M.M. Kumar, C J.;— 1. The instant appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment and order dated 08.10.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ petition filed by appellant-writ petitioner holding that the advertisement inviting applications for appointment to the post of Medical Officer, Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy had made a specific mention of the guidelines issued under National Rural Health Mission Scheme for engagement of local candidates against the vacant positions. The argument that the selection criteria was changed and the changed criteria was not made public, has been rejected. The learned Single Judge also rejected the argument that the criteria of engaging local candidates suffer from vice of arbitrariness. In that regard reliance has been placed on the Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Dr. Javed Iqbal Bhat and ors. v. State and ors decided on 26.08.2010. The Division Bench has taken notice of the purpose of the National Rural Health Mission Scheme which is based on the local criteria. The expression 'preference' has been construed in light of the object of the Scheme. The word 'preference' under the Scheme was held to mean the application of local criteria inviting the doctors who are living within the blocks and are available there. Such persons were to be given preference to achieve the purpose of the Scheme. The learned Single Judge on the basis of the aforesaid Division Bench judgment held that no fault could be found with the action of the respondents in adopting the local criteria which has a direct nexus with the object postulated by the Scheme, namely, proper health care facility of the inhabitants of the local area where the Primary Health Centre is located. According to the learned Single Judge this could be done if preference is given to those doctors who are the residents of the local area. 2. The learned Single Judge also repelled the contention that the criteria of one year experience which was made mandatory in the first advertisement notice dated 17.08.2009 and it was subsequently changed vide notification dated 02.12.2009. The basis for rejecting the aforesaid contention was that the advertisement was issued and the criteria was made public. The appellant writ petitioner as also the other candidates who applied for the post were all well aware of the criteria. The basis for rejecting the aforesaid contention was that the advertisement was issued and the criteria was made public. The appellant writ petitioner as also the other candidates who applied for the post were all well aware of the criteria. Even otherwise, no undue weightage has been given to the private respondents in the matter of selection. The norms adopted for selection were not altered after the commencement of the selection process. The learned Single Judge then held that the appellant-writ petitioner having knowledge of the changed criteria had participated in the selection process and having remained unsuccessful, he cannot later question the same. In that regard, reliance has been placed on the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the cases of Om Parkash Shukla v. Akhilesh Kumar Shukla, 1986 (Suppl) SCC 283 and K.H. Siraj v. High Court of Kerala and ors, AIR 2006 SCW 3136 . 3. Another argument that private respondent no. 5 did not have the registration with the Board of Ayurvedic anid Unani System of Medicines, J&K in terms of Sections 16 & 18 of the Jammu and Kashmir Ayurvedic and Unani Practitioners Act, 1959 (for brevity "The Act') also did not find favour with the learned Single Judge. According to the learned Single Judge, the advertisement dated 02.12.2009 did not require that a candidate must be registered under the Act. All that is required by the advertisement for the post of Medical Officer is that a candidate must be in possession of a degree in the concerned subject from the recognized University/Medical College. In that regard, reliance has also been placed on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Dr. Navkiran Kapoor v. State of J&K and ors. LPA(SW) no. 38 of 2008 decided on 25.04.2008. 4. Mr. Abhinav Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner has argued that after the commencement of the selection process, the criteria of selection has been changed. In that regard, he has invited our attention to the advertisement notice inviting applications for the post of Medical Officer Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy dated 17.09.2009. Referring to para 3 of the advertisement (Annexure-E) learned counsel has submitted that in the column requiring requisite experience, the advertisement states that for the post of Medical Officer one year experience of work in Public/Private Sector after receiving degree is required. Referring to para 3 of the advertisement (Annexure-E) learned counsel has submitted that in the column requiring requisite experience, the advertisement states that for the post of Medical Officer one year experience of work in Public/Private Sector after receiving degree is required. According to the learned counsel, the criteria has been changed on 02.12.2009 (Annexure-L) by issuing another advertisement and in the column concerning experience it was stated that the candidates having one year experience from government/government recognized institutions would be preferred who are, otherwise, found meritorious as per the local criteria prescribed by the District Health Society, Poonch. 5. Mr. Sharma has then submitted that respondent no. 5 was not registered with the Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicines Board as per the requirement of Section 18 of the Act and, therefore, she was not eligible to apply. Another argument advanced by Mr. Sharma is that the posts were advertised for appointment on contractual basis for a period of one year whereas the selected candidates have been continuing even today. 