Constitutional validity of upper age limit

[goodboy_mentor]

Dear Friends,

Article 16 of the Constitution of India says:

Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.—(1) There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State.

Upper age limit for the Government jobs like for soldier, policeman etc. that have overriding requirement for attributes related to the age of candidate, like physical endurance, strength is understandable.

But for the Government jobs that have absolutely no requirement of physical endurance, strength etc. of candidate, having maximum age limit appears unreasonable and unconstitutional, if my understanding of Article 16 is correct. For example a clerk or peon or computer operator whether 25 years old or 55 years old can do same job equally well. Why this discrimination? Is it a violation of Article 16 and a valid ground to contest this as discrimination or inequality before law?

I have heard that due to similar provision in US Constitution there is no upper age limit for Government jobs in USA except for jobs in armed forces, police etc.

1) Can anyone provide me legal insight about the reason why there is no upper age limit for Government jobs in USA, so that a comparison be made with Article 16 of the Indian Constitution?

2) Besides USA, is there any other country that has no upper age limit for Government jobs and what is the legal explanation behind it?

[Vikram]

I would limit myself with reference to the present directions given by MHO regarding arms licenses. The MHO directed the licensing authorities not to renew licenses of persons over 70 years of age. When my dad recently went to renew this license in Hyderabad, his was what told to him by the police.

Now please read this.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 468508.cms

HYDERABAD: A 75-year-old man reportedly shot at one member of a robber gang attempting to loot his premises at Patel Nagar in Chatrinaka in the intervening hours of Wednesday and Thursday.

Tirupathaiah, the injured member of the three-member gang who belongs to Mahbubnagar, sustained injuries on his chest and ribs and was admitted in a serious condition at Osmania General Hospital.

Chatrinaka police said landlord Sriramulu Patel was asleep when the robbers came in at around 1.30 am. "When he heard some noise near his main door, armed with a licensed revolver, Sriramulu opened the door to check if there was anything wrong. He shot at the three robbers outside the house and injured Tirupathaiah in the process," Chatrinaka sub-inspector A Seethaiah told TOI.

An attempt to theft case was registered against Tirupathaiah. Police are on the lookout for the other two accused who fled the spot immediately after the incident.

If the police did not renew the licence of the 75 years old house owner, could he have defended himself against a possible attempt on his life during the course of the robbery?

If one is physically able,why should the government not renew a licence of a senior citizen? If they must, can they guarantee that they can prevent attacks on senior citizens?

Best-
Vikram

[goodboy_mentor]

This is disturbing and plain illegal, there is no such provision under the Arms Act 1959 that empowers MHA to ask licensing authorities to not renew the licenses of senior citizens above seventy years of age. There is no upper age limit for obtaining or renewing arms license under Arms Act 1959 since it is a matter of citizen's right. Can you please share the copy of that directive of MHA, directed the licensing authorities not to renew licenses of persons over 70 years of age.

[Vikram]

Nope. There are no written/published rules.Just instructions from MHO and/or the police's enthusiasm. I am trying to a news clipping that touched this subject.Will post it once I find it.