Y. BHASKAR RAO, J. ( 1 ) THESE appeals are filed assailing the judgment of the learned single judge allowing the writ petitions filed by the students who sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider them for admission to b. ed, course in the state of karnataka. ( 2 ) THE facts of the case are, that the petitioners in these petitions are graduates having taken education, philosophy or psychology and other subjects prescribed by the university. They are all qualified after passing their graduation examinations. They applied for admission to b. ed, course for the academic year 1996-97. Some of the applications of the petitioners were rejected and some candidates were not considered on the ground that the petitioners are not qualified as they are not having qualifications according to Rule 3 (b) of the Karnataka selection of candidates for admission to teachers certificate higher course (t. c. h.) and bachelor of education course (b. ed.) 1996 (hereinafter called the rules ). Petitioners contended that after the rules are issued by the government, government has also issued an additional notification. The rules are issued on 15-6-1996. The government issued a notification dated 20-6-1996 laying down the criteria for admission. According to that criteria, they are eligible and qualified for admission. Therefore, the rejection of their applications or non-consideration of their applications on the ground they are not qualified is not correct and legal and the action of the government is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of india. ( 3 ) THE government has filed an objection denying the allegations made in the writ petitions. It is pleaded that as per the rules, the petitioners are not qualified as they have not passed the examination prescribed in the rules. The notification issued later will not have the force of law. Therefore, the same cannot be taken into consideration and the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. ( 4 ) THE learned single judge after elaborately considering the rival contentions held that the government has promulgated the rules governing admission for the year 1996-97, by issuing a notification on 15-6- 1996. The writ petitioners are not eligible according to the eligibility prescribed under the said rules. ( 4 ) THE learned single judge after elaborately considering the rival contentions held that the government has promulgated the rules governing admission for the year 1996-97, by issuing a notification on 15-6- 1996. The writ petitioners are not eligible according to the eligibility prescribed under the said rules. But the government issued later, a notification dated 20-6-1996 according to which relaxation is given in the eligibility criteria to those candidates who are graduated with philosophy or psychology with one of the elective subjects mentioned in the said notification and a language therein and if they pass, they are eligible for admission. As the government itself has permitted them as qualified candidates by the second notification, they are eligible for consideration for admission and non-consideration of their applications is arbitrary and allowed the writ petitions. Against that, present appeals are filed, ( 5 ) THE learned government Advocate vehemently contended that once the rules are framed which are issued by way of notification, any further notification issued will not have the force of law. Therefore, the admissions are governed only by the rules issued by the government vide notification dated 15-6-1996 but not later notification. ( 6 ) TO appreciate the above contentions, it is relevant to examine the Provisions of the Karnataka educational institutions (prohibition of capitation fee) Act, 1984 (hereinafter called as 'karnataka act 37 of 1984' ). The above act 37 of 1984 deals with educational institutions, prohibition of capitation fee and their administration and other Provisions required for the management and recognition of the institutions. Section 14 of the act empowers the government to frame rules by issuing a notification. By virtue of the said power, government of Karnataka issued the notification No. Ed 67 pti 96, Bangalore, dated 15-6-1996. The rules issued vide the above notification shall apply for the selection of candidates for admission to teachers certificate higher course (tch) and bachelor of education course (b. ed. ). Rule 2 of the rules provides for definitions. Rule 3 provides for eligibility of the candidates for admission which is as follows:"3. Eligibility. The rules issued vide the above notification shall apply for the selection of candidates for admission to teachers certificate higher course (tch) and bachelor of education course (b. ed. ). Rule 2 of the rules provides for definitions. Rule 3 provides for eligibility of the candidates for admission which is as follows:"3. Eligibility. No person shall be eligible for admission under these rules, unless he is a citizen of india, and (a) in respect of teachers certificate higher (tch) course, unless he has passed the second year pre-university course or its equivalent examination: provided that the minimum marks for the purpose of qualification shall be, (i) 45% in the case of candidates belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, category I of other backward classes as specified in the relevant orders issued by the state government from time to time and physically handicapped candidates; (ii) 50% in the case of other candidates: provided further that no person who has passed secondary/pre-university, vocational education course/diploma or any other job-oriented course shall be eligible for admission to tch course. (b) in respect of admission to bachelor of education course unless he has obtained a degree in bachelor of arts or bachelor of science with any one language and at least two subjects out of three electives, specified below: languages: english, kannada, hindi, urdu, sanskrit, marathi. Electives: history, political science, sociology, geography, economics, physics, chemistry, botany, zoology, geology, mathematics, biology, english, kannada, hindi, urdu, marathi and sanskrit: provided that the minimum marks for the purpose of qualification specified above shall be: (i) 45% of marks in the aggregate of three years study in the case of candidates belonging to scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, category I of other backward classes as specified in the relevant orders issued by the state government from time to time and physically handicapped candidates; (ii) 50% in respect of other candidates". Rule 4 deals with the allocation of seats in various educational institutions. Rule 6 deals with the procedure for selection of candidates. We are not concerned with the other rules. ( 7 ) AS per these rules, candidates who studied education, philosophy or psychology are not eligible as it is not one of the elective subjects mentioned in Rule 3 (b ). ( 8 ) THE government thereafter issued a notification dated 20-6-1996 in which the eligibility criteria is laid down as follows:"eligibility. ( 7 ) AS per these rules, candidates who studied education, philosophy or psychology are not eligible as it is not one of the elective subjects mentioned in Rule 3 (b ). ( 8 ) THE government thereafter issued a notification dated 20-6-1996 in which the eligibility criteria is laid down as follows:"eligibility. (1) candidates must be citizens of India and should be Karnataka candidates for government seats. 