JUDGMENT :

(Irshad Ali, J.)

1. Heard Sri Gaurav Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri R.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent-Commission.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

"i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to provide the relaxation in maximum age and consider the application form/ candidature of the petitioner for the post for which the petitioner has applied in pursuance of the advertisement dated 07.02.2014 (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition).

1)(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Government orders dated 14.11.1985, 03.09.1992 and 31.10.2013.

ii) to pass any other suitable order or direction which is deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be passed.

iii) to allow the writ petition with costs.

iv) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the final result declared by the Respondents on 30.10.2018 (Annexure No. 11) to the extent that the candidate placed at serial no. 47 has been given benefit of reservation under the Dependents of Freedom fighters category;

v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner against the vacancy reserved for category of candidates belonging to dependents of freedom fighters in the selections at hand;"

3. Brief fact of the case is that the State Government issued a government order dated 27.9.1972, providing age relaxation to the dependent of freedom fighters. In addition to the aforesaid government order, the State Government issued government orders dated 1.11.1947, 31.1.1957. 14.8.1972, 19.2.1977, 14.11.1985, 3.9.1992 and 31.10.2013 on the issue involved in the present writ petition.

Prior to government order dated 14.8.1972, the exemption/ relaxation in age limit was four years and vide government order dated 14.8.1972, the same was of five years and the government orders are beneficial in nature and by the said government orders, relaxation was given to the freedom fighters, the dependent/ family members of freedom fighters, as defined from time to time and in the said government orders, no time limit is prescribed in relation to the benefit provided.

4. In the year 1993, the State Government promulgated the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993 (in short, 'the Act, 1993) and the Act was lastly amended in the year 2009 and as per the Act, the petitioner is dependent of freedom fighter namely, Late Laxmi Shankar Bajpai, the grandfather of the petitioner.

5. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Basic Shiksha Parishad in the year 1999. The respondent No.2 published an advertisement for appointment/ recruitment dated 7.2.2014 on the post of Lecturers in the State Council for Education Research and Training (S.C.E.R.T.). In the said advertisement, it has not been mentioned that relaxation in age will be given to the dependents of freedom fighters. The petitioner has applied in pursuance to the aforesaid advertisement.

6. The respondent No.2 had also issued advertisement No.A-1/E-1/2-13 dated 23.3.2013, A-2/E-1/2013 dated 23.5.2013 and advertisement No.A-3/E-1/2013 dated 14.6.2013 and in the said notifications, age relaxation of five years is provided to the dependents of freedom fighters.

7. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner had been permitted to appear in the selection process and having been declared successful in the written examination, she was called for interview which was held on 12.10.2018 only for the post of Lecturer in Social Work.

Final result of the selection has been declared, subject to the final outcome of the instant writ petition. However, the name of the petitioner d