Honble PARIHAR, J. – Since on same set of facts similar points are involved in both the writ petitions, the same are heard and decided by this common order, on joint request of counsel for the parties. (2). The petitioners, after having passed their qualifying examinations, also got their bachelor degree in Physical Education in the year 1996. Petitioners got themselves enrolled in the respective employment exchanges. (3). In pursuance to advertisement issued by the respondents for the post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III, the petitioners also submitted their applications for the above post. Apprehension of the petitioners is that they may not be considered for the appointment only on the ground that they were not having the subject of Mathematics in the course of Secondary or Higher Secondary Examination and, as such, in view of the amendment dated 25th of August, 1995 in the relevant Rules, the petitioners may be declared ineligible for the post. Thus, the petitioners have challenged the validity of amendment made vide notification dated 25th of August, 1995 in the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 (hereinafter to be referred as the `Rules of 1971) and has prayed that the petitioners be declared eli- gible for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III and be given appointment as per their merit. (4). The post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III is to be filled in 100% by way of direct recruitment under the provisions of Rules of 1971. The minimum qualification prescribed for the same is Senior Secondary Certificate of Board of Secon- dary Education recognised by the Government of Rajasthan and Secondary or equivalent examination recognised by the Govt. of Rajasthan with five subjects, three of them should be Mathematics, English and Hindi with certificate in physical education. The above qualifications were inserted vide amendment dated 25th August, 1995. By the same amendment the candidates who have passed C.P.Ed. Examination before this amendment, who have been admitted to C.P.Ed. upto Sessions 1994-95 and passed thereafter, and widows and divorced women, appointed prior to amendment under proviso to Rule 22 of the Rules of 1971 were also held entitled/eligible for recruitment to the post of P.T.I. Gr. III. (5). Earlier to the amendment dated 25th August, 1995 the qualifications were also Secondary/Higher Secondary with certificate in Physical Education was there under the Rules. (6). III. (5). Earlier to the amendment dated 25th August, 1995 the qualifications were also Secondary/Higher Secondary with certificate in Physical Education was there under the Rules. (6). Admittedly, the petitioners were not having the subject of Mathematics either in their Secondary course or the Higher Secondary Course. Further, the petitioners got their certificate in Physical Education i.e. Bachelor of Degree in Phy- sical Education in the present case in the year 1996 only. Thus, as per provisions of the Rules as they existed at the time of present selections petitioners were not eligible/qualified for the post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III. (7). The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that petitioners had obtained the certificate of Secondary way back in the year 1982 and at that time under the scheme of the syllabus, while choosing different subjects the petitioners were exempted for opting and appearing in the subject of Mathematics. Since a valid certificate of passing the Secondary has been issued by the Board, where the petitioners were exempted from appearing in the examination of Mathematics, it should be presumed that petitioners have the requisite qualification of Secondary or Higher Secondary certificate irrespective of their opting/passing this subject of Mathematics. (8). Mr. Rajendra Sharma, counsel for the petitioner has further contended that persons who had possessed their certificate of Physical Education before this amendment and even those who got their admission upto session 1994-95 have been held eligible for the post of P.T.I. Gr. III whereas persons obtained certificates after amendment and not having subject of Mathematics have been made ineligible. According to Mr. Sharma, this action of the respondents is wholly arbitrary, discriminatory and unjustified and is in clear violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. (9). Another submission of Mr. Sharma is that the requirement of subject of Mathematics for the post of Physical Training Instructor is wholly irrelevant and, as such, amendment made in the Rules be struck down. (10). After having carefully gone through the entire material on record and the relevant Rules and also having considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that none of the submissions made by him merits acceptance. (11). (10). After having carefully gone through the entire material on record and the relevant Rules and also having considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that none of the submissions made by him merits acceptance. (11). It is a well settled proposition of law that all selections have to be made strictly in accordance with provisions of relevant Rules as they existed at the time of selections. Admittedly, the petitioners were not having the requisite qualifications as per provisions of the relevant Rules and, as such, were not eligible for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III. (12). It is for the State Govt. to frame the Rules and lay down requisite qualifi- cations looking to the nature of post. Merely because qualifications or conditions does not suit a particular person, the Rules or the amendment in this regard cannot be struck down or be held discriminatory or violative of Article 14 or 16 of the Constitution of India. (13). The Apex Court, in number of cases, has held that it is for the expert body to suggest requisite qualifications and the Rule Making Authority or the Legislature is to regulate the method of recruitment and prescribing qualification etc. while framing the Rules in this regard. The court should not tranch into such matters. Reliance can be placed on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of J. Ranga Swamy vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. (1), V.K. Sood vs. Secretary, Civil Aviation and Ors. (2) and Dr. A.P. Singh Narag vs. P.G. Institute (3). (14). Since there is requirement under the Rules for having Mathematics as essential subject in Secondary or Higher Secondary, the petitioners not having the same qualification of Secondary or Higher Secondary, cannot be held eligible for the above post and no inference also can be drawn under any deeming clause as well. The subject which has not been passed, though may have been exempted at the relevant time, for getting the requisite certificate that may not be relevant so far as selection to the post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III under the Rules of 1971 is concerned. The subject which has not been passed, though may have been exempted at the relevant time, for getting the requisite certificate that may not be relevant so far as selection to the post of Physical Training Instructor Gr. III under the Rules of 1971 is concerned. The certificate of Secondary and Higher Secondary as possessed by the petitioners can only be relevant for the purpose of higher studies or the jobs where the subject of Mathematics is not required under the provisions of the relevant Rules. (15). Accordingly, I find no merit in the writ petitions and the same are dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.