Educated unemployed enormous, on rise: HC

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, November 20

In what can be seen as the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s take on the employment scene in the country, a Division Bench has asserted that the number of educated unemployed persons is enormous and increasing and there is nothing unobvious about it.

The observations by the Bench of Justice Rajiv Sharma and Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu came on a bunch of 18 appeals filed by Haryana and other appellants, challenging a single Bench order holding the petitioner-candidates eligible for posts of Post Graduate Teacher after asserting that they were entitled to age relaxation benefit in terms of instructions issued earlier issued.

Refusing to interfere with the single Bench order, the Division Bench asserted: “Before parting with the judgment, we deem it appropriate to state what is very obvious. Public appointments are extremely hard to come by. Years go by before posts are advertised. Lakhs apply for a few vacancies that are advertised. As candidates advance in age, their ability to compete with candidates fresh from colleges and universities diminishes. The number of educated unemployed persons is enormous and is increasing.”

The case had its genesis in instructions issued by Haryana dated June 25, 1981, and February 12, 1982. It stipulated that if a B.Ed or M.Ed applicant within the age prescribed under rules got his or her name registered with an employment exchange and became overage before getting regular appointment, he or she would be considered within age till regularly appointed on the basis of B.Ed or M.Ed qualification.

The state’s stand in the High Court was that the benefit of relaxation in upper age limit was granted to candidates seeking employment prior to amendment of rules in 2012.

Dismissing the appeals, the Bench asserted that the benefit of relaxation in terms of instructions was available to candidates when the 1955 rules and 1998 rules were in existence, as per the state. Both the 1955 rules and 1998 rules contained provisions for relaxation. Relaxation granted by letters and instructions was permissible as per provisions of the 1955 rules and 1998 rules.

The Bench noted that instructions dated June 25, 1981, and February 12, 1982, were formally withdrawn only on June 14, 2017. As such, the instructions were in existence at the time when the petitioners submitted their applications and were selected.

“We find no illegality or infirmity in the judgment of the single Judge holding that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of age relaxation in terms of the instructions,” the Bench observed.

In a nutshell

• According to instructions, any B.Ed or M.Ed applicant registered  with employment exchange who becomes overage before getting regular  appointment to be considered within age till regularly appointed
• The  state’s stand in the High Court is that the benefit of relaxation in  upper age limit granted to those candidates seeking employment prior to  amendment of rules in 2012; bunch of 18 appeals dismissed