By the Court.—Under compelling circumstances we are constrained to make detail discussion of the matter in the review application.

2. The writ petitioner has virtually challenged non-consideration of his candidature by the U.P. Public Service Commission in connection with the examination and/or interview for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) being age bar on the strength of the Supreme Court judgment reported in JT 2006 (4) SC 531 (Malik Mazhar Sultan and another v. U.P. Public Service Commission and others). On 15th December, 2006 in the midst of hearing, as per previous direction, Mr. Vijendra Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel-ll, contended that he has no objection in accommodating the candidates by allowing them to sit for the examination relaxing age on the basis of the fresh requisition. The Court was pleased to pass an order on 15th December, 2006 on the ratio of the aforesaid Supreme Court judgment having its binding effect and on the basis of the concession given by the State.

3. After 15th December, 2006 one of us (V.C. Misra, J.) was not attached to the Court, but the Presiding Judge of the Bench (Amitava Lala, J.) was attached to the Court upto 21st De