6. Mrs. Neeru Goswami, learned Deputy Advocate General has vehemently argued that as a matter of fact that there was no change in criteria and the experience of one year was retained with the stipulation that the experience has to be gained by working in a government/government recognized institutions. According to the learned counsel the stipulation regarding experience expressly provided that it is a preferential qualification and not mandatory requirement. 7. Mr. D. C. Raina, learned senior counsel for private respondent has argued that there are Statutory Rules framed by Jammu and Kashmir Indian System of Medicines (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2006 (SRO 379 of 12.12.2009) which do not prescribe any experience for direct recruitment in respect of a Medical Officer. In that regard, our attention has been drawn to Schedule 2 Part IV appended to Rule 5 (2) (c). Accordingly, it is sought to be argued that once there is a statutory provision which does not provide for any experience, there was no necessity even to provide for one year experience. In any case, it would not be mandatory. The other argument raised by Mr. Raina is that the appellant-writ petitioner has participated in the selection process and is now estopped from challenging the selection. In that regard, Mr. In any case, it would not be mandatory. The other argument raised by Mr. Raina is that the appellant-writ petitioner has participated in the selection process and is now estopped from challenging the selection. In that regard, Mr. Raina has placed reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Lal and ors. v. State of J&K and ors. AIR 1995 SC 1088 : 2010 (5) JKJ SC-819. 8. We have thoughtfully considered the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that this appeal does not merit acceptance. It is pertinent to notice that the Government of India launched National Rural Health Mission Scheme for effective health care of rural population throughout the Country. It was initially made applicable to 18 States which have weak public health indicators and infrastructures. A National Common Minimum Programme was framed to promote the polices aimed at strengthening the public health management in rural areas so as to provide effective medical care facilities in the form of hospital and other health related incentives more particularly to the poor women and children. In part IV of the Scheme for the year 2005-2012 prepared by NRHM society it is categorically stated that the object is to integrate vertical health and family welfare programme at National, State, District and Block levels. A complete copy of the Scheme has been placed on record by the appellant-writ petitioner (Annexure-D). It is interesting to read the preamble of the Scheme which reads thus:- "Recognizing the importance of Health in the process of economic and social development and improving the quality of life of our citizens, the Government of India has resolved to launch the National Rural Health Mission to carry out necessary architectural correction in the basic health care delivery system. The Mission adopts a synergistic approach by relating health to determinants of good health viz segments of nutrition, sanitation, hygiene and safe drinking water. It also aims at mainstreaming the Indian systems of medicine to facilitate health care. The Mission adopts a synergistic approach by relating health to determinants of good health viz segments of nutrition, sanitation, hygiene and safe drinking water. It also aims at mainstreaming the Indian systems of medicine to facilitate health care. The Plan of Action includes increasing public expenditure on health, reducing regional imbalance in health infrastructure, pooling resources, integration of organizational structures, optimization of health manpower, decentralization and district management of health programme, community participation and ownership of assets, induction of management and financial personnel into district health system, and operationalizing community health centres into functional hospitals meeting Indian Health Standards in each Block of the Country. 9. It is in the aforesaid background that the National Rural Health Mission/Health and Family Welfare Officer, District Poonch published the first advertisement on 17.08.2009 inviting applications inter alia for the post of Medical Officer, Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy with a stipulation that the requisite qualification is degree in concerned subject alongwith one year experience of work in public/private sector after receiving degree. The advertisement specifically postulated that the post ought to be filled in the following guidelines/terms and conditions which have been given below and the same is reproduced hereunder:- "Following posts of various categories lying vacant under National Rural Health Mission are to be filled on contractual basis by the District Health Society, Poonch as per the following guidelines/terms and conditions. S.NO. Position No. of Posts Remuneration per month Requisite qualification Requisite experience 1. Medical 3 The rate of honorarium shall be communicated as and when decided by State Health Society MBBS from any Institution recognized by MCI Preference would be given to those who have worked in Gynae/Paed or both for 1 year in Public or Private Sector 2. 