JUDGMENT Hon’ble Bharati Sapru, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has applied for the post of upcharika in the department of respondent No. 2. The last date for submission of the application was 10.12.2007. According to the terms of the advertisement, the petitioner was to send the application by registered post. 3. As the petitioner under some apprehension that the application will not reach by registered post within the time, he sent it by speed post vide receipt dated 6.12.2007. In fact the petitioner did not comply with the terms of the advertisement. 4. It is well aware that Speed Post (EMS) service is value added post services enunciated by the Indian Post and Telegraph Department, for which sender has to pay charges equivalent to the registered letter/parcel together with speed charges depending upon the distance of the place, where the post is being despatched. 5. In the instant case, the petitioner has sent the application by speed post on 6.12.2007 through an agency authorised by the Indian Post and Telegraph Department which assured that the letter would be delivered within 24 hours. 6. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that both Speed Post or registered post are services rendered by Indian Post and Telegraph Department which ensures strict delivery of post and mere making clause in the advertisement that application will be sent through registered post, the respondent cannot refuse the application of the petitioner on the pretext that it had not been sent by the registered post but had been sent by the Speed Post which is equally efficacious post. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has stated that since the interview for the job is going on, she may also be considered. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances stated in the case and if the interview is going on, the petitioner’s application too may be considered by the respondents. 9. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ————