2.Mr.Veera Kathiravan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.234, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 17.04.1989, it has been made clear that as per G.O.Ms.No.475[g.ep.rP], dated 02.05.1985, when the candidates are coming within the age on the date of recommendation for the job and at the time of appointment, if they crossed the age limit, they can also be considered by granting age relaxation and therefore, the petitioner was also granted age relaxation by the Government, by passing G.O.Ms.No.208, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 31.03.2001. He, therefore, submitted that as the age relaxation was given to the petitioner by the Government, the petitioner was deemed to have been appointed along with 11 persons in the year 1997 itself and therefore, the petitioner's seniority must be placed along with 11 persons, who were selected in the year 1997 and hence, the respondents may be directed to place the petitioner in the seniority list between serial No.5 and 6 as per the seniority list prepared by the second respondent.
