The Calcutta High Court has recently invalidated the upper age limit of 45 years for individuals applying for a Fair Price Shop (FPS) dealership in West Bengal. The court deemed this restriction as arbitrary, discriminatory, and constituting an unjustified classification.
Justice Smita Das De remarked that the state lacks the authority to impose age restrictions on trade applicants unless age is directly correlated with the capability to perform the trade effectively.
“There is no indication that individuals over the age of 45 are less competent in managing a shop compared to those within the specified age range, rendering the age limitation arbitrary,” the court stated. The ruling came in response to petitions contesting a state directive that established a 45-year upper age cap for eligibility in applying for a fair price shop license.
The court underscored the absence of empirical evidence or logical reasoning from the state to demonstrate that individuals aged over 45 are less adept at running FPS outlets. “The state has not provided any data to suggest that individuals aged 46 to 60 years are significantly less capable of retail operations. In the absence of a sound rationale, setting the age limit at 45 years is an impermissible whim under the Constitution,” the ruling stated.
The court noted that the imposition of this age restriction limits the pool of eligible applicants without a valid operational justification and concluded that the state had overstepped its legislative authority granted by Parliament.
Furthermore, the court identified that the contested provision effectively created two distinct categories of citizens—those under 45 and those over 45—without a justifiable basis, indicating that the executive had overreached its powers.
“The executive has exceeded its authority by enforcing an age limitation not anticipated in the Parent Act, thereby imposing an unreasonable barrier on the petitioner’s right to engage in their profession or trade. This abrupt alteration in the age criteria adversely impacts individuals who reasonably expected to qualify, and the age restriction creates an unjustified division among citizens,” the court elaborated.
Characterizing the provision as “manifestly arbitrary,” the court concluded that it violated the equality clause under Article 14 and imposed an unreasonable limitation on the right to conduct trade as protected by Article 19(1)(g).
“The disputed clause is clearly arbitrary and lacks a rational connection to the intended objective, thus contravening Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The doctrine of Arbitrariness stipulates that any provision that is whimsical or irrational is subject to being annulled. Moreover, the contested limitation unreasonably infringes upon the petitioner’s right to pursue a profession guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution,” the court stated.
The court further noted that without reasonable justification, the classification becomes arbitrary and violates the principle of equality.
The petitioner had entered the selection process for the fair price shop dealer based on the conditions stipulated in a vacancy notice dated December 17, 2024. Upon participating, the petitioner discovered that a new criterion had been added, following the implementation of a new control order in 2024, which mandated that applicants must not exceed 45 years of age at the time of application.
Feeling wronged by this age limitation, the petitioner sought legal recourse from the high court.
Ashish Shaji serves as a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, specializing in legal reporting. With a law degree and extensive editorial experience, Ashish provides insightful coverage and detailed analysis of judicial proceedings and landmark decisions for a nationwide readership.
His expertise encompasses judicial analysis, simplifying complex court orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, and monitoring legislative changes along with their implications for the public and legal community. With over five years of experience, Ashish has contributed to various legal platforms, enhancing his ability to convey intricate information effectively.
