Judgment :- K.K. Usha, J. Common question arises in these Original Petitions filed by Superintendent of Post Offices and others against the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in applications filed by Extra-Departmental Agents. The method of recruitment and conditions of service of Posts and Telegraph Extra-Departmental Agents, hereinafter referred to as EDA are governed by the Posts and Telegraph Extra-Departmental Agents (Conduct and service) Rules, 1964, hereinafter referred as 'the Rules", issued by the Department of Communications - P & T Board under the authority of Government of India. 2. The term departmental agent would take in 13 categories namely:- i) an Extra-Departmental Sub-Postmaster; ii) an Extra-Departmental Branch Postmaster; iii) an Extra-Departmental Delivery Agent; iv) an Extra-Departmental Mail Peon; V) an Extra-Departmental Letter Box Peon; vi) an Extra-Departmental Mail Carrier or Runner; vii) an Extra-Departmental Packer; viii an Extra-Departmental Messenger; ix) an Extra-Departmental Chowkidar; X) an Extra-Departmental Stamp Vendor; xi) an Extra-Departmental Sorter in the Railway Mail Service; xii) an Extra-Departmental Sub-Record Clerk in the Rail way Mail Service; xiii) an Extra-Departmental Porter. The applications before the Tribunal are working in different categories. In the normal course, appointment as EDA is made by selecting candidates through Employment Exchange. The applicants before the Tribunal sought a declaration that they are entitled to apply for transfer and appointment as and when EDA posts fall vacant in the same office in which they were working or any office in the same place without being sponsored through the Employment Exchange. The Tribunal granted the above prayer made by the, EDAs. While granting such prayer the Tribunal followed its own order dated 25.2.1999 in O. A. No. 45/98, which had not been challenged by the department. 3. S. IV of the Rules provide for the method of recruitment. The minimum age limit will be 18 years and he can be retained in service up to 65 years. The educational qualification for appointment as ED Sub-Postmasters/ED Branch Postmasters is Matriculation. For ED Delivery agents/ed Stamp Vendors and other categories of ED As the qualification is Standard VIII. There are certain other requisites to be satisfied for appointment as EDAs. The applicants before the Tribunal placed reliance on a letter dated 12.9.1988 issued by the Director General of Posts while claiming, appointment by transfer. The above letter is marked as annexure- A3 in O. A. No. 306/2000 from which arises O.P. No. 19237/2000. There are certain other requisites to be satisfied for appointment as EDAs. The applicants before the Tribunal placed reliance on a letter dated 12.9.1988 issued by the Director General of Posts while claiming, appointment by transfer. The above letter is marked as annexure- A3 in O. A. No. 306/2000 from which arises O.P. No. 19237/2000. The letter refers to a decision taken regarding transfer of EDAs from one post to another. Relevant portion reads as follows: "i) When an E.D. Post falls vacant in the same office or in any office in the same place and if one of the existing EDAs prefers to work against that post, he may be allowed to be appointed against that vacant post without coming through the Employment Exchange, provided he is suitable for the other post and fulfills all the required conditions. ii) In cases, where EDAs become surplus due to abolition of posts, and they are offered alternative appointments in a place other than the place where they are originally holding the post, to mitigate hardship, they may be allowed to be appointed in a post that may subsequently occur in the place where they were originally working without coming through Employment Exchange." The above would show that an EDA who had been working as Extra-Departmental Carrier (as in the case of applicant in O.A. No. 306/2000) can apply for a transfer and appointment in the post of an Extra-Departmental Delivery Agency when a vacancy in that post arises in the same office or in any office in the same place. The word 'place' in sub-para (i) had been later clarified in the communication dated 11.8.1994 to mean recruitment unit. As far as ED Branch Postmasters and ED Sub-Postmasters are concerned the recruiting unit is the division and that for other categories of EDAs the same is sub-division. It is further clarified in Cl. 24 of S. IV of the Rules dealing with method of recruitment that the placement of an EDA from one Post Office to another within the same recruiting unit it will be treated as transfer and the EDA concerned will not forfeit his past service for any purpose including seniority. It is further clarified in Cl. 