitment rules fixed the upper age limit for Teacher (Primary) posts, and the earlier decision had to be read in its own context as a limited hardship measure, not as an override of future eligibility conditions. Because the respondent applied under a later advertisement, the prior relaxation could not be extended to displace the governing rules. The claim to consideration despite being over the age limit therefore failed, and the eligibility conditions remained operative under the applicable rules. en-us Fri, 11 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Mar 2023 20:19:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307141 A one-time age relaxation granted in a specific recruitment year did not create a continuing right to similar relaxation in later recruitments. The Court held that the applicable recruitment rules fixed the upper age limit for Teacher (Primary) posts, and the earlier decision had to be read in its own context as a limited hardship measure, not as an override of future eligibility conditions. Because the respondent applied under a later advertisement, the prior relaxation could not be extended to displace the governing rules. The claim to consideration despite being over the age limit therefore failed, and the eligibility conditions remained operative under the applicable rules. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307141