JUDGMENT S.R. Singh, J. - The U. P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad (In short referred to as the 'Commission) issued an advertisement, it being advertisement No. A-l, E-l/89-90 notifying the Combined State Service Examination 1989, inviting applications for the recruitment to the posts specified in the advertisement on the basis of competitive examination followed by Interview. According to advertisement, 8% posts were reserved for Discharged Personnel/Handicapped/Emergency Commissioned/Short Service Commissioned and Ex-Army Personnel. The petitioner being a short Service Commissioned Officer, applied in pursuance of the said advertisement in the manner prescribed therein. Along with his application, the petitioner filed a written undertaking that in event of his being selected for the post applied for, he would get himself released from the Military service. He was allotted Roll No. 18361 and appeared successfully in the written examination, By means of a Communication dated 14-3-1991, the petitioner was called upon to appear for interview before the Commission on 25-3-1991. It appears that by communication contained in Commission's letter dated 23-3-1991, the petitioner was required to produce a certificate as to his eligibility in the category of Ex-serviceman/Commissioned Officer etc. in terms of the following which according to the Commission, is a pre-requisite condition for being included in the said category. "A pat Kaleen Commission Prapt Adhikariyon/Alpkaleen Seva Commission Prapt Adhikariyon Sahit Bhootpurva Sainikon Tatha Commission Prapt Un Adhikariyon par Bni Yeh Chhoot Lagu Hogi Jinhone Raksha Seva Me Kam Se Karn 5 Varsh Ki Seva Kar Li Hon. Eise Raksha Seva Sainikon/Adhikariyon Jo Avedan patra prapt Kiye Jane Ki Antim Nirdharit Tithi Ke 6 Mah Ki Avadhi Me Karya Mukta Hone Vale Honge, Ko Bhi Yeh Chhoot Anumanya Hogi Yadi Unki Kul Seva Avadhi 5 Varsh Se Kam Na Ho." 2. It transpires from the communication of the Commission dated 23-3-1991 that as per certificate already filed by the petitioner, he was in the last year of initial five years' contractual period of Defence Service, where as according to the Government order extracted as aforesaid in the communication dated 23-3-t991 five year's minimum service was required for being eligible as Ex-serviceman/Commissioned Officer etc. On the admitted facts, the petitioner had not completed five years' in the Defence Service as short service Commissioned Officer on the last date of the receipt of the application before the Commission, though on 25-3-1991, the date of interview he had put in more than five years of Defence service as short Service Commissioned Officer. It appears that according to the view taken by the Commission, the petitioner was not eligible under the category of Ex-serviceman/short Service Commissioned Officer etc. by reason of the fact that he had not completed five years of Defence service on 2-9-1989, which was the last date of receipt of the application forms in respect of the said examination before the Commission. Accordingly, by office order dated 25-3-1991, the petitioner was intimated that it would not be possible to extend the benefit of reservation and accordingly, the result of bis examination was being cancelled. True copy of this office memo dated 15-3-1991 is annexed to the petition as Annexure No. 5. 3. The petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari quashing the said office order as also the order dated 25-3-1991 (Annexure-6) where by the petitioner's review application dated 25-7-1991 was rejected. This Court passed in interim order on 27-3-1991 directing the Commission to allow the petitioner to appear in the Interview which was then going on, provisionally, but the Court further quipped that the result would not be declared until further orders of the Court in so far as the petitioner is concerned. In pursuance of the said order, the petitioner was allowed to appear in the Interview, but his result stood frozen in view of the postulate in the interim order of this Court dated 27-3-1991. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for parties. This qualification clause and the clause as to the age of the advertisement being relevant for the present discussion, may be reproduced below. "Qualification.Assistant Controller weights and Measures Grade-1. Bachelor's degree in science with physics or Mechanical Engineering as one of the subjects from University established by law in India or an institution other than a University recognised or declared under any law or a foreign University recognised by the Central Government. 2. U. P. Educational Service Men's Branch (Jr. Scale) : post Graduate Degree. 