In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated:-28-08-2008 Coram: The Honourable Mr.Justice P.K.MISRA and The Honourable Mr.Justice K.KANNAN Writ Petition No.15195 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 R.Periyasamy .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Director of Postal Services, Western Region, Tamil Nadu, Coimbatore-2, Coimbatore District. 2. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Salem West Division, Salem-5, Salem Disstrict. 3. Mr.P.Sundararaju 4. The Sub Divisional Inspector (Postal) Mettur Dam Sub Division, Mettur Dam, Pin.636 401, Salem District. 5. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai-104. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 5th respondent in O.A.No.269 of 2006 dated 20.09.2007 upholding the order passed by the second respondent in Proceedings No.B2/4-5 dated 16-06-2005, quash the same and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to promote the petitioner as Group D (NTC) with effect from the date of promotion of the third respondent as Group D (NTC) with all consequential benefits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner .. Mr.P.Rajendran For Respondents.. Mr.C.Kalaiselvan, ACGSC for R1,2 &4. ******* Order of the Court was made by P.K.MISRA, J Heard Mr.P.Rajendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.C.Kalaiselvan, the learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1,2 & 4. 2. The petitioner was employed as a Gramin Dak Sevak/Mail Deliverer. The petitioner is fully qualified for appointment to the post of Chowkidar (Non Test Category). However, the case of the petitioner was not considered, as he had crossed the age limit of 50 for appointment to the post of Chowkidar (NTC). The petitioner filed Original Application claiming that in respect of candidates belonged to OBC there was a Government of India Instructions for relaxation of age by three years. However, the department and the Tribunal had rejected the said contention on the ground that the post was for the open category. 3. In the present writ petition the petitioner contends that similar question has already been decided by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.631 of 2006 dated 24.01.2008. In the aforesaid decision it was observed as follows: "Even assuming that such an instruction is ipso facto applicable even before the amendment of the statutory Rules or the Rules under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, paragraph 2 of such instruction makes it clear that the instruction is relating to direct recruitment to vacancies in posts under the Central Government. In this connection, the Tribunal has observed : " 6. ... we find from the Recruitment Rules filed before us that in column 9 against the cadre whether age and educational qualifications prescribed for direct recruitment shall apply in the case of promotions it is provided as 'No'. Further, it is seen from column 11 and 12 of the said Rules, 50% of the posts are to be filled by promotion and in the remaining 50%, 25% is from the EDAs on the basis of their seniority and 25% from EDAs on the basis of their merit in the Departmental Examination. The stipulation of passing the Departmental Examination for the seniority quota has been dropped by the amendment made in the rules vide Notification dated 30.1.1995. Therefore, for all purposes, 25% for EDAs (now GDS) whose selections are https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ made on the basis of seniority has to be taken as promotion only and not by direct recruitment..." 5. Though in the present case it cannot be strictly said to be a promotion through DPC., but it cannot also be said that it is a case of direct recruitment. Therefore, the instruction contained in para No.2 may not be strictly applicable. Even if there is an age restriction prescribed for direct recruitment, such an age restriction is not applicable to the case of promotion as found in the rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and in column No.9, of the Rules circulated by the D.G., Department of posts, dated 6.7.1989 vide letter No.44-31/87-SPB-I." 4. The issue involved in the aforesaid decision squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of appointment to the post of Chowkidar (NTC). In the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2008 is closed. gr. Sd/- Assistant Registrar / True Copy / Sub. Assistant Registrar To 1. The Director of Postal Services, Western Region, Tamil Nadu, Coimbatore-2, Coimbatore District. 2. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Salem West Division, Salem-5, Salem Disstrict. 3. The Sub Divisional Inspector (Postal) Mettur Dam Sub Division, Mettur Dam, Pin.636 401, Salem District. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai-104. 1 cc to Mr.P.Rajendran, Advocate, SR.49004 1 cc to Mr.C.Kalaiselvan, Advocate, SR.48629 bvr (co) dv/9.9. W.P.No.15195 of 2008 AND M.P.No.1 of 2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/