24 of S. IV of the Rules dealing with method of recruitment that the placement of an EDA from one Post Office to another within the same recruiting unit it will be treated as transfer and the EDA concerned will not forfeit his past service for any purpose including seniority. However, if the placement is from one Post Office to another outside his own recruiting unit such an event the placement will be treated as fresh appointment and the EDA concerned will forfeit his past service for seniority and will rank as junior most to all the regularly appointed EDA of that unit. 4. The contention raised by the department in these Original Petitions is that the EDAs do not derive any legal right for transfer from Cl. (i) and (ii) of annexure- A3. It only means that those EDAs can seek consideration for the arising vacancies of EDA along with those candidates advised by Employment Exchange. The only advantage intended is that they need not come through Employment Exchange. It does not mean they have any preference over open candidates. According to the learned Senior Standing Counsel, if such preference is given it will bar all opportunities to those who are waiting outside for an appointment. It may be open for the EDAs to make a request for being considered for appointment in the vacancies arising in the same office or in any office in the same place but the word 'may' indicates that it is within the discretion of the department to grant such appointment or not. The choice is with the department to choose the best. The department cannot be compelled to grant appointment by transfer. 5. It is after referring to the provisions of P&T Extra-Departmental Agents (Conduct and service) Rules, 1964 Supreme Court held in The Superintendent of Post Offices etc. v. P. Narayana Rao etc., AIR 1977 SC 1677, as follows: "4. It is thus clear that an extra departmental agent is not a causal worker but he holds a post under the administrative control of the State. It is apparent from the rules that the employment of an extra departmental agent is in a post which exists "apart from" the person who happens to fill it at any particular time. It is thus clear that an extra departmental agent is not a causal worker but he holds a post under the administrative control of the State. It is apparent from the rules that the employment of an extra departmental agent is in a post which exists "apart from" the person who happens to fill it at any particular time. Though such a post is outside the regular civil services, there is no doubt it is a post under the State. The tests of a civil post laid down by this court in Kanak Chandra Dutta 's case (supra) are clearly satisfied in the case of extra departmental agents." Therefore, we find no merit in the contention that the Rules not being issued trader Art.309 of the Constitution have only the status of executive instructions and tine EDAs cannot get any right established by virtue of its provisions. 6. The fact that the department intended to admit a right to transfer and appointment in an arising vacancy in the same office or in any office in the same place is made further clear by annexure- A4 communication. annexure- A4 contains clear directions as clarification regarding the manner in which claims for transfer and appointment made by EDAs are to be dealt with. The relevant portion of Annexure -A4 is quoted below: QUERY CLARIFICATION 1) whether preference can be given to the EDAs for transfer 1) The transfer request may foe against a vacant ED post working in the same office or considered in me following outerswhether the request of senior EDA should be given preference? of preference a) Surplus ED agents whose names for deployment appear in the waiting list b) If surplus ED agents are not available, the senior most ED agent, working in the same office and /or the seniormost ED agent in the same recruitment unit may be given preference in the order. The resultant vacancy, if any, can also be offered in the same manner 2) Whether EDAs having higher marks can be given 2) a) Preference may be given preference for transfer irrespective of their seniority ED agents having higher marks in the existing post? In matriculation when selection is made for the post EDBPM /SPM, if they are otherwise satisfy the eligibility criteria. b) For other ED posts, preference may be given to seniors if they otherwise satisfy the eligibility criteria. In matriculation when selection is made for the post EDBPM /SPM, if they are otherwise satisfy the eligibility criteria. b) For other ED posts, preference may be given to seniors if they otherwise satisfy the eligibility criteria. 3)Whether there is any limit for number of choice posts 3) Under the normal circumstances/offices for which he/she may apply for transfer and ED Agents do not carry any if so, how may times?transfer liability and are not liable to be transferred from one post to another or from one place to another. However, in rarest cases where ED Agents are posted far away from their original Post Offices of posting on being rendered surplus, they may be allowed one or two transfers in their entire service in order to enable them to be posted back to their Parent Post Office or any nearby Post Office. 4) Whether an ED Agent having more service can be give 4) Yes preference in case more than one ED Agent of the same office applies for his transfer against the vacant post of ED Agent? 5) Whether ED As of HOs/LSG Sub Offices can be given transfer against the posts of ED Agents falling vacant in a Sub Division and vice versa. It may also be clarified whether an ED Agent other than EDBPM/SPM can apply for the post of an EDBPM/SPM, falling vacant outside his recruiting unit (sub division) but within the recruiting Yes. So long as the ED Agents seeking transfer from a Head Office or LSG Sub Division against a post falling vacant in a a Sub Division and vice versa are borne on the gradation list unit (i.e. Division). of the same Division and ED Agents seeking transfer to the post of EDBPM/EDBPM within the same Division fulfill the eligibility criteria laid down for appointment as EDBPM/EDBPM. While doing so, the provisions against Item No. 3 above may be kept in view. 6) If the request for transfer of an ED Agent has been 6) The position has already been granted and if he again requests for another transfer, explained against item No. 3 above. clarify whether this can be considered? While doing so, the provisions against Item No. 3 above may be kept in view. 6) If the request for transfer of an ED Agent has been 6) The position has already been granted and if he again requests for another transfer, explained against item No. 3 above. clarify whether this can be considered? 7) Whether any preference to EDMCs whose posts are 7) The EDMC who has been abolished due to administrative reasons, can be given rendered surplus may be given priority in transfer over other categories of ED officials preference over others whose requests are also pending? 7. If the right given for claiming transfer and appointment in arising vacancies is limited to a claim for being considered along with Employment Exchange nominees there was no necessity to provide for the order of preference on the basis of seniority etc. in such detail in annexure- A4. There is no indication at all in annexure- A4 that the EDAs have to compete with fresh candidates from Employment Exchange. 8. We are not impressed by the contention that even if a claim is made by an EDA for transfer and appointment it is within the discretion of the department to allow it or not. According to us, the word 'may' used in Cl. (i) does not import a discretion. The provision is made for the benefit of EDAs. If that be so, if the EDA satisfies all the conditions required in Cl. (i) his claim cannot be denied. In that sense the word 'may' is used as equivalent to 'shall'. In Julius v. Bishop of Exford, (1880) 5 App. Cas. 214, Lord Cairns has observed as follows: "where a power is deposited with a public office for the purpose of being used for the benefit of persons who are specially pointed out, and with regard to whom a definition is supplied by the legislature of the conditions upon which they are entitled to call for its exercise, that power .-ought to be exercised and the court will require it to be exercised." According to Lord Blackburn, "The enabling words are construed as compulsory whenever the object of the power is to effectuate a legal right" A reference (a annexure- A3 would clearly show the provisions in Cl. (i) were brought in for the benefit of EDAs in service. (i) were brought in for the benefit of EDAs in service. The detailed provisions contained in annexure- a 4 also would make it clear that the respondents are bound to act as per the norms contained therein when an application for transfer and appointment is received. 