1. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are strangers to the fourth respondent Bank in whose service they wanted to get in to as Assistants. They have been filing cases after cases before this court with one relief or other. The fourth respondent Bank is the Salem District Central Cooperative Bank Limited, represented by its Special Officer. The bank has its own special bylaws relating to the service conditions of its employees. The rules were framed under Rule 149 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Rules, 1988 (for short TNCS Rules) and they were approved by the State Government vide Rule 149 (1) of the TNCS Rules vide G.O.Ms.No.84, Consumer, Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 15.3.2004. As per bylaw No.10, it is stated as follows:

"10. AGE AT ENTRY AND AGE OF RETIREMENT.

In matters of age for appointment and retirement, the provisions contained in subrule (3) of rule 149 shall be followed."

(Emphasis added)

2. Rule 149(3) of the TNCS Rules has stipulated that in the matters of reservation for appointments and age for appointment and retirement, the rule applicable to the Government servants shall be followed. The original rule enacted reads as follows:

"149(3)In matters of reservation for appointments and age for appointment and retirement, the rule applicable to the Government servants shall be followed."

3. Subsequently, the rule underwent a change by S.R.O.A-34/2005 by which the words "age for appointment and retirement" were dropped from the rule. By the said amendment, the Cooperative Societies need not follow the Government rule and they can have their own bylaws. The fourth respondent Bank had issued a press publication informing that there were 30 posts of Assistants to be filled up. Therefore, they had called for requisition from the District Employment Exchange. The persons who were aspiring to apply for the posts must have degree along with Cooperation training or B.A. or B.Com in Cooperation subject. It is also stated as on 1.4.2008, they should not have crossed 35 years. In respect of persons belonging to MBC, SC, ST and BC, they should be below 40 years. At the time of the said press publication and the requisition called for, the petitioners herein had crossed the age limit stipulated therein. Though they were not in employment in Bank or employment in any other cooperative societies, they sent representations stating that by G.O.Ms.No.98, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 17.7.2006, the State Government had granted relaxation from the upper age limit for a period of five years. Therefore, they were eligible for such relaxation and their cases should be considered.

4. This court while entertaining the writ petitions in W.P.No.33000 of 2007 and batch cases, by an order dated 10.09.2008 had directed the District Employment Officer, Salem to consider their representations for sponsoring their names. Another person by name T.Chandrasekaran filed W.P.No.4124 of 2008 seeking for a direction to forward his name for consideration by the Cooperative bank. That writ petition was also disposed of by an order dated 30.09.2008 directing the person's name to be sponsored. In the mean while, the fourth respondent bank informed various aspirants that as per G.O.Ms.No.222, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 13.7.2007, five years' relaxation will come to 32+5 = 37 years in respect of MBC. Since the petitioners had crossed that age, their request for considering to the post of Assistants will not arise. In each of the case, the petitioner had beyond the age stipulation by the Bank.

5. Thereafter, the petitioners once again came before this court with batch of writ petitions being W.P.Nos.30578 of 2008 and batch cases (since reported in 2009 (5) CTC 237). In that batch of cases, the prayer of the petitioner was that the communication sent by the bank negativing their claims should be set aside and their claims for appointment should be considered by the Ban