3. Medical Officer Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy The rate of honorarium shall be communicated as and when decided by State Health Society Degree in concerned subject i.e. BAMS/BUMS/Homeopathy/BHMS One year experience of work in Public/Private sector after receiving degree 10. In the concluding part of the advertisement, it was stated that the criteria of selection of the candidates for the post of doctor, Indian System of Medicines is Technical Qualification 80% and Viva-Voce 20%. 11. In the concluding part of the advertisement, it was stated that the criteria of selection of the candidates for the post of doctor, Indian System of Medicines is Technical Qualification 80% and Viva-Voce 20%. 11. The respondents found that the experience certificate generated from the private health institutions which are not recognized by the Government and District Health Society, Poonch have been produced by a large number of candidates who have applied for the post of Medical Officer, Indian System of Medicines. Therefore, it was felt necessary to issue another advertisement stipulating that one year experience should have been gained from government/government recognized institutions. The advertisement notice no. 6 of 2009 dated 02.12.2009 appeared in the Kashmir Times, Jammu which reads thus:- "1. Whereas three posts of I.S.M Doctors, eight posts of MBBS doctors and one post of District Accounts Manager were advertised vide, advertisement Notice no. 3 of 2009 dated 17.08.2009 (wrongly inserted as 17.09.2009) under National Rural Health Mission; 2. Whereas, among others, 84 application forms for the post of ISM doctors have been received, containing 61 application forms from the candidates hailing from districts other than Poonch and twenty four applications from the local candidates, residing in District Poonch; 3. Whereas the candidates have approached this office alleging anomaly contained in the aforesaid notification, with regard to "requisite experience" appearing at column 5th in the notice, in case of Medical Officers, MBBS and Medical Officers ISM. Whereas, some candidates have also approached this office with the request to debar the candidates having no experience of one year, as per the notification, irrespective of their merit; 4. Whereas, there has been no provision of engaging candidates from other districts, so far guidelines under NRHM are very clear to engage only local candidates against vacant positions and it was notified vide above mentioned notice dated-17/08/2009 that residence at the place of posting, being mandatory, only local candidates shall be preferred; 5. Whereas, this office has received some clarifications vide letter no. SHS/RCH/7931 dated 26.10.2009, from Project Director Family Welfare and RCH, J&K Jammu on 30.10.2009. The communication has stressed upon local criteria for selection of candidates against vacant positions, under NRHM and District Health societies have been advised to take corrective measures; 6. Whereas, interview of the candidates, in reference to advertisement notice no. SHS/RCH/7931 dated 26.10.2009, from Project Director Family Welfare and RCH, J&K Jammu on 30.10.2009. The communication has stressed upon local criteria for selection of candidates against vacant positions, under NRHM and District Health societies have been advised to take corrective measures; 6. Whereas, interview of the candidates, in reference to advertisement notice no. 3 of 2009 dated 17.08.2009 conducted on 30.10.2009 was put on hold; 7. Whereas, majority of the candidates who have applied for posts of Doctors (ISM) have submitted experience certificate from local private health Institutions, not recognized by the Government and District Health Society Poonch cannot consider the same being invalid; 8. Therefore, in order to remove existing anomaly/discrimination with regard to experience of the contacting candidates against the posts of SAMS/BUMS/BHMS/MBBS and to determine local criteria for selection of candidates for various vacant positions, in pursuance of letter no. SHS/RCH/7931, dated 26.10.2009, issued by Project Director, Family Welfare and RCH, J&K State Jammu and in supersession of advertisement Notice no. 3 of 2009 endorsed vide no. CMO/P/NRHM/09-10/103-112 dated 17.08.2009 (wrongly mentioned as dated 17.09.2009) applications for the posts shown at Annexure A to this notification are invited from the candidates, under National Rural Health Mission to strengthen health care, delivery system and to ensure functioning of health care institutions for 7 days (24 hours) in the district. Interested candidates may apply for the contractual appointments on the prescribed format (available at the office of Chief Medical Officer Poonch) addressed to Chief Medical Officer, Poonch, which must reach by or before 9th of November, 2009. The candidates, who have already applied for the posts, referred at Annexure 'A' above and against the post of Programme Manger, vide notification, bearing advertisement notice no. 5 of 2009 dated 20.11.2009 shall appear before the competent committee on 14.12.2009. The candidates who have applied for the posts of FMPHW (Female Multipurpose Health Workers) vide advertisement Notice no. 2 of 2009 dated 27.06.2009 could not appear for interview on 27.11.2009, shall appear now on 14.12.2009. Terms and conditions:- 1. Contract will be offered by the District Health Society, Poonch and the candidates shall have to sign a contract with the District Health Society, Poonch as per the guideline of NRHM. 2. Contractual appointee shall not be entitled to any preferential claim for regular appointment under normal process of selection. 3. Terms and conditions:- 1. Contract will be offered by the District Health Society, Poonch and the candidates shall have to sign a contract with the District Health Society, Poonch as per the guideline of NRHM. 2. Contractual appointee shall not be entitled to any preferential claim for regular appointment under normal process of selection. 