'karnataka student' means a student who has studied for atleast 7 full academic years in any one of the government or government recognised institutions in Karnataka from 1st standard to 2nd puc and passed either sslc or puc examination in karnataka. Candidates who have enrolled as private candidates for sslc or puc and have passed sslc or puc examination or who have passed in the national open school will be considered if they have stayed at least for seven years in Karnataka and produce the residence certificate from the competent authorities. (2) candidates must be graduates with b. a. or b. sc. And shall have studied any one of the languages and any two of the three electives specified below: languages: english, kannada, hindi, sanskrit, urdu, marathi. Electives: physics, chemistry, botany, zoology, geology, biology, mathematics, history, political science, sociology, geography, economics, english, kannada, hindi, sanskrit, urdu, marathi. Candidates who have studied education, philosophy or psychology as a subject in their graduation are eligible for admission to b. ed, course, if they have studied at least one of the elective subjects specified above and have passed any one of the language examination considered as equivalent to degree by the government of Karnataka as per Annexure-7. Candidates must have obtained not less than 50% of the marks in the aggregate marks of three years of study, in respect of candidates belonging to scheduled caste/scheduled tribe/physically handicapped and category 1, the minimum marks shall not be less than 45%". ( 9 ) ACCORDING to the eligibility criteria of the above notification, the candidates who have studied education, philosophy or psychology as a subject in their graduation are eligible for admission to b. ed, course, if they have studied at least one of the elective subjects specified above. Thus the subjects philosophy and psychology which are not provided in the earlier rules which are issued by notification are now included by this notification dated 20-6-1996. Thus the subjects philosophy and psychology which are not provided in the earlier rules which are issued by notification are now included by this notification dated 20-6-1996. Therefore, it cannot be said that candidates who have studied education, psychology and philosophy with one of the elective subjects prescribed in the later notification are not eligible. The later notification has to be read as additional rule. Section 14 of the act 37 of 1984 empowers the government to make rules by issuing notification for carrying out all or any of the purposes of this act. Therefore, there is no embargo on the government not to frame further rules or modify or supplement the rules after framing the rules as the powers of the government are not exhausted, when once the rules are framed. Therefore, the later notification has to be read as modification of the said rules. So we are not able to agree with the contentions of the learned government Advocate that the later notification cannot be taken into consideration which is contrary to the earlier rules. ( 10 ) IT is secondly contended by the learned government Advocate that a graduate with psychology or philosophy is not eligible for admission. He is eligible only if he has studied one of the elective subjects mentioned in the notification. Therefore, the respondent-writ petitioners are not eligible for admission. ( 11 ) WE have already referred to the eligibility criteria provided in the notification dated 20-6-1996. Clause 2 of the above eligibility criteria provides, "candidates must be graduates with b. a. or b. sc. And shall have studied any one of the languages and any two of the three electives specified below. The electives are, physics, chemistry, botany, zoology, geology, biology, mathematics, history, political science, sociology, geography, economics, english, kannada, hindi, sanskrit, urdu and marathi. Therefore, those candidates who have studied education, philosophy or psychology are eligible for admission if they have studied one of the elective subjects specified above. This sub-clause of the electives specifically provides eligibility if they studied philosophy or psychology as one of the subjects. This is one of the exceptional Provisions. But sub-rule (2) of the eligibility criteria provided in the notification if not read as exceptional proviso, this clause becomes redundant. It is settled principle of law that whenever legislature passes any notification, they will not frame any rules or clauses which are redundant. This is one of the exceptional Provisions. But sub-rule (2) of the eligibility criteria provided in the notification if not read as exceptional proviso, this clause becomes redundant. It is settled principle of law that whenever legislature passes any notification, they will not frame any rules or clauses which are redundant. Therefore, a candidate who passes graduation with education, philosophy or psychology as a subject in the graduation and one of the elective subjects mentioned in sub-rule (2) of the later notification, he is eligible and qualified for consideration for admission. Therefore, the contention of the learned government Advocate is not tenable. ( 12 ) THE government itself first issued a notification framing rules and thereafter again issued a second notification dated 20-6-1996. In pursuance of the notification, number of students have applied for admission and some were admitted. Once the government itself issued notification relaxing the earlier rules, it cannot contend that the candidates are not eligible according to the second notification. On this ground also, the contention of the appellants is not tenable. Therefore, we do not see any merit in the writ apeals. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. ( 13 ) THE rules framed by virtue of the second notification will continue to be in force until they are amended, annulled or reviewed. ( 14 ) THE interim orders passed in these cases are deemed to be vacated. ( 15 ) THE orders passed in the writ petitions shall be carried out by the respondents if not already carried out. --- *** --- .