JUDGMENT V. K. Khanna, J. 1. The petitioner before us in pursuance of an advertisement made by respondent for recruiting Principals of the intermediate colleges, made an application in the prescribed form. The petitioner was not called for interview. On enquiry the petitioner was told that the respondent has framed certain rules which provide for awarding of marks on the basis of which the applications made by all the candidates are entertained and only certain percentage of the applicants securing top marks are called for interview. The petitioner came to know that he could not secure adequate marks as his teaching experience in the Army Educational Corps institutions was not taken into account and on that score 8 quality marks had not been awarded to him. At this stage it may be mentioned that at the time of filing of the writ petition no interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner and several selections including the selection which was going on at the time of filing of the writ petition had already taken place and the candidates selected in those selections are acting as principals for a number of years. 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission the stand taken is that the petitioner is not entitled to get 8 quality marks inspite of his teaching experience in the institutions run by the Army Educational Corps. It has been urged that Annexure 3 to the writ petition rightly reproduces the criteria in awarding quality point marks. Under clause (8) of the aforesaid rules it has been provided that "for purposes of Teaching Experience" (vide supra, "Criteria for awarding quality point marks") only the aggregate of such experience shall be taken into account as the applicant has aquired by working in the capacity of a teacher (other than a Head of Institution) in any recognised institution including a Primary School). Clause (9) of the aforesaid criteria provides that " for purposes of (7) and (8) above :- (a)......(b) The expression 'recognised' with reference to any institution shall mean recognised by the Department of Education, U. P. or any Board of Education established or created by an Act of legislature including the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, the Council of Indian School Certificate Examination, Delhi, any University established by law or any degree college affiliated to any such University. It may be mentioned at this stage that maximum quality marks for teaching experience which has been awarded had been fixed at the figure of 20. 3. Shri K. S. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent has urged that the institutions which being run by the Army Education Corps have neither been recognised by the Director of Education, U. P. or any other Board established or created by an Act or any other authority as mentioned in clause (9) (b) of the criteria. It is for this reason that the respondent did not award quality marks to the petitioner for his teaching experience as according to the commission the petitioner was not teaching in any recognised institution as laid down in the criteria. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent at some length, we are of the opinion that the Commission had not taken into account the fact that the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U. P. has recognised the Army Special Certificate of Education which is being granted by the institutions run by the Army Education Corps as being equivalent to the Matriculation, This very certificate has been recognised by the Government of India as equivalent to the Matriculation examination for the purposes of recruitment to all posts and services under the Central Government. On the facts and circumstances of the case it is clear that the educational institution in which petitioner was teaching was being run by the Army Educational Corps which is run and maintained by the Government of India. The syllabus of various classes in the institutions run by the Army Educational Corps are based on NCERT and Central Board of Education, Delhi. Annexure 12 to the writ petition clearly indicates that all the Universities in all the States of India including the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U. P. have recognised the Army Special Certificate of Education as being equivalent to Matriculation. In such circumstances it will be very difficult to suggest that the institutions run by Army Educational Corps would not be treated as a recognised institution in view of the fact that the certificate granted by them is being treated as equivalent to the Matriculation certificate by the U. P. Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Allahabad. The petitioner in our opinion was thus entitled to get quality point marks on this score. 5. The petitioner in our opinion was thus entitled to get quality point marks on this score. 5. The next question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether all the appointments of the Principals on the basis of the selection which has already been held should be quashed. After taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the case specially the fact that the petitioner has not been treated to be a person who has been selected in selection which has already been held, we are of the opinion that it will not be a fit exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash those selections in pursuance of which several principals may have been working for several years in various institutions of the State. It is however made clear that the respondent will not deprive the petitioner from getting quality marks only on the ground that the teaching experience in the institutions run by Army Educational Corps could not be treated to be an experience in a recognised institution. In case the petitioner applies in future for being selected to any post for which he may be eligible in pursuance of an advertisement made by the respondent, the respondent will give benefit to the petitioner in accordance with the principles laid down taking that the petitioner had worked in a recognised institution. 6. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition is partly allowed. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case the parties shall bear their own costs. Petition allowed.