9. As was observed by the Supreme Court in Oovind Lai Chaggan Lai Patel v. The Agriculture Produce Market Committee and others, AIR 1976 SC 263. The question as to whether a statute is mandatory or directory depends upon the intent of the legislature and not upon the language in which the intent is clothed' Thus, the governing factor is the meaning and intent of the legislature, which should be gathered not merely from the words used by the legislature but from a variety of other circumstances and considerations. In other words, the use of the word 'shall' or may'' is not conclusive on the question whether the particular requirement of law is mandatory or directory'. annexure- A4 also would make the intention of the rule making authority that if an EDA makes a claim under Cl. (i) in annexure- A3 and if he is qualified and eligible, he shall be granted transfer and appointment to the vacancy arising in other categories of EDAs. 10. Public interest is in no way adversely affected by granting the claim of the EDAs. They had already undergone a selection process through the Employment Exchange. They had acquired experience by working in one category or other as EDA. They must be found suitable for the new post and should fulfill all the required conditions. If that be so, there is no question of the standard of efficiency being diluted by granting their claim. We find no merit in the averment that if the EDAs are entertained in the arising vacancies the large multitude of jobless young people standing outside would be denied an opportunity. When the EDA is granted transfer and appointment to an arising vacancy the post held by him will become vacant and it will be available for those who are nominated by the Employment Exchange. The analogy sought to be drawn from the appointments made for 180 days under R.9(a)(i) of K.S.& S.S.R. is totally out of place. 11. When the EDA is granted transfer and appointment to an arising vacancy the post held by him will become vacant and it will be available for those who are nominated by the Employment Exchange. The analogy sought to be drawn from the appointments made for 180 days under R.9(a)(i) of K.S.& S.S.R. is totally out of place. 11. We will now refer to the facts in each case: O.P. No. 19237/2000 (Arising from O.A. 306/2000) : In this case, the applicant before the Tribunal is working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Panipra Branch Post Office. His request is for being transferred and appointed in a vacancy arising in the same Office for the post of E.D. Delivery Agent. O.P. No. 19248/2000 (Arising from O.A. 1658/97): In this case, the applicant was working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Pezhakkappilly E.D. Sub Office under Aluva Postal Division. He applied for appointment by transfer as E.D. Branch Post Master in Nirmala College Branch Office, Muvattupuzha in the same Division. O.P. No. 17207/2000 (Arising from O.A. 1657/97): In this case, the applicant is working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Ponjassery Branch Office under Aluva Postal Division. He applied for transfer and appointment to the post of E.D. Branch Post Master,-Ponjasserry in the same place. O.P. No. 10107/2000 (Arising from O.A. 763/00): In this case, the applicant is working as E.D. Delivery Agent. His claim is for transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master in the same Post Office. O.P. No. 12009/2000 (Arising from O.A. 878/98) : Applicant in this case is working as E.D. Delivery Agent. His request is for transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master, Naripetta Post Office. O.P. No. 18595/2000 (Arising from O.A. 444/2000) : Applicant herein is presently working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Chovoor Post Office, Pala. He applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Packer, Teekoy Post Office in the same Sub Division. O.P. No. 18579/2000 (Arising from O.A. 386/98): Applicant who is working as E.D. Messenger in Alangad Post Office under Aluva Sub Division sought transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master, Panaikulam Post Office coming under Aluva Division. O.P. No. 18667/2000 (Arising from O.A. 648/98) : In this case, the applicant who is working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Chittanjur, applied for a transfer and appointment to the post of E.D. Delivery Agent in Chittanjur itself. O.P. No. 18667/2000 (Arising from O.A. 648/98) : In this case, the applicant who is working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Chittanjur, applied for a transfer and appointment to the post of E.D. Delivery Agent in Chittanjur itself. O.P. No. 19350/2000 (Arising from O.A. 381/2000) : In this case, applicant who is now working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Karipuzha Post Office applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Delivery Agent, Arrikkara Post Office in the same Sub Division. O.P. No. 19355/2000 (Arising from O.A. 445/2000) : Applicant herein is working as E.D. Branch Post Master, Eruvankoara, Kunnom Post Office. He applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master, Govindamuttam Post Office in the same Sub Division. O.P. No. 19380/2000 (Arising from O.A. 443/2000) : Applicant is working as E.D. Delivery Agent, Aryanikudy Post Office. She applied for a transfer and appointment as E.D. Sub Post Master in the