Judgment :- Prayers in these Writ Petitions are identical i.e., for a direction to the respondent society not to prescribe any upper age limit and also to direct the Employment Exchange to sponsor the names of the petitioners for the post of Assistant in the respondent Bank. 2. Normally, Writ Petition is not maintainable, in the light of the Larger Bench decision of this Court in K.Marappan Vs. Dy.Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Namakkal, reported in 2006 (4) CTC 689 . 3. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that when the issue involves a direction to the Registrar, the writ is maintainable. The learned counsel also drew the attention of this Court to Rule 149 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988, under which, with regard to age in case of appointment or reservation, the rule applicable to Government servants shall be followed. 4. Mr.S.Kamadevan, learned counsel, has also drawn the attention of this Court to Rule 12 (d) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules. However, in the said Rule, it is clearly stated that the maximum age limit prescribed in the sub-rule shall not apply to various appointments if the qualification is lower than a Degree of any University and if such a candidate possesses educational qualification higher than that is referred to in sub-rule (a). 5. The said argument fails to be taken into consideration, because of the two provisos made in Rule 12 (d), wherein it is clearly stated that if a post requires a minimum general educational qualification, then only an exemption is granted in case of BC and MBC for two years and in case of SC and ST for five years. The present case falls under the proviso to the main rule. 6. Under the circumstances, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is misconceived and the Writ Petitions lack merits. 7. Hence, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs.