:- (D. Murugesan, J) 1. This writ petition questions the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench dated 06.09.2011, directing the benefit of Para 7(h) of the Notification dated 07.6.2010 with a further direction that the petitioners herein should declare the respondents 1 to 3 as deemed to have passed the SOG Examination of the year 2008 and to extend the consequential service benefits to them. 2. Respondents 1 to 3 are working as Senior Auditors in various branches of the petitioners-department. The petitioners have conducted examination for the promotion to the post of Section Officer, which is called Section Officers Grade Examination (SOGE). Such examination was conducted in the year 2008 for consideration of promotion and the respondents 1 to 3 also took the examination in papers including Statistics and Statistical Sampling (SAS). However, they failed in one paper viz. Statistics and Statistical Sampling. Subsequently, having noticed the ground reality in respect of the paper viz. Statistics and Statistical Sampling, the petitioners notified vide their Circular dated 07.8.2010 that the paper on 'Statistics and Statistical Sampling' had been withdrawn. They had also notified that the old candidates failing in the said paper will be deemed to have passed 'Section Officers Grade Examination' from the date of formal Notification. 3. Based on the said Notification, the respondents 1 to 3 made a request to promote them to the next higher post after declaring them as they deemed to have passed SAS (Civil Audit) Examination 2008. As the said request was not considered, they had approached the Tribunal for a direction to the petitioners herein to extend the benefit of the Circular. The Tribunal by its order dated 06.9.2011, having considered the purport of the Circular, directed the extension of the benefits. That order is questioned in this writ petition. 4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 5. There is no dispute that the respondents 1 to 3 were eligible to take the examination for the promotion to the higher post. That apart, they had also taken the examination in 'Statistics and Statistical Sampling' paper. It is also not in dispute that having realised the ground reality in the said subject, the petitioners had issued Notification and in paragraph 7(h) of the said Notification dated 07.6.2010, it is stated as follows: "The paper on 'Statistics and Statistical Sampling' of the earlier SOGE stands abolished. It is also not in dispute that having realised the ground reality in the said subject, the petitioners had issued Notification and in paragraph 7(h) of the said Notification dated 07.6.2010, it is stated as follows: "The paper on 'Statistics and Statistical Sampling' of the earlier SOGE stands abolished. The candidates of earlier SOG Examination, who were declared fail in only Statistics and Statistical Sampling (SOE-31) paper, would be deemed to have passed the examination from the date of issue of this circular. All such cases may be forwarded to this office (Examination Wing) for consideration." 6. A perusal of the said paragraph shows that all those candidates, who had taken SOG examination earlier and declared failed in only 'Statistics and Statistical Sampling' paper, would be deemed to have passed the examination from the date of issue of the said Circular. Hence, the question is whether the said Circular should be given effect to with effect from 07.6.2010 or the date on which the respondents 1 to 3 had taken the examination. 7. Though it was contended before the Tribunal by the petitioners herein that the said Circular would be effective from the date of its notification i.e. on 07.6.2010, the Tribunal repelled the said contention and had found that the benefit of the said Circular would be applicable to the examination that was held in the year 2008. 8. A similar contention is raised in this writ petition. Paragraph 7(h) of the said Circular should be read in toto. It is very categorical in directing that the candidates of earlier SOG examination, who have been declared failed in one subject, viz. Statistics and Statistical Sampling' would be deemed to have passed the examination from the date of examination. Of course, the said Circular further says that the said benefit would be available to the candidates from the date of issue of the Circular. The first condition of the said paragraph is deemed provision whereby all those who have taken the examination earlier, but failed in the subject in question, shall be declared to have passed the examination. The respondents 1 to 3 took the examination in the year 2008. Therefore, while interpreting the said paragraph, it must be held that respondents 1 to 3 shall be deemed to have passed SOG examination held in the year 2008. The respondents 1 to 3 took the examination in the year 2008. Therefore, while interpreting the said paragraph, it must be held that respondents 1 to 3 shall be deemed to have passed SOG examination held in the year 2008. The reference to the application of the said Circular from the date of the issue of Circular" does not in any way take away the benefit to the candidates, who have taken the examination earlier and for that reason, the Tribunal had correctly interpreted the above said paragraph and had directed the petitioners herein to extend the benefit to respondents 1 to 3. 9. We find no infirmity in the said finding, requiring interference by this Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2012 is also dismissed.