Summary
The Supreme Court reversed an order granting outsourced workers the age relaxation reserved in ECIL’s recruitment advertisement for specified direct contract employees. The respondents’ engagement through an outsourcing agency did not meet the advertised category, and the Division Bench had not examined any legal entitlement to the relaxation.
Issues
- Whether outsourced workers were entitled to the advertised age relaxation for ECIL’s specified direct contract employees.
Held
- The record showed engagement through an outsourcing agency. Under the advertisement, those respondents did not qualify for the age relaxation applicable to the specified category of persons directly engaged by ECIL. (¶ 8)
- The writ petition was filed shortly before the application deadline, and by the writ appeal that period had expired. The Division Bench directed relaxation without considering whether it could be claimed as of right; its assessment was incorrect. (¶ 8–9)
Result
ECIL appeal allowed; Division Bench judgment set aside; Single Judge’s dismissal of Writ Petition 382 of 2018 restored. No order as to costs.