3. For posts other than those enumerated as 1 and 2 above. 2. U. P. Educational Service Men's Branch (Jr. Scale) : post Graduate Degree. 3. For posts other than those enumerated as 1 and 2 above. Degree of a recognised University or its equivalent obtained prior to the last date for the receipt of applications. For U. P. Police service the minimum height must be 165 CM for male candidates and 150 CM for female candidates. For male candidates of Kumaum and Garhwal Division and candidates who are declared as scheduled Tribes, it must be 160 CM. The minimum measurement of expanded chest must be 84 CM for male candidates and 79 CM for female candidates. The expansion of chest must be 5 CM. Age.Candidates must have attained the age of 21 years and must not have completed 30 years on July 1, 1989, The maximum age limit as above is relax-able up to a maximum of 5 years for candidates belonging to scheduled Cast.es/Scheduled Tribes/Backward Class/Dependents of Freedom fighter of Uttar Pradesh and physically Handicapped Candidates. This age relaxation will also apply in the case of Emergency Commissioned Officers/Short Service Commissioned Officer/Ex-serviceman who have rendered at least five years of Service in the defence services. This relaxation will also be available to these defence service officers who are due to be released within six months from the last date of the receipt of applications provided that their total Service period is not less than 5 years A relaxation of 5 years in the maximum age prescribed shall be admissible for efficient players of classified games in accordance with the Government order No. 22/21/1983-Karmik-2, dated 28 November, 1985 subject to their submitting certificates 1on prescribed forms. 5. It is evident from the advertisement that while in respect of the academic qualification, it is specifically provided in the advertisement that the qualification referred to therein, must have been acquired 'prior to the last date of receipt of application. There is nothing in the advertisement as to who were the persons who may be eligible for 8% posts reserved for discharged Personnel/Handicapped/Emergency Commissioned/Short Service Commissioned/and Ex-Army Personnel. The Government order No. 2003/40 Sba-Eka-6-11-77 dated 20-8-1977 provides for 8% reservation for Class 1 and Class-2 posts, in direct recruitment, for Emergency Commissioned Officer/Short Service Commissioned Officer-Ex-Servicemen, while the Government Order No. 17.2/81-Karmik-2-Lucknow dated 28th February 1985 provides for five years of relaxation in the Upper Age Limit. The Government order No. 2003/40 Sba-Eka-6-11-77 dated 20-8-1977 provides for 8% reservation for Class 1 and Class-2 posts, in direct recruitment, for Emergency Commissioned Officer/Short Service Commissioned Officer-Ex-Servicemen, while the Government Order No. 17.2/81-Karmik-2-Lucknow dated 28th February 1985 provides for five years of relaxation in the Upper Age Limit. The last of these two G. O.'s being relevant is quoted as below. The last of these two G. O.'s being relevant is quoted as below. fo"k; & lh/kh HkrhZ }kjk Hkjs tkus okys lewg ' d' rFkk lewg ' [k' inksa esa fu;qfDr ds fy, vkikr~dkyhu deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa vYidkyhu lsok deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa lfgr] HkwriwoZ lSfudksa rFkk deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa dh mijh vk;q lhek esa NwV fn;k tkukA egksn;] eq>s vkidk /;ku jk"V~h; ,dhdj.k vuqHkkx ds 'kklukns'k la[;k&2003@pkyhl jk0,dh0 5&11&77 fnukad 20&8&77 dh vksj vkd`"V djus dk funsZ'k gqvk gS ftlesa lsuk ds fodykax vf/kdkfj;ksa rFkk ,ejtsalh deh'ku 'kkVZ lfoZl deh'ku vQljksa ,oa HkwriwoZ lSfudksa ds fy, lewg " d" ,oa " [k" ds inksa@lsokvksa esa 8&8 izfr'kr dk vkj{k.k iznku fd;k x;k gSA blh lanHkZ esa rRdkyhu fu;qfDr foHkkx ds dk;kZy; Kku la0&5&1&66 fu;qfDr " [k" fnukad 24&8&1966 dh vkSj Hkh vkidk /;ku vkd`"V fd;k tkrk gS] ftlesa fuxZr vkns'kksa ds v/khu m0iz0 yksd lsok vk;ksx }kjk lapkfyr izfr;ksfxrk ijh{kk vFkok pquko ds vk/kkj ij ls fHkUu vU; fdlh izdkj ls Hkjk tkrk gS] lsok esa dh xbZ lsok dh lEiw.kZ vof/k mldh okLrfod vk;q esa ls ?kVk nh tkrh gS vkSj ;fn bl izdkj ?kVkbZ xbZ vk;q fu/kkZfjr vf/kdre vk;q&lhek ls rhu o"kZ ls vf/kd u gks rks le>k tkrk gS fd mi;qZDr vH;FkhZ vf/kdre vk;q ds lEcU/k esa in ij fu;qDr fd;s tkus dh 'krZ dks iwjk djrk gSA 28 HkwriwoZ lSfud ds iwuZfu;kstu ls lEcfU/kr vf/kdkfj;ksa ds dk;Zny dh fofHkUu flQkfj'kksa ij Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk fy, x;s fu.kZ; dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq;s jkT;k/khu lsokvksa@inksa ij lh/kh HkrhZ }kjk lewg " d" rFkk lewg " [k" inksa ij fu;qfDr ds