Antony Dominic, J.

1. These appeals are filed against the common judgment in WP (C) 33953/11 and 19769/12. Appellant in WA Nos. 1391/15 and 1392/15 is the 4th respondent in WP (C) 19769/12 and 3rd respondent in WP (C) 33953/11. WA Nos. 1459/15 and 1472/15 have been filed by respondents 1 to 3 in WP (C) 19769/12 and respondents 1 and 2 in WP (C) 33953/11 respectively. First respondent in all these appeals is the petitioner who filed the writ petitions in question. The issue that led to the filing of the writ petitions is the claim of the first respondent herein for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Law, which was a post reserved for physically handicapped persons. Though there is no dispute that the first respondent satisfied all the educational qualifications prescribed for the post, according to the University, she was over-aged and therefore, it appointed the appellant in WA Nos. 1391/15 and 1392/15. In the judgment under appeal, the learned Single Judge held that the first respondent herein was eligible for relaxation in the upper age limit prescribed by the University and on that reasoning, held the action of the University in not considering her suitability for t