JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner, by this writ petition, has challenged the order dated 18th September, 2012 (Annex.11) and has further sought a direction against the Public Service Commission to consider his candidature for appointment to the post of Senior Teacher (Grade-II) (English), as a candidate belonging to OBC Ex-Servicemen. That apart, a mandamus is also sought by the petitioner against the respondents for providing him appointment on the post of Senior Teacher (Grade-II) (English). 2. The aforementioned reliefs are claimed by the petitioner by alleging, in the petition, that he was selected as Soldier (Clerk) in the Indian Army on 27th July, 2010 and on medical grounds he was discharged by the Indian Army w.e.f., 23rd November, 2010. The petitioner has further stated, in the writ petition, that he is possessing the qualifications of B.A., and B.Ed., from Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner. In the writ petition, the petitioner has also stated that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondent-Commission dated 1st July, 2011 (Ann.4) being eligible as Ex-Serviceman OBC category, he has offered his candidature for the post of Senior Teacher (Grade-II) (English). Pursuant to his application, he has appeared in the screening test and he was assigned merit position No.2246. Thereafter, RPSC has also published the cut off marks for Ex-Servicemen as 88.77. Subsequently, the petitioner was asked by the RPSC to produce discharge certificate vide communication dated 6th June, 2012. The said document was produced by the petitioner, but without examining the discharge certificate, the RPSC has rejected his candidature. Being aggrieved from that, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation on 17.09.2012 and in response to which the RPSC, vide its communication dated 18th September, 2012, informed him that his candidature cannot be considered as an Ex-Serviceman. 3. No formal reply has been filed by the respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that, in the discharge certificate (Annex.1), it is clearly mentioned that "combined certificate of discharge and recommendation for civil employment" and therefore, the Commission has erred in rejecting his candidature as Ex-serviceman. Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that by rejecting his candidature as Ex3 serviceman arbitrarily, the respondent-RPSC has violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 5. Per contra, Mr. Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that by rejecting his candidature as Ex3 serviceman arbitrarily, the respondent-RPSC has violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 5. Per contra, Mr. Khet Singh appearing on behalf of the RPSC has submitted that the order of rejection of the candidature of the petitioner as Ex-serviceman is a just order, because as per definition given in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-Servicemen) Rules, 1988 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as `the Rules of 1988), the petitioner does not fall within the ambit of Ex-Servicemen. The learned counsel Mr. Khet Singh has also invited my attention to Rule 3(a) of the Rules of 1988. The complete text of Rule 3(a) of the Rules of 1988 is reproduced as infra:- 3. Definitions. - (a) "An ex-serviceman" means a person who has served in any rank whether as a combatant or non-combatant in the Regular Army, Navy and Air Force of the Indian Union and - (i) who retired from such service after earning his/her pension; or (ii) who has been released from such service on medical grounds attributable to military service or circumstances beyond his control and awarded medical or other disability pension; or (iii) who has been released, otherwise than on his own request, fro such service as a result of reduction in establishment; or (iv) who has been released from such service after completing the specific period of engagements, otherwise than at his own request or by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency and has been given a gratuity; and includes personnel of the Territorial Army of the following categories, namely:- (i) Pension holders for continuous embodies service; (ii) Persons with disability attributable to military service; and (iii) Gallantry award winners; 6. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, the status of the petitioner is not akin to that of an Ex-Servicemen within the four corners of the aforesaid rule and that being so, there is no infirmity much less legal infirmity in rejection of candidature of the petitioner as Ex- Servicemen for recruitment to the post of Senior Teacher (Grade-II) (English). 7. I have considered the rival submissions and examined the matter in the light of definition aforementioned. 8. 7. I have considered the rival submissions and examined the matter in the light of definition aforementioned. 8. On examining the matter, in its entirety, in my considered opinion, the petitioner who has hardly served for four months in the Indian Army and who is not getting any privilege out of this employment cannot be categorized as an ex-serviceman. That apart, the definition of ex-servicemen under the Rules of 1988 is very exhaustive but even in that definition also there is no room of doubt to conclude that the petitioner does not fall within the definition of an incumbent, who can be categorized as an ex-serviceman. That being the situation there is no illegality on the part of RPSC in rejecting his candidature. 9. Resultantly, there is no force in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. 10. Stay petition also stands dismissed. 11. There is no order as to costs.Petition Dismissed. *******