Judgment Ajay Rastogi, J.-Instant petition has been filed questioning validity of selections made by respondent PSC for the post of Lecturer (Commercial Art) pursuant to advertisement dated 20.01.1997 (No. 7/1996-1997) (Annexure-1). 2. To examine controversy raised, necessary acts, in brief , required for consideration, are that petitioner who is having qualification of B.A., M.A., & Diploma in Commercial Art, applied in pursuant to advertisement (Annexure-1), ibid, as per which ten posts of Lecturer (Commercial Art) were advertised. Screening test was held wherein petitioner also succeeded and was permitted to participate alongwith respondents 4 to 9 in process of selection and interview but in final selections, he was not found suitable as informed vide letter dated 08.09.1997 (Annexure-7). Counsel for petitioner contends that respondents 4 to 9 are ineligible to hold the post of Lecturer [Commercial Art] as per condition of eligibility laid down in Rajasthan Technical Education Service Rules, 1973 (“Rules”) as they possess degree of Bachelor in Fine Arts but no specialization in Commercial Arts which is one of the eligibility condition under the Rules as such he has been deprived from fair consideration. Counsel further contends that petitioner being diploma holder in commercial art should have been considered on preferential basis while examining her suitability for the post in question. In support of contention, Counsel placed reliance on the decisions of Apex Court in P.M. Latha vs. State of Kerala, 2003 (3) SCC 541 ;; Yogesh Kumar vs. Govt. NCT Delhi, 2003 (3) SCC 548 ;; Punjab University vs. Narinder Kumar, 1999 (9) SCC 8 and Dr. Bhanu Prasad Panda vs. Chancellor Sambalpur University, 2001 (8) SCC 532 . On the strength of Judgment s (Supra), Counsel submits that very selection process stands vitiated and she is legally entitled to be appointed to the post in question. 3. Respondents have filed their reply but their contentions are almost the same. However, Counsel for respondent PSC submits that the degree in Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) is minimum qualification and there is no special subject like Commercial Arts with which one can have specialization. It is a three years degree course and as per syllabus as prescribed by University of Rajasthan, there is no such subject having specialization in Commercial Art in BFA. It is a three years degree course and as per syllabus as prescribed by University of Rajasthan, there is no such subject having specialization in Commercial Art in BFA. That apart, all who were selected by PSC are holders of degree in Fine Arts and are better qualified than petitioner and once petitioner participated and finally found to be unsuitable, he cannot be permitted to question process of selection at later stage. 4. It has also been urged on behalf of respondents that so far as preference is concerned, it is only with respect to those who have two years practical experience and not to the persons who possess minimum qualification and that apart, it applies in case when two persons are similarly placed in the order of merit, then question of preference comes in making selection on preferential basis since petitioner has not been found suitable, question of preference referred to does not arise. 5. Counsel for respondents No. 4 to 9 further informed that after selections were finalized all have joined the post in question and by this time, all are confirmed in their respective cadre. 6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, and with their assistance, perused the material on record, as regards eligibility, this fact remained undisputed that Commercial Arts is not a subject in which one can have specialization degree as awarded by University of Rajasthan - as per syllabus is of Bachelor of Fine Arts. It may be professional skill for making selections but in absence of any subject like Commercial Art, which Counsel for petitioner has not been able to show, in my opinion in such facts situation, it is for the PSC to take its decision after due consultation from the State to carry out the spirit of rules which serve the object of the rule making authority. Once PSC has acted upon expert opinion that those who possess degree of Fine Arts are qualified for the post in question which is also supported by the State as well, I do not find any infirmity in the decision of PSC in holding them eligible for the post of Lecturer [Commercial Arts ]. 7. Once PSC has acted upon expert opinion that those who possess degree of Fine Arts are qualified for the post in question which is also supported by the State as well, I do not find any infirmity in the decision of PSC in holding them eligible for the post of Lecturer [Commercial Arts ]. 7. As regards preference claimed by petitioner, in my opinion, the submission is without any substance for the reason that when the petitioner has not been selected, question of equality as well as preference qua incumbents who are selected by PSC, does not arise. 8. So far as Judgment s, on which the Counsel for petitioner placed reliance, are concerned, in Dr. Bhanu Prasad Pandas case (Supra), it was a case of appointment in Department of Political Science & Public Administration but selections were to be made for the post of Lecturer in Political Science and indeed both are separate and different subjects, accordingly, it was considered that those who have qualification in Political Science alone can be considered eligible for selection, which is not the case in hand. In P.M. Latha vs. State of Kerala and Yogesh Kumar vs. Govt. NCT Delhi (Supra), minimum qualification for the post of Teacher as referred to in the advertisement was of Teachers Training Certificate, it was considered that those who possess degree of B. Ed., are qualified for teaching students of higher classes, while TTC is required for children at primary level. In my opinion, Judgment s cited on behalf of petitioner are of no assistance to him in relation to controversy raised herein. 9. That apart, once petitioner participated and finally found to be unsuitable, even otherwise if anything adversely comes out, he is not going to be benefited. Taking an over all conspectus of the matter particularly the fact that the added respondents were selected in 1997 and joined pursuant to their selection and confirmed to the posts in question in their cadre, I do not find any infirmity in process of selection and any justification to interfere with impugned decision of PSC. 10. Consequently, this writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Stay order dated 30.09.1997 confirmed on 27.05.2002 stands vacated.