same Post Office. O.P. No. 19464/2000 (Arising from O.A. 1139/99) : Applicant herein is working as E.D. Packer, Thuruthy Post Office, Changanacherry Postal Sub Division. She requested for transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master, Kainadi Post Office in the same Division. O.P. No. 14867/2000 (Arising out of common Order in O.A. Nos. 859 & 918/99): Applicant in O.A. 859/99 is working as E.D. Branch Post Master, Edadu Post Office. She applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Sub Post Master, Udumbanoor. Applicant in O.A. 918/99 who is working as an E.D. Packer, Vellathooval Post Office, sought a transfer and appointment as E.D. Sub Post Master, Udumbanoor coming under the same Division. O.P. No. 22425/2000 (Arising from O.A. 384/98): Applicant who is working as E.D. Packer/Mail Carrier, Kalamasserry Development Plot Post Office made a request for appointment by transfer as E.D. Packer, Cochin Export Processing Zone Post Office of as E.D. Packer or E.D. Delivery Agent, Ambalamugal S.O.A. O.P. No. 22959/2000 (Arising from O.A. 389/2000) : The applicant herein is an E.D. Packer, Kandalloor Post Office. She applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Sub Post Master, Mahadevikadu Post Office. O.P. No. 14720/2000 (Arising from O.A. 304/2000) : Applicant herein is working as E.D. Delivery Agent, Rajapuram Post Office. She applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master, Mankuva Post office in the same Division. O.P. No. 11512/2000 (Arising from O.A. 1367/99) : Applicant is working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Pathiriyad Post Office in Thalasserry Sub Division. O.P. No. 14720/2000 (Arising from O.A. 304/2000) : Applicant herein is working as E.D. Delivery Agent, Rajapuram Post Office. She applied for transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master, Mankuva Post office in the same Division. O.P. No. 11512/2000 (Arising from O.A. 1367/99) : Applicant is working as E.D. Mail Carrier, Pathiriyad Post Office in Thalasserry Sub Division. He applied for a transfer and appointment as E.D. Branch Post Master in Mambram Post Office coming under the same recruiting unit. 12. In all the above cases, Tribunal granted a declaration that the applicants are entitled to be considered for transfer and appointment to different categories coming under E.D. Agent, in the light of Annexures A3 and A4 as marked in O.A. 306/2000 from which arises O.P. 19237/2000. Tribunal further directed the respondents to consider the claim of the applicants along with other applicants from among E.D.As. in accordance with Annexure A3 and A4. We have already come to the conclusion that the respondents are bound by the provisions contained under Annexures A3 and A4. Therefore, the Tribunal was fully justified in directing the respondents to consider the request made by the applicants on merits. 13. It is relevant to note that the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 45/80 on 25.2.1999 holding that ED As are entitled to transfer and appointment in other categories has not been challenged by the department. It is the view taken by the Tribunal in the above order that was followed and applied in the original applications with which we are concerned in these Original Petitions. In O.A. No. 45/98 there was a challenge against two letters dated 4.2.1997 and 16.10.1997 issued by Member (Personnel) and Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Aluva Division attempting to clarify that the communication dated 12.2.1988 intended only to mean that the EDAs in service need not go through a selection process through Employment Exchange and that they do not have any right or claim for transfer and appointment in other vacancies. These two letters were set aside by the Tribunal as repugnant to the original instructions. So long as the order in O.A. No. 45/98 is not successfully challenged, the respondents cannot place reliance on the above mentioned two documents and rightly no reliance was placed on these documents by the department in these Original Petitions before us. 14. These two letters were set aside by the Tribunal as repugnant to the original instructions. So long as the order in O.A. No. 45/98 is not successfully challenged, the respondents cannot place reliance on the above mentioned two documents and rightly no reliance was placed on these documents by the department in these Original Petitions before us. 14. We find no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O. A. Nos. 306/2000,1658/97,1657/97, 763/200,878/98,444/ 2000,386/98,648/98,381/2000,445/2000, 443/2000,1139/99,859/99 & 918/99,384/98,389/2000,304/2000 and 1367/99. 15. In the result, the Original Petitions fail and they stand dismissed.