fy, p;u ds lEcU/k esa vkikr~dkyhu deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa@vYidkyhu lsok deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa lfgr] HkwriwoZ lSfudksa rFkk deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa ds ekeyksa esa mijh vk;q&lhek esa NwV fn;s tkus ds lEcU/k esa yksd lsok vk;ksx] m0iz0 ds ijke'kZ ls 'kklu }kjk fuEufyf[kr fu.kZ; fy, x;s gSa& ( d) lewg " d" rFkk lewg " [k" ds inksa esa ftuesa lh/kh HkrhZ izfr;ksfxrkRed ijh{kk ds vk/kkj ij dh tkrh gS] muesa fu;qfDr ds fy, lsuk ls vkikr~dkyhu deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa@vYidkyhu lsok deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa lfgr HkwriwoZ lSfudksa rFkk deh'ku izkIr mu vf/kdkfj;ksa dh] ftUgksaus lsok esa de ls de ikWap o"kZ dh lsok dj yh gks] fu/kkZfjr ( vf/kdre vk;q&lhek ls) vf/kdre vk;q&lhek ls vf/kdre ikWap o"kZ rd dh NwV lsokdky dks vk/kkj ekudj nh tk;sxhA ;g NwV mu lSfudksa@vf/kdkfj;ksa dks Hkh vuqeU; gksxh tks N% ekg dh vof/k esa dk;ZeqDr gksus okys gks ijUrq fuEufyf[kr dks vuqeU; ugha gksxhA& ( 1 ) tks lnkpkj vFkok vdq'kyrk ds dkj.k c[kkZLr gq;s gksa] ( 2 ) tks lsuk dh lsok esa voxq.k le>h tkus okyh 'kkjhfjd v;ksX;rk vFkok v'kDrrk ds dkj.k lsok eqDr gq;s gksaA ( [k ) lewg " d" rFkk lewg " [k" esa ftu inksa ij lh/kh HkrhZ izfr;ksfxrkRed ijh{kk ls vU; izfdz;k ls dh tkrh gS] mu ij vkikr~dkyhu deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa@vYidkyhu lsok deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa lfgr HkwriwoZ lSfudksa rFkk deh'ku izkIr vf/kdkfj;ksa dks orZeku esa ykxw vkns'kksa tks fu;qfDr ( [k) foHkkx ds dk;kZy; lkFk la[;k&5&1&66 fu;qfDr [k] fnukad 24 vxLr] 1966 esa iz'kkfor fd;s x;s Fks] ds vuqlkj lsuk esa dh xbZ lsok vof/k ds vfrfjDr rhu o"kZ dh NwV vuqeU; jgsxhA 3& d`i;k bl fu.kZ; ls vius v/khuLFk leLr vf/kdkfj;ksa@dk;kZy;ksa dks voxr djkus dk d"V djsaA Hkonh; g0&th?kihu 'kqDy 6. There is nothing in the Government Order No. 2003/40-R-Ek-6-l 1/77 dated 20th August 1977 which provides for reservation in favour of the above category of persons to the extent of 8% in Class-1 and Class-2 posts and to the extent of 3% in Class-3 and Class-4 posts under the U. P. Government as to, who are the persons coming under this category. The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of personnel and Administrative Records New Delhi in its Notification No. 390916/10/79 Estt(c) New Delhi 15th December, 1979 has in exercise of powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution made rules known as 'Ex-servicemen (Reemployment in central Civil Services and posts) Rules 1979. Rule 2 of the said rules being relevant is quoted below : (2) Definitions in these rules, unless the context otherwise requires : (a) "Armed Forces of the Union" means the Navel Military and Air Forces of the Union. (b) Disabled Ex-servicemen" means an ex-serviceman who while serving the Armed Forces of the Union was disabled in operations against the enemy or in disturbed areas. (c) Ex-servicemen" means a person, who has served in any work (whether as a combatant or as non-combatant) in the armed Force of the Union, including the Armed Forces of the former Indian States, but excluding the Assam Rifles, Defence Security Corps, General Reserve Engineering force, Look Sahayak Sena and Territorial Army, for a continuous period of not less than six months after operation and (i) Has been released, otherwise than at his own request or by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency or has been transferred to the reserve pending such release or (ii) Has to serve for not more than six months for completing the period of service requisite for becoming entitled to be released or transferred to the reserve as aforesaid, or (iii) Has been released at his own request after completing five years service in the Armed Forces of the Union : Para Military Force's means the Border Security Force, Central Reserve P lice Force, Indo-Tibetan Border police, Central Industrial Security Force, Secretariat Security Force, Assam Rifles and Railway protection Force. (3) "Reserved Vacancies" means vacancies reserved under Rule 4 for being filled by ex-servicemen. 7. (3) "Reserved Vacancies" means vacancies reserved under Rule 4 for being filled by ex-servicemen. 