3. Residence of the candidate at the place of posting is mandatory therefore meritorious candidate hailing from the same Block Tehsil where FRU/PHC exists shall be given first priority so as to ensure continuous presence of the doctors/staff for twenty four hours, seven days. "Annexure 'A' to Advertisement Notice No. 6 of 2009 dated 02.12.2009 S.No. Name of Post No. of Post Location of Posting/Tehsil Prescribed Essential Qualification Preferential Medical Officer/Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy Three only Tehsil Mendhar=1 Tehsil Surankote = 1 Tehsil Haveli/Mandi=1 Degree in concerned Parthy i.e. BUMS/BAMS/BHMS from a recognized university/Medical College Candidated having one year experience from government/government recognized institutions, found otherwise meritorious, as per local criteria prescribed by the district Health Society Poonch shall be preferred. 12. The advertisement is self speaking in as much as it has abandoned the earlier advertisement and invited applications afresh with a stipulation that those who applied earlier need not apply. There are various reasons for superseding the earlier advertisement disclosed in the advertisement dated 07.12.2009. Some candidates approached the Chairman, District Health Society, Poonch with the demand to declare those candidates ineligible who have no experience or who lacked one year experience. It also clarified that only those candidates who are local resident were to be preferred. Some corrective measures were required to be taken in view of the clarification issued by Project Director Family Welfare and RCH J&K Jammu on 30.10.2009 which insisted upon local criteria. The most of the candidates who applied had submitted experience certificates from local private health institutions which are not recognized by the Government and District Health Society, Poonch. Such certificates were not Valid. There is no challenge to all these reasons which weighed with the respondents for issuing new advertisement inviting fresh applications. 13. The most of the candidates who applied had submitted experience certificates from local private health institutions which are not recognized by the Government and District Health Society, Poonch. Such certificates were not Valid. There is no challenge to all these reasons which weighed with the respondents for issuing new advertisement inviting fresh applications. 13. The advertisement further provided that the number of posts was confined to three and the location of posting was also specified, namely, Tehsil Mendhar, Tehsil Surankote, Tehsil Haveli, Tehsil Mandi for each of the post and in respect of experience preference was to be given to those candidates who had acquired one year experience from government/government recognized institutions who were, otherwise, found meritorious as per the local criteria prescribed by the District Health Society, Poonch. 14. The appellant-writ petitioner has participated in the selection process. He was eligible to appear in the selection process for the reason that he had acquired experience from a recognized institution. The objection raised by the appellant-writ petitioner is that the criteria has been changed mid-stream when the selection process has already started. Having participated in the selection process and on account of being unsuccessful a plea in the nature of estoppel would come in play imposing a bar on him to challenge the selection made by the selection committee. For the aforesaid proposition, reliance has been rightly placed by the learned Single Judge on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Om Parkash Shukla and KH Siraj's case (supra). Likewise, reliance has rightly been placed by Mr. Raina on the view taken by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Madan La’'s case (supra). What is more striking in the present litigation is that the appellant-writ petitioner has not been rendered ineligible by issuance of the second advertisement as his application has not been rejected on the ground that he had acquired experience from a private medical institution which is not recognized by the Government. On that score also, the plea in the nature of estoppel would defeat any argument emanating from the appellant-writ petitioner. 15. The other argument that respondent no. 5 has not been registered with the Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicines Board would also fail to cut any ice because the advertisement does not require Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy graduates to be registered with the Board. 15. The other argument that respondent no. 5 has not been registered with the Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicines Board would also fail to cut any ice because the advertisement does not require Ayurvedic/Unani/Homeopathy graduates to be registered with the Board. In any case, during the course of argument, it has been pointed out that respondent no. 5-Vaseem Irm has been issued a certificate on 09.11.2009 and a provisional certificate was issued on 01.03.2010. A photostat copy of both the certificates are taken on record as mark 'X' and 'Y'. Therefore, there is no substance left in that argument also. The last argument that the selected candidates have continued beyond one year would not require any serious consideration. There is no period fixed in the second advertisement dated 07.12.2009 which refers to the guidelines of NRHM. It stipulates for signing of a contract for initial period of one year which is extendable depending on the performance. Therefore, this argument is also devoid of any merit and the same is liable to be rejected. 16. In view of the above, the appeal does not merit admission and the same is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge is upheld.