MISRA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order dated 3. 12. 2003 passed by the learned Single Judge who had been pleased to dismiss the writ petition which had been filed by the petitioner-appellant herein seeking appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III in pursuance to the advertisement issued in the year 1995-96. Admittedly, the essential qualification for the post of Teacher Grade-III were expressly laid down in the advertisement itself which was to the effect that the candidate should have been possessing Secondary and Higher Secondary certificate with five subjects of which one of the subjects was mathematics. The petitioner-appellant, admittedly, had passed out the secondary examination in the year 1976 without mathematics and, therefore, at the time of interview, she was disqualified for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III. THIS gave rise to a cause to the petitioner to contest the matter by filling the writ petitioner wherein it was submitted on her behalf that in the year 1996 when she had passed out secondary from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, mathematics was not a compulsory subject and, therefore, she could not have been disqualified for the appointment. It was further submitted that a circular had been issued by the State of Rajasthan laying down that the candidates who had passed out the secondary without mathematics, would also be eligible for consideration for appointment and, therefore, she was illegally denied the chance of interview.
(2.) THE learned Single Judge was pleaded to reject the writ petition in view of the reply filed by the respondent-State which had submitted that the petitioner lacked the requisite qualification and hence she was rightly not granted the chance to participate in the interview as also the fact that the whole selection process having been concluded long back, it was not possible to grant any relief after such a long lapse of time. The petitioner-appellant, therefore, has preferred this appeal and the contention of the learned counsel is on the same line which has been recorded herein-above. But even at the risk of repetition, it may be stated that the contention raised on behalf of the counsel for the appellant is to the effect that the petitioner-appellant should not have been restrained from participating in the selection process for Teacher Grade-III as she has passed out secondary as per the rule which was applicable to the Secondary Board students and mathematics was not a compulsory subject. Secondly, it was submitted as already recorded herein before that the circular permitted such candidates to participate in the selection process of Teacher Grade-III even though they had not opted or they had not passed the secondary with mathematics as one of the subjects. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we do not feel impressed with either of the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant. In the first place, the advertisement itself lays down clearly that only those candidates would be eligible for appointment to the post of Teacher Grade-III who had passed with mathematics as one of the compulsory subjects and if the State Government had issued a circular relaxing this condition, then a fresh advertisement should have been issued in our view, inviting applications for appointment to the post of Teacher Grade-III. If a particular benefit or relaxation was allowed in favour of some candidates who passed out without mathematics in a particular year obviously that benefit will have to be allowed to be availed by all similarly situated candidates in the sense that all other candidates who could have applied for the post but did not apply for want of mathematics as a compulsory subject, would be eliminated from the selection process without any just cause. Therefore, this relaxation could not have been allowed only in favour of those candidates who had applied contrary to the terms of the advertisement. An additional reason for not permitting this kind of concession is also due to fact that the candidates who went by the terms of the advertisement and thought it proper to abide by the terms of the advertisement and did not apply for the post of Teacher Grade-III, can not be allowed to be duped by eliminating them while granting the concession and relaxation in favour of those candidates, who applied ignoring the condition that they are not eligible, remaining us of an ironical adage that rules are for the fools. We, therefore, do not feel inclined to accept the arguments advanced by the counsel for the appellant to the effect that merely because the selection process had been completed in the year 1995-96 and no post was kept vacant for the appellant, the same should not have been a reason for the learned Single Judge to deny relief to the petitioner-appellant, for even if this were to be ignored, the fact remains that the petitioner-appellant was not eligible in terms of the advertisement.
(3.) HENCE, this appeal has no substance and consequently stands dismissed. .;