Judgment :- 1. The petitioners have registered their name in the Employment Exchange for the post of Conductor. 2. The Third respondent-Corporation issued notification dated 19.7.2012 about the recruitment of Conductor and fixing the upper age limit for various categories as follows:- (i) O.C. - 30 years (ii) B.C./M.B.C. - 35 years (iii) SC/SC/ST - 40 years 3. The petitioners have sought to question the aforesaid notification. They have also sought for a direction to the respondents to fix the upper age limit as follows:- (i) O.C. - 35 years (ii) B.C./M.B.C. - 40 years (iii) SC/SC/ST - 45 years 4. The second and third respondents have filed counter affidavit refuting the allegations. It is stated that the appointment to the post of Conductor is governed by the Common Service Rules as notified in G.O.Ms.No.1373, Transport Department dated 02.12.1985. As per clause 11 of the said Rules, the following is the upper age limit prescribed for the post of Conductor. (i) O.C. - 30 years (ii) B.C./M.B.C. - 35 years (iii) SC/SC/ST - 40 years However, it is further averred that when there was a ban on recruitment for five years between 2001-2006, age relaxation of five years was given between 17.07.2006 and 16.7.2011, as per G.O.Ms.No.114, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 11.08.2010. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of this court dated 31.08.2012 in W.P.Nos.21107 of 2012 etc. batch. 7. In the aforesaid judgment, this court has categorically held that appointment shall be made to the post of Conductor/Driver/Technical Staff as per the Service Rules of the Transport Corporation and it is for the Government/Transport Corporation to decide about the granting of age relaxation and this court could not direct the respondents to grant age relaxation. 8. In view of the aforesaid order dated 31.08.2012 passed in W.P.Nos.21107 of 2012 etc. batch, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.