JUDGMENT: V. Eswaraiah, J. The petitioners herein, who are the applicants before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, filed these Writ Petitions against the orders dated 30-09-2011 of A.P. Administrative Tribunal in dismissing their O.As. 1. As these Writ Petitions arise from the common orders passed in original Applicants by the Tribunal and they involve common questions of fact and law, they are disposed of by this common order. As the facts in all the cases are similar, the facts in W.P.No.32372 of 2011 herein are referred. W.P.No.32372 of 2011 is filed against the order in O.A.No.6598 of 2010. The said O.A was filed to declare the action of the respondents 2 and 3 herein in not sending the petitioner herein for medical examination in respect of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector pursuant to the notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 issued by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, Hyderabad as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner in the said O.A that pursuant to the notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 issued by the A.P. Public Service Commission inviting applications from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009, they have applied for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors and produced all the original documents relating to the academic qualifications and with regard to the Heavy Vehicle Driving License as required under the Rules. He got motor Driving License with 3 years experience of driving motor vehicles and aged more than 21 years. His license expired on 22-12-2008 and it was renewed on 23-1-2009 as per the provisions contained in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1996. It is stated that the Service Commission is bound to take into consideration the statutory provisions and as such having sent the other candidates for medical examination, he was not sent on the ground that on verification of the Driving License as on the date of notification dated 30-12-2008 he was not having the endorsement of Heavy Vehicle Driving License. It is stated that the selection process was initiated online from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009, and therefore, unless the Tribunal directs the respondents to send him for the Medical Examination for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, he will suffer serious irreparable loss. 2. It is stated that the selection process was initiated online from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009, and therefore, unless the Tribunal directs the respondents to send him for the Medical Examination for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, he will suffer serious irreparable loss. 2. A counter was filed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary, TR & B Department stating that the Public Service Commission issued notification No.45/2008 on 30-12-2008 for recruitment of 217 vacancies of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors in the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service in Transport Division. The post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector is governed under the special Rules issued for the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service vide G.O.Ms.No.71, Transport, Roads & Buildings (Ser-IV) Department, dated 19-2-2009. As per annexure appended to the Special Rules, under Rule 6, to hold the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, one must possess degree in Mechanical Engineering or Automobile Engineering or must possess Diploma in Automobile Engineering and must hold Motor Driving License and should have experience in driving motor vehicle for a period of not less than 3 years and possess Heavy Vehicle Endorsement, provided where persons with 3 years experience in driving motor vehicles are not available, the persons with two years experience in driving motor vehicles may be appointed. It is stated that the A.P. Public Service Commission has furnished a list of candidates along with the details of the driving licenses to the department requesting to verify the eligibility of the driving licenses to hold the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in accordance with the Special Rules issued for the Transport Subordinate Service. Pursuant to the same, some of the driving licenses were verified with reference to records available and also the computer data available in the Central Survey of the department. The verification report in respect of the petitioner herein revealed that his driving license expired on 22-12-2008 and is not valid as on the date of notification dated 30-12-2008. He himself admitted that he has renewed the driving license on 23-1-2009 i.e., subsequent to the date of the notification. Hence it was informed to the Public Service Commission that the driving license was not valid and hence he is not eligible. He got the driving license on 8-6-1989 and the Heavy Transport Vehicle endorsement on 28-10-1991 and it expired on 22-12-2008. Hence it was informed to the Public Service Commission that the driving license was not valid and hence he is not eligible. He got the driving license on 8-6-1989 and the Heavy Transport Vehicle endorsement on 28-10-1991 and it expired on 22-12-2008. It is stated that under sub-Rule 3(a) of Rule 12 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules 1996, a candidate should possess the academic qualifications and experience including the practical experience prescribed, if any, for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector as on the date of notification for direct recruitment issued by the concerned recruiting agency. The candidate who has applied for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector under notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 issued by the A.P. Public Service Commission must possess a valid driving license as on the date of notification on 30-12-2008, and thus, it is stated that O.A was without any merits and is liable to be dismissed. 