Case Note & Summary
The review application was filed by P.Shanmugam, the appellant in W.A(MD).No.913 of 2018, seeking to review the order dated 06.10.2025. The original writ petition sought to quash the non-selection of the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited. The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner, having participated in the selection process, could not challenge it. In the writ appeal, the Additional Advocate General contended that the maximum age limit for backward class candidates was 35 years, and the petitioner had crossed that age on the date of application. Relying on this submission, the writ appeal was dismissed. The present review application was filed on the ground that the maximum age limit for backward class candidates is 40 years, not 35 years. The petitioner relied on a TNPSC Notification No.07/2013 dated 28.03.2013 and an information received under the Right to Information Act on 07.03.2014. The respondents, representing the Transport Corporation, submitted that the maximum age limit was 35 years, as reflected in the covering letter sent to the Employment Exchange and the call letter sent to the petitioner. The court examined the documents and found that the communication dated 07.03.2013 relied upon by the petitioner was a draft letter prepared by subordinate officials for internal purposes, not an official notification. The Public Information Officer of the Transport Corporation had informed the petitioner on 10.03.2014 that the maximum age limit for backward class candidates was 35 years. The TNPSC notification relied upon by the petitioner did not relate to the recruitment in question. The court held that there was no error apparent on the face of the record and dismissed the review application.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Review - Order 47 Rule 1 CPC - Error Apparent on Face of Record - The review petitioner sought review of a dismissal order on the ground that the maximum age limit for backward class candidates was 40 years, not 35 years as earlier held. The court found that the petitioner relied on a draft internal communication and a TNPSC notification not applicable to the recruitment, while the official communication from the Transport Corporation confirmed the age limit as 35 years. Held that no error apparent on the face of record exists, and the review petition is dismissed. (Paras 1-9) B) Service Law - Age Limit - Recruitment - Backward Class Candidates - The dispute pertained to the maximum age limit for backward class candidates applying for the post of Junior Engineer in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation. The court examined the recruitment notification, call letter, and official RTI response, all indicating 35 years as the maximum age. The petitioner's reliance on a draft letter and TNPSC notification was rejected. Held that the age limit of 35 years stands, and the review fails. (Paras 2-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the review petitioner has made out a case for review of the order dated 06.10.2025 in W.A(MD).No.913 of 2018 on the ground that the maximum age limit for backward class candidates is 40 years and not 35 years.
Final Decision
The review application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Review jurisdiction
- Order 47 Rule 1 CPC
- Error apparent on face of record
- Age limit for backward class candidates
- Recruitment notification prevails over draft internal communication
