THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR WRIT PETITION NO. 33447 of 2010 Between: J. Katamaiah ………….Petitioner AND The Superintendent of Post Offices, Anantapur Division, Anantapur. ………….Respondents HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR WRIT PETITION NO. 33447 OF 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) 1) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19-10-2010 passed in O.A.No.1051 of 2009 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and consequently seeks direction to the respondents to identify the vacancies of Postman/group-D for the years 2005-2010 available towards 25% of seniority quota and to conduct a separate DPC’ s for each year’s vacancies taking the eligibility criteria as on the date on which the vacancies arose. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner relying on an unreported judgment in W.P.Nos.13573 of 2009 and batch dated 10-9-2009 contended that the Tribunal ought to have directed the respondents to consider the relaxation of upper age of 53 years under powers conferred under Rule 5 of the Department of Posts (Postman/Village Postman and Mail Guards) Recruitment Rules, 1969. On the other hand, Sri J.P. Srikanth, advocate representing the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, contends that the petitioner became ineligible for appointment, therefore the order of the Tribunal requires no interference by this Court. 3) It is seen from the records that the petitioner was appointed as extraordinary departmental delivery agent with effect from 22-12-1980, and thereafter as Substitute Post Man by the 1st respondent on 4-8- 2005. Since the petitioner was crossing the upper age limit of 53 years, by 10th January 2010 the Tribunal held that the petitioner is not entitled to get the relief claimed for. 4) The Division Bench of this Court in judgment in W.P.No.13573 of 2009 and batch dated 10-9-2009 held he hardship in denial of a just claim needs to be taken into consideration particularly keeping in view the power to relax given under Rule 5 of Rules which provides as follows. “ 5. Where the Central Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may, by order, for reasons to be recorded in writing, relax any of the provisions of these rules with respect to any class or category of persons.” 5) In the present case also, the hardship to the petitioner and the interests of substantial justice deserve that the respondent authorities be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of relaxing the upper age limit condition in terms of the power to relax mentioned above. 6) In the circumstances, following the judgment in W.P.No.13573 of 2009 and batch dated 10-9-2009, the writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the said order. No costs. _______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ____________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J DATE:19-1-2011/Kk THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR WRIT PETITION NO. 33447 OF 2010 19-1-2011