CWP-9464/10 (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9464/2010 Bhagirath Meena Vs. State of Raj. & Anr. Date Of Order :: 23/07/2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Nikhlesh Katara, for petitioner. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the grievance that despite he secured more than cut off marks in ST Male category for primary education, duly notified by Rajasthan Public Service Commission on 19.2.2010, however has not been called upon by the respondent. Counsel submits that grievance of the petitioner raised in the instant petition is covered by the judgment of this Court in Naveen Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors., S.B Civil Writ Petition No.4728/2008 & other connected petitions, decided on 1.12.09. The process was initiated by the respondent vide notification dt.30.10.06 holding selection for the post of Teachers (Primary and Upper Primary School) where BSTC is one of the training qualification required for appointment on the post of Teacher (Primary/Secondary Education). After the result of written examination was declared on 16.3.07, candidates were called upon to submit their CWP-9464/10 (2) relevant mark-sheet, who had participated in the selection process in the office of the commission by 31.3.07. Indisputably, the petitioner did his BSTC in 2007 and his result was declared on 20.3.08 which has been placed on record as Annx.4 and it was one of the condition of eligibility for the applicants to participate in the process of selection initiated by the respondent. Merely because the petitioner was permitted to appear in the written examination, which is always on provisional basis, will not confer right upon him unless he holds eligibility in reference to the advertisement in question. As already observed, the petitioner was not holding qualification of BSTC in terms of the advertisement and in reference to notification issued by the commission calling upon the applicants to submit their training certificate by 31.3.2007. So far as the judgment referred to supra relied upon by the counsel is concerned, it certainly relates to such applicants who too had participated in the selection process initiated by the respondent commission held in pursuance to advertisement dt.30.10.2006 but eligibility of the applicants was not disputed and they had participated in the selection process and secured the cut off marks as CWP-9464/10 (3) notified by the commission but because of their date of birth and being younger in age were not considered for appointment despite holding eligibility and taking note thereof, this Court while deciding the writ petition referred to supra on 1.12.09 observed that if vacancies are available, such eligible writ petitioners may be considered for appointment. In the facts and of the instant case he has rightly not been considered by the commission to participate in reference to the notification issued on 19.2.2010. Taking note thereof, this Court does not find any substance in the instant petition. Consequently, the petition stands dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi),J. VS Shekhawat/-p.3 9464cw10Jul23Fnl.doc