JUDGMENT : T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J. 1. This intra-Court appeal by the Life Insurance Corporation of India is directed against the order dated 6th March, 2025 in W.P.A. 16609 of 2023. The respondent filed the said writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to withdraw the order dated 3rd July, 2023 issued by the Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India and not to give effect to the said letter and issue appointment letter to the writ petitioner for the post of Apprentice Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India. 2. The learned Single Bench has interpreted the condition stipulated in the recruitment notification with regard to experience criterion and held that the writ petitioner fulfils the said condition as he has been an LIC agent. The interpretation given by the learned Single Bench is to the effect that in the experience condition the expression “or” has been used, which expression should be read to mean as disjunctive and there are two categories of persons, who will be eligible to apply for recruitment to the said post in rural areas i.e. a person, who has been an LIC agent for not less than 10 years or DSAs/FSEs and has brought a net first year premium income of not less than Rs.1,00,000/- on 50 lives per year in any 3 of the immediately preceding 4 financial years. 3. The learned advocate for the appellant would strenuously contend that the interpretation given by the learned Single Bench that the word “or” is disjunctive may be right but the learned Single Bench ought to have taken note of the expression “and” used in the third sentence, which would mean that premium income criteria and the number of policies is applicable to both the categories of candidates viz. DSAs and FSEs. 4. It is not in dispute that the name of the respondent/writ petitioner finds place in the select list under General (UR) category including SCs/STs/OBCs/ EWS candidates (LIC Agents) and his name has been shown in serial no. 2. In the ranking list of agents on number basis, the rank of the respondent/writ petitioner is 4. Insofar as the quantum of business, which was canvassed by the centurion agents of team Purulia, the rank of the respondent/writ petitioner is 4 for the financial year 2022-2023. 2. In the ranking list of agents on number basis, the rank of the respondent/writ petitioner is 4. Insofar as the quantum of business, which was canvassed by the centurion agents of team Purulia, the rank of the respondent/writ petitioner is 4 for the financial year 2022-2023. The respondent/writ petitioner has been presented with a Centurion Agent Certificate by the Life Insurance Corporation of India for appreciation of he having sold 100 new policies during the financial year 2022-2023. Apart from that, the Life Insurance Corporation has published an advertisement showing the names alongwith photographs of star agents for the year 2023 for the Purulia Branch and the name and photograph of the respondent/writ petitioners also finds place. 5. On perusal of the declaration in Form – B given by the respondent/writ petitioner, it is seen that for two of the financial years, the respondent/writ petitioner has exceeded the limit of 50 lives i.e. for financial year 2021-22, the net first year premium was Rs.14,63,742/- and the number of lives were 160 and for the financial year 2020-21 it was Rs.5,81,646/- with 71 lives but in 2019-2020, the amount of net first year premium was Rs.3,62,255/- with 37 lives. There was a shortfall but in 2017-18, the net first year premium was Rs.4,37,219/- with 41 lives. Thus, the statistics show that there has been consistent development made by the respondent/writ petitioner by dint of his sincere and hard work so as to benefit the Life Insurance Corporation. 6. Apart from that the respondent/writ petitioner hails from the rural area in Purulia district and the appellant being a Government of India Enterprise, should encourage such person, who has been recognised to be a star performer. 7. The apprehension of the appellants cannot be brushed aside as the interpretation given by the learned Judge, if allowed to stand, it may impact the selection process in other States as well. 8. Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the respondent/writ petitioner should be given employment in the post of Apprentice Development Officer as his name finds place in the merit list. However, the findings rendered by the learned Single Bench cannot be treated as a precedent and shall be restricted only in the case of the respondent/writ petitioner and no other person can rely upon such finding to advance his case. 9. However, the findings rendered by the learned Single Bench cannot be treated as a precedent and shall be restricted only in the case of the respondent/writ petitioner and no other person can rely upon such finding to advance his case. 9. With the above observations, the appeal and the connected application stand disposed of and the appellants are directed to comply with the directions issued by the learned Single Bench within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of server copy of this judgment and order. 10. Furthermore, we note that during the pendency of the writ petition, pursuant to an interim order dated 18th September, 2023 one post has been kept vacant. Therefore, appellants/Corporation are directed to appoint the respondent/writ petitioner in such post, which has been kept vacant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of server copy of this judgment and order. 11. No costs. 12. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities. I agree. (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)