HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 18525 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners functioned as Preraks under the Adult Education Scheme introduced by the Government at various places in Visakhapatnam District. Recently, Preraks were replaced by Sakshar Bharath Scheme. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Rt. No.203, dated 13.4.2010 prescribing the guidelines for implementation of the scheme. It provides for appointment of Coordinators at District, Mandal and Village levels. In the qualifications prescribed for the Coordinators, the age limit is stipulated as 35 years. Subsequently, it was enhanced to 40 years through G.O.Rt. No. 378, dated 8.7.2010. Petitioners contend that they gained vast experience in the spread of informal and adult education and they do not fit into the age limit prescribed under the Sakshar Bharath Scheme. They claimed the relief in the form of a direction to the respondents not to insist on the age criteria in the matter of appointment of Coordinators. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for School Education. Each Scheme introduced by the State or Central Government has its own specifications or priorities. The Sakshar Bharath Scheme contemplates the appointment of Coordinators. The respective educational qualifications, age limit etc., are stipulated. In a way, the persons who worked as Preraks under the earlier Scheme are given priority. It is always open for an agency or appointing authority to stipulate the conditions, eligibility criteria for the persons to be appointed by them. This Court can interfere only when discriminated treatment is accorded to different sections of people. The Government has already provided for preference or priority to the persons who have worked as Preraks under the earlier Schemes. However, that shall be subject to their being within the age limit. This Court, cannot find fault with the respondents in stipulating the age limit. It is not as if the respondents are unmindful of the hardships being faced by the candidates. Initially, 35 years was stipulated as the age limit. Taking into account, the representations made by the persons like the petitioners and public representatives, it was enhanced by five years. The request of the petitioners is to completely do away with the age limit. This Court is not inclined to accede to the request of the petitioners. The writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY,J DATE: 27th October, 2010 pnb