7. By means of Government Order No. 39016/15/79-Estt(C) Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of personnel and A. R. New Delhi, the 7th September 1981, the following decisions appear to have been taken in consultation with the Union public Service Commission. (i) The upper age limit shall be relaxed by the length of military service increased by three years in the case of ex-servicemen and commissioned officers including ECOs/SsCOs for appointment to any vacancy in Group 'A' and Group 'B' services/posts filled by direct recruitment otherwise than on the results of an open all India Competitive Examination held by the U.P.S.C. subject to the condition that (i) the continuous service rendered in the Armed forces by an ex-serviceman is not less than six months after attestation and (ii) that resultant age after deducting his period of service from his actual age does not exceed the prescribed age limit by more than three years and also subject to usual conditions which have been prescribed in respect of appointment of ex-serviceman in Group 'C' and Group 'D' posts vide this Departments Notification No. 39016/10/79 Estt. (C) dated 15-12.1979. (ii) For appointment to any vacancy in Group 'A' and Group 'B' services/post filed by direct recruitment on the results of an All India Competitive Examination held by UPSC the ex-servicemen and Commissioned officers including ECOs/SSCOs who have rendered at least five years military service and have been released on completion of assignment (including those assignments is due to be completed within six months) otherwise than by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency, or on account of physical disability attributable to military service or on invalidment shall be allowed maximum relaxation of five years in the upper age Limit." 8. The Uttar Pradesh Government too appear to have framed rules known as Uttar Pradesh (Bhootpurva Sainikon ke Liye Tritiye Shreni Aur Chaturth Shreni Ki Ab Varg 'G' Aur 'Gha' Sevaon Me Aur Pado Par Riktiyon Ka Arakshan) Niyamawali, 1977. The Uttar Pradesh Government too appear to have framed rules known as Uttar Pradesh (Bhootpurva Sainikon ke Liye Tritiye Shreni Aur Chaturth Shreni Ki Ab Varg 'G' Aur 'Gha' Sevaon Me Aur Pado Par Riktiyon Ka Arakshan) Niyamawali, 1977. Clauses (a) (b) and (c) of Rule 2 of "the Rules are quoted below: (ka) "Sangh Ki Sashastra Sena" Ka Tatya Parya Sangh Ki Nausena Athwa Vayu Sena Se He Aur Ismen Bhootpurva Bhartiyon Rajyon Ki Shashastra Sena Bhi Sammalit Hein ; (kha) "Angheen Bhootpurva Sainik" ka Tatyaparya Us Bhootpurva Sainik Se He Jo Sangh Ki Sashastra Sena Me Seva Karte Hue Shatru Ke Virudb Karyawahi Ka Dauran Ya Updrava Grasta Chhetron me Angheen Hua Tha ; (Gha) "Bootpurva Sainik" Ka Tatyaparya Us Bhyaki Se He Jisme Sangh Ki Sashastra Sena Me Kisi Koti (Rank) Me Chahe Yodhak Ke Rup Me Athva Anayodhak Ke Rup Me) Kam Se Kam Chheh Mas Ki Avadhi Ke Liye Lagatar Seva Ki Ho Aur (Ek) Ke Karan Padchiyut Kiye Jane Se Bhinna Rup Me Kiya Gaya Hon, Athva Nirmukta Hone Tak Reserve Me Estbanantrit Kiya Gaya Ho Ya (Do) Upyukta Prakar Se Niyukta Hone Athva Reserve Me Esthanantrit Kiye Jane Ka Haqdar Hone Ke Liye Apekshit Seva Ki Avadhi Poori Karne Ke Nimin Chheh Mas Se Anadhik Seva Kami Padi Ho." 9. Neither the terms Armed Forces of the Union', 'Disabled Ex-serviceman', and 'Ex-serviceman' as defined in the Ex-serviceman (Re-employment in central Civil Services and posts) Rules, 1979 framed by Government of India nor these terms as defined in the U. P. Government Rules referred to above, have any bearing on the facts of the present case inasmuch as the petitioner applied against reserved quota not as an Ex-serviceman, or even as a Disabled Ex- serviceman but as a short Service Commissioned Officer still in Service at the relevant time for which neither the advertisement nor any Government order or the Rules Prescribed five years' of minimum service as a condition of eligibility under the said category against the reserved quota of 8%. The term 'Short Service Commissioned Officer' does not require that in order to come under the category of a Short Service Commissioned Officer, one must have rendered at least 5 years service as such officer. The term 'Short Service Commissioned Officer' does not require that in order to come under the category of a Short Service Commissioned Officer, one must have rendered at least 5 years service as such officer. It may be noticed that the State Government had already provided the benefit of three years 'age relaxation in the upper age limit to those categories of persons vide office Memo No. 5/1/66 Appointment (Kha) dated 24-8-1966 in respect of plots under the State Government falling outside the purview of the State Public Service Commission and by means of the G. O. dated 28-2-1985, the benefit of 5 years are relaxation in the upper age limit was extended to these categories of persons in respect of Class 'A' and Class 'B' posts under the State Government to be filled in by direct recruitment on the basis of competitive examination provided that they have put in at least the minimum Service of 5 years in the