JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. In this writ petition, a direction has been sought to be issued to the respondents to promote the petitioner as Inspector/MM at least w.e.f. 01.11.2004, the day when his junior Hardeep Singh was promoted as such. The petitioner and Hardeep Singh, no doubt, had appeared as direct candidates for appointment as Head Constable/MM in the test conducted during the period 27.12.1987 to 02.01.1988. Shri Hardeep Singh though was junior to the petitioner, however, duly qualified, including fulfilling the age criteria, also was selected and appointed as Head Constable/MM, whereas the petitioner being overage was not given the appointment. As per the recruitment and promotion rules, a candidate belonging to general category should be 19 to 27 years for appointment as Head Constable/MM by way of direct recruitment. However, in the case of departmental candidates, like the petitioner, there is provision of relaxation of five years in the criteria of age. 2. Since the petitioner at the relevant time when the test conducted, was 34 years 6 months and 15 days of age, therefore, was rightly dropped being not eligible. On the other hand, his junior Hardeep Singh was eligible and as such, on his selection as Head Constable/MM, was promoted and appointed accordingly. The petitioner, as such, cannot seek parity with the case of his junior, i.e. Hardeep Singh, aforesaid. The petitioner, no doubt, had approached this Court by way of filing Civil Writ Petition No.161 of 2001, which was disposed of vide judgment dated 08.03.2007. As a matter of fact, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider his case for relaxation. Consequently, relaxation in the age, i.e. 2 years 6 months and 15 days, was given to the petitioner and he was appointed by way of promotion as Head Constable/MM w.e.f. 15.02.2008. Subsequently, he was appointed as Sub Inspector/MM w.e.f. 11.11.1993, whereas Inspector/MM w.e.f. 15.05.2007, of course, notionally. There was no rejoinder to this part of the case of the respondents pleaded in reply to the writ petition. 3. Subsequently, he was appointed as Sub Inspector/MM w.e.f. 11.11.1993, whereas Inspector/MM w.e.f. 15.05.2007, of course, notionally. There was no rejoinder to this part of the case of the respondents pleaded in reply to the writ petition. 3. Since the writ petition was disposed of only with a direction to the respondents to grant relaxation to the petitioner, of course as per rules , therefore, he cannot claim his promotion as Inspector/MM w.e.f. 01.1.2004, the day when his junior Hardeep Singh was promoted as such because there was no direction of this Court to grant benefits prospectively to him in case the relaxation granted. Therefore, after the judgment, Annexure P-1, his case was considered for relaxation and while granting relaxation, he was promoted initially as Head Constable/MM and thereafter as Sub Inspector/MM and Inspector/MM. He, therefore, has been granted the benefit of promotion and also the monitory benefits in the form of retiral benefits. Since his junior Hardeep Singh was appointed as Head Constable/MM, being duly qualified and eligible for the same, therefore, the petitioner cannot seek parity or justified in claiming the equity. Being so, the writ petition being devoid of any merits, is dismissed. The pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.