PRATAP KUMAR RAY, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, ( 2 ) IN the instant case, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the private respondent No. 5 being a member of the Scheduled Caste community got an undue advantage of age relaxation, who admittedly crossed the age of 37 years at the time of interview whereby and whereunder he was selected and empanelled as a first candidate of the panel in the concerned unreserved vacancy. The only question which to be considered as to whether a Scheduled Caste candidate if appears in an unreserved vacancy whether would be entitled to age relaxation benefit interims of the direction issued by the Director of School Education, West Bengal under Memo No. 1736 (21) g. A. Dated, Calcutta, the 1st November, 1999 read with the West Bengal scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vancancies in services and Posts) Act, 1976. The concerned vacancy is under Group 'd' post and under an unreserved category as per reserved in post. The memo dated 1st November, 1999 being the direction of the Director of School education so far as the age bar is concerned reads thus :-"4 (D) No person shall be selected for appointment unless he/she is a Citizen of India and 18 years of age or above. The maximum age limit for appointment in Aided Institution is 37 years and is relaxable in case of S. C. /s. T/o. B. C. candidates as per existing Government Orders". ( 3 ) UNDER the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1976. (hereinafter referred to for brevity as S. C. /s. T. Act, 1976 ). Under Clause (c) provision has been made for grant of concession of five years to the members of Scheduled caste and Scheduled Tribe Community. Over the prescribed maximum age limit for appointment in services or posts, Clause 4 (c) reads thus :-"the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be entitled to a concession of five years over the prescribed maximum age limit for appointment to any service or post". Over the prescribed maximum age limit for appointment in services or posts, Clause 4 (c) reads thus :-"the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be entitled to a concession of five years over the prescribed maximum age limit for appointment to any service or post". ( 4 ) UNDER Clause 4 (d) of direction issued by the Director of School education, West Bengal, it appears that maximum age limit of appointment has been provided with relaxation clause for S. C. /s. T candidates but the maximum age limit for selection of a candidate has not been provided. It is a settled law that the word "selection and appointment" are not synonymous. Selection means empanelment, enrolment and approval of panel, whereas appointment means actual posting in a particular post. Reliance may be placed for such meaning of the aforesaid two words to the judgment passed in the case Prafulla Kr. Sain v. Prakash Chandra Mishra, reported in 1993 (Supple) 3 S. C. C. 181, a judgment of three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court. Having regard to such meaning of the word 'selection' and 'appointment' the statutory provision to be looked into. As already observed that under Clause 4fd) there is no such language limiting the maximum age of selection by contour of maximum age. So far as the selection is concerned the words reads thus :-"no person shall be selected for appointment unless he/she is a citizen of India and 18 years of age or above". So, as per the said provision, minimum age limit has been prescribed for selection of appointment. There is no rider about maximum age limit for such selection. But so far as the appointment is concerned it is provided by the word" maximum age limit for appointment. . . . is 27 years and is relaxable in cases of S. C. /s. T. /o. B. C. candidates as per existing Government Orders". Hence, from the statutory provision it appears that when the Selection Committee prepares a panel that means when the selection process is done for selecting the candidates, there is no scope to consider the age bar issue by the Committee as the statute had never placed any embargo of selecting the candidates even if the candidate crosses the maximum age limit of appointment. But at the time of appointment surely the maximum age limit as mentioned to be looked into. In the instant case, the petitioner has challenged the empanelment of panel the wherein the respondent No. 5 who stood first, only on the ground that at the time of selection the respondent No. 5 not withstanding being a candidate of scheduled Caste/scheduled Tribes Community since he was selected for an unreserved post, ought to have satisfied the maximum age limit of 37 years on the date of holding the interview and /or empanelment. Such contention cannot be legally sustainable in view of the aforesaid interpretation of Clause (d) of the Recruitment Rules. Recruitment Rules has nowhere placed any embargo providing maximum age limit for candidates for selection. ( 5 ) FURTHERMORE, under the statutory provision as stipulated under sc/st Act, 1976, under Clause 4 (c) as already quoted, it appears that the members of SC/st Community are entitled to have concession of five years over the prescribed maximum age limit for appointment to any service or post. What does it mean by the word to any service or post ? The answer of this will answer the grievance of the writ petitioner. The words "to any service or post" have not restricted any particular service or post in view of using the word 'any'. Having regard to framing of the words as mentioned, this Court is of the view that such age relaxation of SC/st members are available to any service or post irrespective of the fact that the post may be reserved or unreserved whatever it may be. ( 6 ) HAVING regard to the aforesaid observations and findings accordingly the writ petitioner has no legal right to challenge the selection of the respondent No. 5. Under law the respondent No. 5 even at the time of appointment will get the benefit of age relaxation of five years as per the statutory provision, namely SC/st Act, 1976. ( 6 ) HAVING regard to the aforesaid observations and findings accordingly the writ petitioner has no legal right to challenge the selection of the respondent No. 5. Under law the respondent No. 5 even at the time of appointment will get the benefit of age relaxation of five years as per the statutory provision, namely SC/st Act, 1976. ( 7 ) SINCE the panel is waiting approval since August, 2000 in view of the pendency of the litigation, the respondent, District Inspector of Schools concerned is directed to take a decision for approval of the panel as per law within two weeks from the date of communication of the order and the Managing committee of the School is directed to issue appointment letter to the first empaneled candidate in the event the panel is approved within a week from the date of communication decision of approval which to be communicated by the D. I. of Schools within 30 days of this decision. ( 8 ) WITH the aforesaid observations, the writ application stands dismissed. ( 9 ) THERE will be no order as to costs. ( 10 ) LET affidavit of service as filed be kept with the record.