Defence Forces. In respect of such posts of Class 'A' or Class 'B' as are required to be filled directly by any method other than the method of competitive examination relaxation in the Upper age limit was upto 3 years as provided in the office Memo No. 5/1/66-Niyukti (kha) dated 24-8-66. It is more than evident that 5 years or 3 years, as the case may be of a direct recruitment based on competitive examination or by any method other than competitive Examination respectively, of service as a Commissioned Officer etc. is not necessary in order to claim benefit of 8% reservation provided that such an officer is not over-age on the relevant date. If however, such an officer is over-age then he can claim benefit of reservation only if the comes within the age after giving him the age relaxation in manner indicated in the G.O. dated 28-2-1985 and not otherwise. 10. The learned counsel appearing for the Commission has, however, placed reliance upon a Division Bench decision of this Court rendered in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 190 of 1990, Hari Shanker Tripathi v. Union of India and another, decided on 7th May, 1990, copy of which is annexed as Annexure CA-5 to the counter Affidavit. 10. The learned counsel appearing for the Commission has, however, placed reliance upon a Division Bench decision of this Court rendered in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 190 of 1990, Hari Shanker Tripathi v. Union of India and another, decided on 7th May, 1990, copy of which is annexed as Annexure CA-5 to the counter Affidavit. Hari Shanker Tripathi, who was the petitioner in the said writ petition, had put in three years, seven months and ten days of total service, when he was discharged from the service of Army on 10-11-1982 on medical grounds. He was born on 3-6-1983 and was well within the age limit prescribed for appearing in the combined State Service Commission 1988-89 held by the U. P. Public Service Commission, without any relaxation in Upper age Limit. He was informed by the Commission by order dated 28-12-1989 that since he had not completed five years of Army Service, he could not. be considered for appointment against the q.iota reserved for Ex-servicemen etc. In the present case, the petitioner applied as a Short Service Commissioned officer and has, on admitted facts, completed more than five years of service, though he had not put in five years of service on the last date of receipt of the application form in the Commission. It being no requirement in the advertisement that a candidate applying under the said category should have completed five years of service as such on the last date of receipt of the application form in the office of the Commission, the petitioner would not be rendered in-eligible for staking is claim against the quota reserved for 'short Service Commissioned Officer', etc. The Division Bench itself seems to have distinguished the case of a Commissioned Officer as is evident from the following observations : "The provisions relating to Emergency Commission and other short-term Commissioned services referred to in the same Government Order are not relevant in this case because it is not the petitioner's case that he has served in such commissions or services." Further the conclusion of the Division Bench that completion of five years of service is a condition precedent for eligibility under the said Category of Ex-servicemen etc. is not backed or followed by reasons and discussion of relevant Jaw. is not backed or followed by reasons and discussion of relevant Jaw. The observation of the Division Bench runs as below : "There is nothing wrong on the part of the State Government, for having adopted and applied the principle that completion of not less than five years' service in Army is a necessary requirement for claiming five years' relaxation in upper age limit for appearing in the examination and the same condition of five years' service is a requisite for claiming post/Service against the quota reserved for Ex-serviceman. As the petitioner did not complete a minimum period of five years' in the service of the Army, he is not entitled to claim either of the two benefits." 