3. The Tribunal summed up the various contentions raised by the applicants. The contentions, which are necessary for the purpose of this Writ Petition, are as follows: 1. Notification No.45/2008 was issued on 30-12-2008, but 30-12-2008 cannot be taken as the date of notification, and the date of notification should be taken as 30-4-2009, as it was stated in the notification that the applications would be available on the website of the Service Commission from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009. 2. The applicants who acquired Heavy Vehicles License Endorsement after 30-12-2008 are also eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector. Basing on the above said contentions, the Tribunal framed various points for consideration and insofar as this writ petition is concerned the following points that arose for determination. 1. Whether 30-12-2008, i.e., the date of paper publication of Notification No.45/2008 or 13-4-2009, i.e., the date on which the applications were made available on website shall be the date of notification? 2. Whether the applicants have to possess the requisite qualification as on 30-12-2008 or as on 13-4-2009? 3. Whether the applicants who acquired Heavy Vehicle Driving Endorsement after 30-12-2008 and before 30-4-2009 are eligible and can be considered for selection? The Tribunal held the above three points against the petitioners and dismissed the O.As. Aggrieved by the same, these writ petitions are filed. 4. 3. Whether the applicants who acquired Heavy Vehicle Driving Endorsement after 30-12-2008 and before 30-4-2009 are eligible and can be considered for selection? The Tribunal held the above three points against the petitioners and dismissed the O.As. Aggrieved by the same, these writ petitions are filed. 4. The very self-same contentions have been raised in these writ petitions contending that the Public Service Commission initially issued notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 publishing in news papers, employment news inviting applications for 217 posts of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors. However, it is stated that notification made available in the internet on 13-4-2009 contains details with regard to the procedure of selection, method of applying, breakup of vacancies, communal roaster within each zone, Syllabus and scheme of examination in Paras V and VIII of Annexure I and II. The comparison of notification published on 30-12-2008 in daily news papers and the notification made available in the website on 13-4-2009, clearly and categorically shows that the notification dated 30-12-2008 as published is not as per the A.P. Public Service Commission Rules. That as per Rule-3 of the A.P. Public Service Commission Rules, the Commission shall announce the number of vacancies, invite applications, conditions of admissions to the examination, the subjects, scheme or syllabi of the examination etc., but in the notification dated 30-12-2008 as published, it is mentioned that a detailed notification with break up of vacancies, scale of pay and other instructions may be viewed on the website from 13-4-2009. Therefore, the notification, which was made available in the website on 13-4-2009 bears the date as 30-12-2008. However the State of A.P framed new Rules under Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India for A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 in supersession of the earlier rules after publishing the notification dated 30-12-2008 and in the detailed notification made available in the website from 13-4-2009 onwards, it is stated that the recruitment shall be made as per new A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules, and therefore, the date of notification shall be taken into account as 13-4-2009 but not 30-12-2008. In support of their contention, they have relied on a Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise v. New Tobacco Co ( AIR 1998 SC 668 ) wherein the notification was not made available and that mere printing is not sufficient unless the printed material is made available to the general public. It is stated that the Tribunal has erroneously held that no prejudice would be caused by mentioning the Rules made in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 in the notification dated 13-4-2009 and that the tribunal also erroneously held that 13-4-2009 is only a proforma application and not a notification. 5. The points that arise for consideration in these writ petitions are as follows: 1. Whether the publication of the notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 in the daily news papers is the date of notification or the detailed notification containing the full particulars like break up of the vacancies, scale of pay, age, community, educational qualifications etc., as made available on the website from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 shall be treated as date of notification. 2. Whether the applicants who have acquired the requisite qualifications and Heavy Vehicle Motor Driving Endorsement after 30-12-2008 and on 13-4-2009 are eligible to be considered for selection; and 3. Whether any prejudice is caused to any of the petitioners by reason of issuance of the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules 2009 in super cession of the earlier Rules? Insofar as points 1 and 2 are concerned, it is not in dispute that A.P. Public Service Commission, Hyderabad widely published Notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 in daily news papers employment news inviting online applications through the proforma applications available on website from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 for recruitment of post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors in A.P. Transport Subordinate Service. The desirous eligible candidates are required to apply online by satisfying themselves with the terms and conditions of the recruitment. The Commission has dispensed with the sale of applications and proforma applicants are made available on website only from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009. However, for convenience and appreciation of this case, the notification as published on 30-12-2008 is extracted hereunder. “ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION: HYDERABAD NOTIFICATION NO.45 OF 2008 (General Recruitment) Applications are invited on line through the proforma application available on WEBSITE (www.apspsc.gov.in) from 13.4.2009 to 30.4.2009 for recruitment to the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors in A.P. Transport Subordinate service. “ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION: HYDERABAD NOTIFICATION NO.45 OF 2008 (General Recruitment) Applications are invited on line through the proforma application available on WEBSITE (www.apspsc.gov.in) from 13.4.2009 to 30.4.2009 for recruitment to the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors in A.P. Transport Subordinate service. The desirous eligible candidates may apply on line by satisfying themselves with the terms and conditions of this recruitment. The commission has dispensed with the sale of applications through HPS’s/Sales Counter of Commission’s office. The details of the provisional vacancy position is as follows. S. No Name of the Post No. of Vacancies Age as on 1.7.2008 Scale of pay 01 Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors in Transport Subordinate Service 217 18-39 Rs.8815-20300. Qualifications: i) Must hold a Degree in Mechanical Engineering or Automobile Engineering of a recognized University in India. OR Must hold a Diploma in Automobile Engineering granted by the State Board of Technical Education and Training, Andhra Pradesh or Technological Diploma Examination Board, Hyderabad or any other equivalent qualification. ii) Must hold a Motor Driving License and have experience in driving motor vehicles for a period of not less than 3 years and possess Heavy Transport Vehicle endorsement. Provided further that in case of women, they must hold a Motor Vehicle driving license, if they are holder of light motor vehicle driving license only, they shall acquire the Heavy Transport Vehicle Endorsement within two years of their joining the service as Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector, failing which their services will be terminated without assigning any reasons. PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS: i) For Men: Must not be less than 165 Cms in height and not less than 86.3 Cms round the chest on full inspiration with a minimum expansion of 5.00 Cms and in case of SC/ST the minimum height must not be less than 160 Cms and must not less than 83.80 round the chest with minimum expansion of 5.00 Cms ii) For Women: The height shall not be less than 157.5 Cms and must not be less than 86.3 Cms round the chest on full inspiration with a minimum of 5.00 Cms expansion. iii) Must be certified to possess the visual standards specified below without glasses: i) Right Eye: Distance vision 6/6 Near vision: 0.5 Left Eye: Distance vision 6/6 Near vision: 0.5 (shellen) ii).. Each eye must have a full field of vision. iii).. iii) Must be certified to possess the visual standards specified below without glasses: i) Right Eye: Distance vision 6/6 Near vision: 0.5 Left Eye: Distance vision 6/6 Near vision: 0.5 (shellen) ii).. Each eye must have a full field of vision. iii).. Colour Blindness, Squint or any morbid conditions on the eyes or lids or either eye knock kness, pigeon chest, flat foot, varicose vains, hammer toes, fractured limbs and decayed teeth shall be deemed to be a disqualification. Detailed Notification with breakup of vacancies scale of pay, age, community, Educational qualifications and other instructions along with prescribed Application proforma may be viewed at WEBSITE (www.apspsc.gov.in). After filling the necessary details, the application form along with challan will be generated in downloadable/printable PDF, Candidates are required to take printout of the online application along with the challan which may be retained with the candidates for reference. Through challan form candidates are required to pay the amount indicated in the challan in any branch of State Bank of India across the country. IMPORTANT: 1. The candidate should read the Commission’s Notification and other instructions available in User’s Guide carefully before applying for the Recruitment and enter the particulars properly in the Application though ONLINE. 2. Candidates are required to retain a photocopy of Application form with Reference Id No. 3. Candidates have to submit applications only through online mode, Hand written/Typed/Photostat copies/Printed Application Form will not be entertained neither by APPSC directly nor by Post Office nor in person. 4. Candidates are advised to submit their applications through online well in advance of the last date to avoid last day rush. 5. Detailed Notification along with proforma application will be available at WEBSITE (www.apspsc.gov.in) from 13/4/2009. Hyderabad. DATE: 30/12/2008 Sd/-Harpreet Singh, I.A.S., SECRETARY.” Hitherto, the Public Service Commission used to sell the applications through the Head Post Offices as well as in the counter of the Commission, but by the said notification, the applications are invited online only. 5. Detailed Notification along with proforma application will be available at WEBSITE (www.apspsc.gov.in) from 13/4/2009. Hyderabad. DATE: 30/12/2008 Sd/-Harpreet Singh, I.A.S., SECRETARY.” Hitherto, the Public Service Commission used to sell the applications through the Head Post Offices as well as in the counter of the Commission, but by the said notification, the applications are invited online only. The candidates have to go through the details of the proforma application made available on website and after filling the necessary details, the application form along with the challan will be generated in the downloadable/printable PDF and then the candidates are required to take a printout of the online application along with the challan and the candidates have to pay the amount shown in the challan in any branch of the State Bank of India. Applications applied online are only accepted. 6. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the State and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Public Service Commission submits that the Notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 was published widely in all the daily newspapers on 30-12-2008 and also in the employment news inviting the applications online through the proforma application indicating that the proforma application containing all the details are made available from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009. It is stated that when the proforma application was made available, the number of vacancies are stated as 218 instead of 217 and the age as on 1-7-2008 is stated 21-39 years instead of 18-39 years and the scale of pay is the same. It is stated that the proforma application contains the details of method and manner to apply online, the challan for Rs.25/-towards the process of application and Rs.80/-towards examination fee for those who are not exempted from the payment of fee. Even in the original publication of the notification dated 30-12-2008, it is clearly communicated that handwritten, typed or Photostat applications will not be entertained except the applications received through online mode. Even in the original publication of the notification dated 30-12-2008, it is clearly communicated that handwritten, typed or Photostat applications will not be entertained except the applications received through online mode. It is stated that the detailed notification contained a note with regard to the procedure for filing the application online, the legal provisions governing the recruitment process, educational qualifications, physical requirements, age, fee, mode of payment of fee and exemption from payment of the fee by the reserved candidates, procedure for selection and the stages of written examination, oral test for those qualified as per the Rules, about the rule of reservation, implementation of Presidential Order with regard to the local and non-local and the indication of centers for written examination, instructions to the candidates etc. In Annexure I, the breakup of provisional vacancies for the zone wise posts and reserved category are also mentioned and in Annexure II the scheme and syllabus of the written examination is mentioned. It is stated that the publication of notification dated 30-12-2008 cannot be the same as the proforma application containing the details made available in the website from 13-09-2009 to 30-4-2009. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that as per Notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 published on 30-12-2008, the number of vacancies mentioned as 217 and age between 18-39 as on 01-07-2008. But whereas in the said detailed notification made available in the website from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 the number of vacancies is mentioned as 218 and as on 1-7-2008 and age as 21-39. It is stated that as per the State Subordinate Service Rules a person is eligible for direct recruitment if he is in between 18 to 34 years, of course subject to relaxation of 5 years in case of S.Cs. S.Ts and B.Cs. It is stated that as per the State Subordinate Service Rules a person is eligible for direct recruitment if he is in between 18 to 34 years, of course subject to relaxation of 5 years in case of S.Cs. S.Ts and B.Cs. But in the instant case, there are three different ages provided, and as per the original notification, the age as on 1-7-1989 is 18-39 years and the detailed notification made available from 13-4-2009 is 21-39 years, but as per Rule 12 (1)(v) of the State Subordinate Service Rules the age shall be taken into account as 18-34 years and the notification mentioned that the recruitment will be processed as per the detailed notification, instructions issued by the Government and also as decided by the Commission from time to time in terms of the respective special Rules, adhoc Rules governing the recruitment issued in A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules from time to time. The petitioners further submits that as on the date of publication of the notification dated 30-12-2008 the A.P. State Transport Subordinate Service Rules in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 were not in existence and the detailed notification states that the Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.71 are applicable, and therefore, any recruitment made must be in accordance with special Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.71 but not pursuant to the earlier Rules. Therefore, that notification shall be taken into account as made available from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 and not the notification dated 30-12-2008 as published. 8. It is not in dispute that as per the qualifications prescribed in the Notification No.45/2008 published on 30-12-2008, the candidate must hold a Degree in Mechanical Engineering or Automobile Engineering or Diploma in Automobile Engineering and apart from it Motor Driving License having three years experience and also possess Heavy Transport Vehicle Endorsement. There is no change in the said requirement of the qualifications as was contained in the original notification as published and the detailed notification made available in the website and as well as in A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules in G.O.Ms.No.529, Transport, Roads and Buildings (Transport.1) Department dated 4-6-1999 amended from time to time and superseded by the Rules issued in G.O.ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009. Under the Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 of the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules 2009 in supersession of earlier rules the same qualifications are prescribed. Under the Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 of the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules 2009 in supersession of earlier rules the same qualifications are prescribed. Therefore, it cannot be said that any prejudice is caused to the petitioners by reason of issuing the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules in supersession of the earlier Rules in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009. Therefore, as none of the petitioners are affected either with regard to the qualifications or the age by mentioning new Rules in the detailed notification made available in the website from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 and as no prejudice is caused to them, it cannot be said that the notification dated 30-12-2008 shall be treated as notification dated 13-4-2009 or 30-3-2009. The question is whether the petitioners have fulfilled the requisite qualifications as on the date of issuance of notification dated 30-12-2008. Admittedly, the driving license itself has been expired as on the date of issuance of notification dated 30-12-2008 in case of some of the petitioners and in case of some others, the validity of the endorsement of the Heavy Driving License was expired by 30-12-2008. The renewal of said driving license or the Heavy Transport Vehicle Endorsement made subsequent to 30-12-2008 are valid from the date of such renewal or the date of endorsement alone, and therefore, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that none of the petitioners herein have a valid driving license with heavy transport vehicle endorsement as on 30-12-2008. Therefore, the respondents found on verification of the certificates that the petitioners are not eligible to be considered for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors, and therefore, they were not sent for medical examination. 9. The Judgment relied on by the petitioners in Collector of Central Excise (Supra 1) relates to the publication of the notification through gazette and so called printed gazette was not made available to the interested public, and therefore, it was held that if publication is through a Gazette then mere printing of it in the Gazette would not be enough, and unless the Gazette containing the notification is made available to the public, the notification cannot be said to have been duly published. But whereas in the instant case, the notification dated 30-12-2008 was widely published in the daily news papers employment news inviting applications through the proforma applications which are made available after three months in the website i.e., from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the detailed notification shall be taken into account as the date of notification. In the notification dated 30-12-2008 which was published widely in daily news papers it was mentioned that proforma applications are made available from 13-4-2009 in the website. Therefore, the date of the proforma applications made available in the website from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 cannot be taken as the date of publication of the notification. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal rightly held that there is no difference with regard to the qualifications in the old Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.529 as amended from time and the new Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 either with regard to the method of appointment or with regard to the educational qualifications and physical measurements to the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector. Therefore, mere mentioning of new Rules in supersession of the old Rules, it cannot be said that the date of notification gets changed to the date of the detailed applications made available in the website. Accordingly, it was rightly held that the notification as published on 30-12-2008 is valid notification. The Tribunal also rightly held that the candidates must possess the requisite qualifications by the date of notification i.e., 30-12-2008. None of the petitioners have got the renewal of licenses or endorsement within the prescribed period of 30 days, after the expiry of licenses, they have obtained renewal of license and endorsement, which came into effect from the date of such renewal or endorsement. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly held that none of the applicants have requisite qualification as on the date of notification i.e., on 30-12-2008. 10. The apex Court in State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Hirendra Pal Singh and others ( (2011) 5 SCC 305 ) in para 22 while considering the settled legal proposition that whenever an Act is repealed held that it must be considered as if it had never existed. The repeal is not a matter of mere form but it is of substance. Therefore, on repeal, the earlier provisions stand obliterated/abrogated/wiped out wholly. The repeal is not a matter of mere form but it is of substance. Therefore, on repeal, the earlier provisions stand obliterated/abrogated/wiped out wholly. In para 24, the apex Court held that there is a clear distinction between repeal and suspension of the statutory provisions and the material difference between both is that repeal removes the law entirely; when suspended, it still exists and has operation in other respects except wherein it has been suspended. Thus, a repeal puts an end to the law. A suspension holds it in abeyance. In the instant case, there is no difference between superseded Rules and the new Rules insofar as the qualifications are concerned. Therefore, no prejudice is caused to any of the petitioners insofar as the fulfillment of the requisite qualifications are concerned. Even in Collector of Central Excise (supra 1) the Hon’ble Supreme Court considered various earlier judgments that the effect of supersession is not obliterated altogether. An Act or order is said to be superseded where later enactment or order effects the same purpose as an earlier one by repetition of its terms or otherwise. In the instant case, the present Rules superseding the earlier Rules nowhere changes the eligibility of the qualifications. Therefore, it cannot be said that the proforma notification available in the website is to be treated as date of notification. In Alka Ojha v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and another ( (2011) 9 SCC 438 ) the question that arose for consideration is with regard to the qualifications prescribed in the Rajasthan Transport Subordinate Service Rules, 1963 for the post of Motor Vehicle Sub-Inspectors. In the said case advertisement was issued on 1-10-2001 by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission and the last date fixed for submission of the applications was 19-11-2001. It was found on scrutiny that as on the last date of submission of the applications they did not possess the required driving license. But the learned Single Judge held that they are entitled for relaxation of the educational qualifications acquired by them before the date of interview. But the said Judgment of the learned Single judge was set aside by the Division Bench and the said Judgment was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 11. But the learned Single Judge held that they are entitled for relaxation of the educational qualifications acquired by them before the date of interview. But the said Judgment of the learned Single judge was set aside by the Division Bench and the said Judgment was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 11. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, as there is no change with regard to the requirement of qualifications either under the old A.P. Transport Subordinate Rules or under the new A.P. Transport Subordinate Rules, and as no prejudice is caused to the petitioners, it cannot be said that by mere mention of new Rules in the detailed proforma notification made available in the website, the date of original notification is not applicable. We are of the opinion that the requisite qualifications are required as on the date of publication of the original notification dated 30-12-2008 but not as on the date of available of the proforma applications on the website. The available proforma applications with detailed instructions cannot be treated as a date of notification. Any notification inviting applications must be published widely. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the notification is not in conformity with Rule 3 of A.P. Service Commission Rules also cannot be accepted as the notification contains the number of vacancies subject to variation in inviting application, requisite qualification, availability of application in the website, manner of filing applications on online etc. The original notification cannot contain the particulars of interview board for interviewing the candidates and arrangement for conduct of examinations, space, scheme or syllabi of examination and condition of admission to the examination under Rule 3. As a matter of fact, the Public Service Commission by issuing the notification announced the number of vacancies and as rule itself provides that the notification is subject to variation of number of posts and increase in one post of the Motor Vehicle Inspector is for the advantage of the applicants alone. However, the application proforma contains all the particulars, and therefore, the detailed notification making proforma application made available is part and parcel of the original notification alone. However, the application proforma contains all the particulars, and therefore, the detailed notification making proforma application made available is part and parcel of the original notification alone. The petitioners in fact have not raised all these issues in their original applications before the Tribunal except stating that the selection process was initiated by inviting online applications from 13-4-2009 and that the action of the respondents in not sending them to medical test on the ground of lack of valid driving license for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector as illegal and arbitrary. No foundation has been laid as to how the action of the respondents in not selecting them and sending for the medical examination is illegal, though admittedly they did not possess the requisite qualifications as on the date of publication of notification dated 30-12-2008 inviting applications from a future date i.e., from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009 on online. For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the publication of the Notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 in the daily newspapers is the date of notification as rightly held by the Tribunal. We also hold that the applicants who have acquired the requisite qualifications and Heavy Vehicle Motor Driving Endorsement after 30-12-2008 and before 30-4-2009 are not eligible and cannot be considered for selection, and no prejudice is caused to any of the petitioners by reason of issuance of the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules 2009 in supersession of the earlier Rules as rightly held by the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not see any error committed by the Tribunal or merit in the writ petitions and they are accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.