Honble MISHRA, J. – The relief sought by the petitioner in this writ petition which is the right of appointment on the post of police constable, hinges upon the question as to whether the certificate of `Prathama acquired by him in the year 1990 from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is equivalent to Secondary or 10th Class which was the minimum educational qualification required for the said post. (2). The occasion for consideration of the aforesaid question cropped up under the following facts and circumstances:– An advertisement dated 14/10/1991 was issued by the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur for various posts in the districts within the State of Rajasthan. In so far as the minimum educational qualification for the post of police constable is concerned, the same required certificate of Secondary Examination or 10th Class or equivalent thereof. The petitioner who had passed the `Prathama Examination from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 1990 also applied for one such post as according to his case, the said examination was recognised by the State of Rajasthan as equivalent to the examination of High School or Higher Secondary Pt. I vide order dated 13/5/1974. The petitioners plea is that the said order dated 13/5/1974 is still in force and the same has not been withdrawn till date. The petitioner, thus, on the assumption that he is qualified and eligible for the post of Police Constable applied for the same in the District Tonk, and was also summoned for interview and parade on 9/10th December, 1991. A list was then prepared for 54 posts of police constables and two posts for lady police constables and the petitioners name was shown at Sr. No.51. It has been stated by the petitioner that he was also called for the medical check-up on 13th December, 1991, but on the said date, his medical examination was with held and the reason which was disclosed to him orally was that his name has been withdrawn from the list of eligible candidates as he is lacking in essential educational qualification since his certificate of `Prathama from the Hindi Sahitya Sam- melan, Allahabad is not a certificate which has been recognised by the State of Rajasthan equivalent to Secondary or 10th Class. (3). (3). The petitioner thereafter contacted the authorities personally and also the concerned Minister, but all in vain, due to which he moved this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. (4). A show cause notice was issued to the respondent on the writ petition and on appearance, a reply was filed wherein it has been stated that the petitioner failed to fulfill the requirement of essential qualification as the minimum educational qualification for the post of police constable is Secondary or 10th Class, or equivalent thereof. It has further been replied that the certificate of `Prathama exa- mination from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad had been recognised by the State Government as equivalent to High School or High School, Part-I, only for Hindi standard,which cannot be said to be equivalent with the Secondary with English. It also states that the recognition of the said certificate has already been cancelled by the State Government in the month of August, 1984 and the same was circulated vide order of the Government dated 23/9/1985 and the petitioner has obtained the said certificate after 1985. It has further been replied on behalf of the respondent that the Rajasthan Secondary Board of Education, Ajmer which is the Board competent to issue certificate. A copy of the order dated 23/9/1985 has been annexed to the reply as Annexure R/1. On these averments, the writ petition has been contested contending that the petitioner failed to fulfill the minimum requisite qualification for selection of police constables, and accordingly, has no claim to the post. (5). In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri R.P. Sharma has endeavoured to impress upon of . . . . . . . . . . . . the petitioner as the said Circular dated 23/9/1985 relates to the Rajasthan Subordinate Ministerial Staff Rules, 1958. Elaborating on this submission, it has been contended that the provisions of the Rajasthan Subordinate and Ministerial Staff Service Rules, 1958 are not applicable in this case and, a bare perusal of schedule appended with the Rules of 1958 will show that the minimum qualification for the post of constable is Secondary or 10th Class pass, or equivalent thereto from the recognised school/examining body. Therefore, according to his contention the advertisement dated 14/10/1991, in response to which the petitioner had applied as well as the Rules of 1958, the petitioner is fully qualified and the Circular dated 23/9/1985 has wrongly been relied upon by the respondent to disqualify him. (6). The argument which has been countered by Shri M.A. Khan on behalf of the respondent is the same which has been referred to hereinabove by way of reply on behalf of the State Government. In addition, however, he has relied upon two decisions of this court reported in the matter of State Bank of India & Ors. vs. Nand Ram (1) and in the matter of Sardara Ram Dangi vs. District Judge, Jodhpur (2). In these two cases, a similar question arose as to whether the `Prathama Examination of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad could be treated as equivalent to matriculation and whether the said qualification could hold the petitioner therein eligible for promotion and whether the promotion could be denied on the ground of lack of requisite educational qualification. (7). On a perusal of the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench in the matter of State Bank of India vs. Nand Ram (supra) it transpires that the learned Judges had noticed therein that `Prathama Examination was never recognised as equiva- lent to matriculation and the benefit to the employees for such certificate was given only for a limited purpose regarding grant of honorarium to the employees of the State Bank and further that the `Prathama Examination was treated as equivalent to Hindi standard of matriculation and not exactly parallel to the certificate of Matriculation. In this matter, several other judgments on similar questions were also considered including the judgment in the matter of Sardara Ram Dangi vs. District Judge, Jodhpur & Ors. (supra) wherein the said controversy as to whether `Prathama Examination was equivalent to matriculation was considered and after due deliberation on this question, it was finally held that the `Prathama Examination has been given only a conditional equivalence i.e. for Hindi Standard of SSC/ Matriculation only and, hence, it was held that it is not a parallel qualification or equivalent to matriculation. It was consequently held that the petitioners in those cases did not fulfill the necessary educational qualification for promotion to the clerical cadre. It was consequently held that the petitioners in those cases did not fulfill the necessary educational qualification for promotion to the clerical cadre. This Court, therefore, will proceed on the footing that the certificate of `Prathama is not exactly equivalent to Secondary or 10th Class and its recogni- tion is only for a limited purpose. Hence, it is not essential to embark upon an enquiry as to whether the recognition granted to `Prathama has been withdrawn by the State of Rajasthan after 1974 or not in view of the precedents on this question by two Division Benches of this Court. (8). The leaned counsel for the petitioner, however, has tried to distinguish his case from the cases referred to hereinabove and also emphasised that the Circular dated 23/9/1985 applied only in regard to those employees who belong to the ministerial cadre and is applicable only in cases for the post of clerks and the said yardstick cannot be applied for appointment to the post of constable. (9). A reading of the citations relied upon by the counsel for the respondent referred to hereinabove clearly demonstrates that the certificate of Prathama Examination has categorically and unequivocally not been held to be equivalent to matriculation and, if at all, the benefit of the said certificate has been made available to the candidates only for a limited purpose i.e. equivalent to Hindi standard. On the basis of the `ratio decidendi- in the above cases when the facts of the instant case are considered, the first and foremost feature which strikes are the terms and conditions laid down in the advertisement for the post of Police Constable. The requisite qualification in the advertisement for the post of police constable is admittedly Secondary or 10th Class, or equivalent thereof which clearly means that the certificate other than Secondary or 10th Class ought to be exactly equivalent to it. The requisite qualification in the advertisement for the post of police constable is admittedly Secondary or 10th Class, or equivalent thereof which clearly means that the certificate other than Secondary or 10th Class ought to be exactly equivalent to it. If, therefore, in terms of the advertisement any candidate was required to possess Secondary or 10th Class certificate, without there being any indication that a certificate which is equivalent to Hindi standard of Secondary would also be valid, the obvious inference will have to be drawn that the candidates would have possessed a certificate which was fully equivalent to Secondary or 10th Class and not merely partial equivalent as has been earlier laid down by the Judges of the Division Bench that the certificate of `Prathama is not fully equivalent to Matriculation and, at the most, it is equivalent to Secondary/Matriculation or 10th Class for Hindi standard only. In such circumstances, in my opinion, it was only the Appointing Authority who could consider the question as to what would be the adequate minimum qualification for the post of Constable and whether the Secondary certificate equivalent to Hindi standard would be a sufficient qualification for the post of Constable. Now, if it is further held that the certificate is valid for the post of Constable, although this is invalid for the post of clerical cadre, it is bound to result into further anomaly giving rise to a situation where the certificate would be valid for a particular category of posts and yet invalid for another category. In my considered opinion, the certificate is either valid for a post, or it is invalid and it cannot be midway. It is, therefore, only the Appointing Authority who could relax the qualification according to the Rules before issuing the advertisement which was required of the post and satisfy himself as to whether a particular qualification even though it may be lacking in some respects would hold a person eligible for the post or not. In the instant case, neither the rule nor any indication in the advertisement declare that a certificate of Secondary which, although, has been recognised for Hindi standard only would hold a person eligible for the post of Constable and, therefore, an incumbent cannot be allowed to claim the post as a matter of right. In the instant case, neither the rule nor any indication in the advertisement declare that a certificate of Secondary which, although, has been recognised for Hindi standard only would hold a person eligible for the post of Constable and, therefore, an incumbent cannot be allowed to claim the post as a matter of right. When there is no distinction either in the advertisement or in the relevant rules, then, in my opinion, the submission of the counsel for the petitioner that the recognition of the certificate of `Prathama has been withdrawn for clerical cadre of the Rajasthan Ministerial Staff Service Rules cannot be accepted. Further more, if the police rules were framed in the year 1989 in place of 1974, it was all the more necessary to clarify that for the post of police constable, Secondary certificate even if it is valid for Hindi standard only would be a sufficient qualification, but no clarification in this regard has been made, then the interpretation that a certificate even if it has been recognised for a limited purpose only should be held to be an equivalent qualification, has to be rejected and, if such an interpretation is made, the confusion is bound to be further confounded. It is, therefore, essential to lay down with clarity that the certificate of Secondary or 10th Class acquired from any institution should be equivalent to Secondary or 10th Class in all respects and not for a limited purpose. But whether that limited qualification is also an adequate qualification for a particular post will have to be tested in terms of the rules in this regard on the basis of which the advertisement had been issued. If no relaxation had been indicated in the advertisement, it cannot be legally and logically held that it hits any of the constitutional provision so as to attract the re- medy under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. (10). For the aforesaid reasons, I find no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly rejected without costs.