11. The said conclusions of the Division Bench cannot be cited as a binding precedent in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of U. P. v. M/s Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd., (JT) 1991 (3) SC 268 wherein Hon R. M. Sahai, J., in his concurring judgment has observed as below : "Uniformity and consistency are core of judicial discipline. But that which escapes in the judgment without any occasion is not ratio decided. In Shama Rao v. State of Pondicherry, AIR 1967 SC 1680 it was observed, 'it is trite to say that a decision is binding not because of its conclusion but in regard to its ration and the principles, laid down therein'. Any declaration or conclusion arrived without application of mind or preceded without any reason cannot be deemed to be declaration of law or authority of a general nature binding as a precedent. Restraint in dissenting or overruling is for sake of stability and uniformity but rigidly beyond reasonable limits is inimical to the growth of law". The Division Bench decision relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the Commission, is, therefore, of no aid to him. The view that I am taking in this case finds support by an authority of this Court reliance upon which was placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Division Bench decision dated 16th October, 1987 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3488 of 1987, Dr. Km. Anju Sharma v. U.P. Higher Education Service Commission and another, wherein Dr. The view that I am taking in this case finds support by an authority of this Court reliance upon which was placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Division Bench decision dated 16th October, 1987 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3488 of 1987, Dr. Km. Anju Sharma v. U.P. Higher Education Service Commission and another, wherein Dr. K. Anju Sharma was not awarded Ph.D. degree on the last date for submission of the form which was 24th September, 1986 but the said degree was awarded to her in October, 1986 i.e. much before the date fixed by the Commission for submission of the relevant documents in support of the essential qualification has laid down the Commission was not justified in not taking the Ph.D. degree into account for determining her eligibility merely because the degree was awarded to her after expiry of the last date for the submission of the application forms, though before submission of the documents before the Commission. 12. The learned Counsel for the Commission has also urged before me that under similar circumstances, one Arvind Kumar Singh, who appeared in the Combined State Service Examination 1985-87 was disqualified and his representation was rejected by the State Government vide the order No. 17/2/1981 dated 5-10-1989 a copy of which is annexed as Annexure CA-2 to the Counter Affidavit. The stand taken by the Government in the said order is that since the Government order dated 28-2-1985 provides five years of minimum service as a condition for granting five years of relaxation in Upper Age Limit on the same basis 5 years minimum service should be insisted upon for eligibility to the quota reserved for Short Service Commissioned Officer etc. The construction put upon the Government order dated 28 February 1985 by the State Government in its order dated 5-10-1989 is wholly uncalled for and not at all discern able from the Government order dated 28-2-1985. 13. Assuming that the Government order dated 28-2-1985 implies five years of minimum Defence Service as a condition precedent for eligibility in respect of 8% posts reserved for Short Service Commissioned Officer etc. 13. Assuming that the Government order dated 28-2-1985 implies five years of minimum Defence Service as a condition precedent for eligibility in respect of 8% posts reserved for Short Service Commissioned Officer etc. such a condition would be hit by Article 14 of the Constitution of India being arbitrary and irrational having no nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the provisions made in the Government order dated 20th August, 1977, provided for 8% reservation in Class-1 and Class-2 posts under the State Government with a view to rehabilitate the Short Service Commissioned Officers and Ex-servicemen etc. As such, requirements of five years minimum Defence Service as a condition precedent engrafted in the Government Order dated 20-8-1977 and 28-2-. 985 by interpretative skill is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and has to be given go by. For this reason also, the Division Bench Decision in Hari Shanker Tripathi (supra) is of no consequence to the respondents. 14. In the result, the petition succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 25-3-91 (Annexed as Annexures 5 and 6 respectively to the writ petition) are hereby quashed and the respondents are 'directed to declare the petitioner's result of the combined State Service Examination, 1989 forthwith and recommend his name for appointment in appropriate discipline of the Combined Services for which examination was held if he is entitled for that on the basis of merit. 15. Parties to bear their own costs.