R. K. AGRAWAL, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioners, Surendra Mohan and Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, in the present petition, claim themselves to belong to Scheduled Caste. They had applied for the course of Basic Training certificate (BTC) for teaching Urdu in Junior/senior Basic Schools in terms of the advertisement dated 16. 10. 2000. After the examination, the result was declared and both the petitioners were declared successful under the category of Scheduled Caste. However, when they went to join the training, they were declined admission on the ground that the petitioner No. 1 was overage and the petitioner No. 2 could not be given benefit of 10 marks as is available to a ward of a teacher. ( 2 ) I have heard Shri Ashutosh Srivastava learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri A. K. Dwivedi learned Standing Counsel. ( 3 ) SINCE the counter and rejoinder affidavits have already been exchanged, hence this petition is decided at the stage of admission itself with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties as per Rules of the Court. ( 4 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the date of birth of the petitioner No. 1 is 29th July, 1969, and since he belongs to Scheduled Caste, he is entitled for relaxation, as of age of 5 years. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the result of the petitioner No. 1 has been declared under the Scheduled Caste Category and thus there is no disputed about reservation. So far as the petitioner No. 2 is concerned, the learned Counsel submitted that the father of the petitioner No. 2 has retired as Assistant Basic Education Officer and earlier he was working as Assistant Teachers, therefore, the petitioner No. 2 should be treated as teachers ward. This submission cannot be accepted. His father had retired as an officer and, therefore, the petitioner No. 2 cannot be given any benefit available to a ward of a teacher. In the alternative, the learned Counsel submitted that even if the petitioner No. 2 is not given the benefit of 10 marks as indicated above, the petitioner No. 2 still keeps very high position in the merit list and thus, he is entitled for admission. According to him, the persons who have obtained lesser marks, have been granted admission in that category. According to him, the persons who have obtained lesser marks, have been granted admission in that category. ( 5 ) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties, I find that the matter requires reconsideration by the respondent No. 1. It is to be checked and verified as to whether the petitioners belong to Scheduled Caste and whether they had filled up the admission forms claiming reservations. The date of birth of the petitioner No. 1 is also to be verified. If the respondent No. 1 comes to the conclusion that the petitioner No. 1 belongs to Scheduled Caste and has claimed the benefit thereof and the date of birth as stated by him is correct, then the petitioner No. 1 is entitled for relaxation of age of 5 years as provided in the advertisement. Consequential order is to be passed by the respondent No. 1 in the light of observations made above. ( 6 ) SO far as the petitioner No. 2 is concerned, even after ignoring the benefit of 10 works available to a ward of a teacher, his position is to be redetermined and if the respondent No. 1 has given admission to persons who have secured lessor marks then the petitioner No. 2 in that category or in general category, which the petitioner No. 2 is claiming, there is no justification for the respondent No. 2 not to give admission to the petitioner No. 2. ( 7 ) IN the result the writ petition succeeds and is allowed in part. The respondent No. 5 is directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law in the light of observations made above within one month from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order before him. .