- (1.) INSTANT bunch of appeals since involves common question, hence heard together and being decided by the present order. Instant intra -court appeals have been filed against order of learned Single Judge dismissing writ petitions of the applicants who had participated in the process of selection initiated for the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest, which is included in the schedule appended to Rajasthan Forest Service Rules, 1962 ("Rules, 1962"), pursuant to advertisement dt. 20.09.2011. It will be relevant to notice that for the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) the selection process is based on written examination followed with personality and viva -voce examination in terms of R. 24 of the Rules, 1962 where the applicant/candidate has to secure minimum 35% marks in each of the compulsory subject and a minimum of 40 marks in the aggregate to qualify the written test. However, the Commission still holds discretion to award grace marks upto 1 in each of the compulsory papers and upto 3 in aggregate and those who qualify in the written test with fulfillment of the requirement postulated under the scheme of Rules, 1962 are being called upon for viva -voce examination and those who are finally selected their candidatures are being recommended by the Commission as contemplated u/R 25 of the Rules, 1962. Indisputably either of the appellant petitioner had not obtained minimum 35% marks in each of the compulsory subjects and at this stage when they were not permitted to appear and participate in the Viva -voce examination, approached to this Court by filing their respective writ petitions.
(2.) THE learned Single Judge taking note of R. 24 of Rules, 1962 and observed that each of the applicant/candidate has to secure 35% marks in each of the compulsory subjects and a minimum of 40% marks in the aggregate and the corrigendum which was issued by the Commission on 30.08.2013 after the written examination was held in no manner changes the conditions of eligibility and it is an intimation to the applicant/candidate that such of the applicants alone could be permitted to appear in Viva -voce examination those who fulfilled the mandate of R. 24 of the Rules, 1962 and upheld decision of the Commission in not permitting such ineligible candidates to participate in Viva -voce examination.
(3.) COUNSEL for appellants at the stage when one of the appeal came up for admission pointed out that in one of the similar matter, a Single Bench of this Court granted ad -interim protection to the writ petitioner and permitted him to participate in Viva -voce examination and keeping reliance thereof the Division Bench of this Court also granted ad -interim protection to one of the appellant as well, as such out of 4 one of the appellant has appeared in Viva -voce examination under the ad -interim order of this Court on provisional basis. The main thrust of submission of counsel for appellants is that after issuance of advertisement which was notified on 20.09.2011 and the written examination held on 26 -30.06.2012, issuance of corrigendum at later stage on 30.08.2013 is noting but to make them ineligible and the rule of examination could not be changed at a later stage after it has once commenced.;