Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) THESE writ petitions have been preferred by petitioners against corrigendum issued by respondent Rajasthan Public Service Commission, dated 29.10.2012, whereby the R.P.S.C. has invited fresh applications for appointment on 16 posts of Lecturer (Business Administration) for the Department of College Education, which were earlier notified vide advertisement dated 21.09.2010. clause -2 of originally issued advertisement dated 21.09.2010, which is for educational qualification, provides that for appointment on that post, a candidate, apart from having good academic record, must possess a Post Graduation Degree in the subject concerned from any University in India with at -least 55% marks or equivalent grade, or equivalent Degree from any University in Foreign. According to petitioners, the R.P.S.C. did not initially, in the first instance, treat the candidates having the qualification of Master of Business Administration (for short, 'MBA'). The petitioners are those, who are also holding the qualification of M.Com. in the subject of Business Administration, and were allowed to appear in the screening test, which was meant for the purpose of shortlisting the candidates. Their result was declared and thereafter the programme was issued by the R.P.S.C. on 17.02.2012 for commencement of interviews. Category wise result giving the roll numbers of candidates, who qualified the examination, was notified by the R.P.S.C., requiring them to download the application form from its web -site and forward the same to the R.P.S.C. with their testimonials, upto 24.02.2012. Thereafter the dates of interviews were to be notified. It was thereafter that the R.P.S.C. on 29.10.2012 issued aforesaid corrigendum directing that the candidates possessing the Degree of MBA (M.B.A./M.B.A. With specialization in functional and related area/M.H.R.M./M.I.B./M.M.S.) would also be treated eligible, if they satisfy the other eligibility conditions. The corrigendum is purported to have been issued in pursuance of letter of the. Principal Secretary to the Government, Department of Higher Education, Jaipur.
(2.) IN their counter -affidavit filed on 29.03.2013 in the form of application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India, respondent R.P.S.C. has clarified that the R.P.S.C. received only 245 applications in response to the advertisement dated 21.09.2010 for appointment on the post of Lecturer (Business Administration). The on -line screening examination was conducted on 04.12.2011, result of which was declared on 07.02.2012. In all 65 candidates were declared successful. Out of these 65 candidates, 9 candidates did not submit their detailed application forms even after a specific request and these 9 candidates were declared ineligible, which also include petitioner No. 4 Pratibha Meena in Writ Petition No. 18837/2012. When the applications were scrutinized, it was found that 31 of these candidates are holding qualification of MBA and, as such, they were also excluded. Thus, as against 16 posts so advertised, only 25 candidates were tentatively found eligible. Thereafter when the final result of on -line screening examination was declared on 21.03.2012, only 15 candidates were declared successful. Shri R.D. Saini, learned counsel for petitioners, has argued that action of the respondents was wholly illegal. According to conditions of eligibility of University Grants Commission, only those candidates possessing the Post Graduation Degree in the subject of Business Administration were eligible for appointment on the post of Lecturer in that subject. Degree of MBA has never been accepted as valid eligibility qualification for appointment on the post of Lecturer (Business Administration). No such deviation has been made in any other subjects except the subject of Business Administration. Besides, the respondents have already conducted the examination and petitioners have qualified that examination and thereafter their result was declared. Thereafter, they were called upon to download the OMR application form and duly submit the same to the R.P.S.C. along -with their testimonials, which the petitioners did. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that issuance of the corrigendum now would tantamount to changing the rule of game in the midst of process of selection and would therefore be wholly illegal and unconstitutional. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioners, relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Manjusree vs. State of AP & Anr., : (2008) 3 SCC 512.
(3.) SHRI Amit Kuri, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the on -line written examination, was only a screening examination. As per the decision of the R.P.S.C., three times candidates of the advertised vacancies, were to be invited for interview, the appointments being entirely based on interview. Keeping in view that availability of candidates in much lesser number than requisite three times the number of vacancies, it was therefore decided to postpone the interviews, scheduled to commence from 14.03.2012 to 19.03.2012. It was found that many candidates holding qualification of MBA preferred applications for appointment on the post of Lecturer (Business Administration) on the ground of its equivalence to the qualification of M.Com. (Business Administration). Number of representations were received from such candidates. The R.P.S.C., therefore, constituted a committee of three experts of the subject to consider the nomenclature of Degree of MBA with the Degree of M.Com. (Business Administration). The said Committee resolved that the Degree of MBA/MBA with specialization in functional and related area/MHRM/MIB/MMS be considered equivalent to M.Com. (Business Administration). The recommendations of the Committee were sent to the Government for its approval. The Principal Secretary to the Government, Department of Higher Education, vide its letter dated 06.08.2012 informed the R.P.S.C. that the Government has approved the recommendations of the Committee. Thereafter the matter was placed before the Full Commission of the R.P.S.C. on 11.10.2012, which also approved the recommendations of the Committee and therefore the corrigendum advertisement was issued on 29.10.2012. The impugned corrigendum was issued to invite fresh applications not only from the candidates having qualification of M.B.A., but also from those who possess the Degree of M.Com. (Business Administration). The corrigendum was issued in continuation of the earlier advertisement dated 21.09.2010 and therefore, those who had already applied earlier, were not required to apply again. The date for submitting the application forms was extended upto 25.11.2012. This has been done only with a view to ensuring that all eligible candidates get equal opportunity to compete and best suitable candidates for the post are selected. Process of selection that was initiated with the initial advertisement/notification dated 21.09.2010 has merely been kept alive and continuous. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that the judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Manjusree, supra, does not apply in the present case.;