ORDER : Navin Sinha, J. 1. This order shall dispose both the appeals arising from a common order dated 08.03.2016 disposing two separate writ petitions. 2. The learned Single Judge held that the order dated 28.10.2015 issuing guidelines for calculation of marks on basis of the minimum secured in the supplementary examination instead of actual marks was not sustainable in absence of any reasonable explanation for the same. It was further held that the rules of the game regarding calculation of marks could not be changed after the selection process had commenced. 3. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the guidelines dated 28.10.2015 were issued by the Additional Director (Administration), Medical & Health Services pursuant to the recommendation of an expert committee constituted consequent to an order of the Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 3766/2015 (Madan Singh and Others v. State of Rajasthan and Others) with regard to the selection process for the post of Nurse Grade II. The Rajasthan Secondary Education Regulations, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations') framed under the Rajasthan Secondary Education Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') provided that the minimum marks secured in the supplementary examination would be considered for passing only and no division would be awarded to such a candidate. The amendment to the Regulations for the 2012 examination stipulated that the minimum marks obtained in the supplementary examination would be added to the other marks and division accorded on that basis. The Respondent having passed the secondary examination in 1997 would therefore be governed by the original Regulations and therefore the authorities committed no error by acting on the recommendation of the expert committee to determine the award of marks to him for his educational qualification of secondary education based on the minimum marks obtained in the supplementary examination. 4. Learned counsel for the Respondent supported the order under appeal urging that it called for no interference. It was contended that the advertisement was published on 26.02.2013. There was no such stipulation in the same or on that date. The guidelines dated 28.10.2015 were subsequent and contrary to the terms of the advertisement. The Appellant State in Rajkumari v. State of Rajasthan and Others, Civil Writ Petition No. 15961/2015 as noticed in paragraph 10 of the order under appeal, had itself taken the stand that the actual marks in the supplementary exam was to be counted. 5. The guidelines dated 28.10.2015 were subsequent and contrary to the terms of the advertisement. The Appellant State in Rajkumari v. State of Rajasthan and Others, Civil Writ Petition No. 15961/2015 as noticed in paragraph 10 of the order under appeal, had itself taken the stand that the actual marks in the supplementary exam was to be counted. 5. We have considered the submissions on behalf of the parties. 6. Section 3 of the Act provides for the incorporation of the Board of Secondary Education for Rajasthan which shall have perpetual succession and a common seal. Section 4 provides for composition of the Board including nominated members and co-opted members. Section 9 provides for the powers and functions of the Board which includes conduct of public examinations and publication of the results of the examinations amongst other things. Section 36 empowers the Board to frame Regulations and Section 38 empowers the Board to make alterations to the same. The Regulations framed by the Board as existing in 1991 provided that the minimum marks obtained in the supplementary examination would be added to the other marks for purposes of declaring pass but without grant of division. The amendment of the Regulations in 2013 with regard to the examination held in 2012 provided that the minimum marks of the supplementary examination would be added to the marks obtained in the main examination and division granted accordingly. 7. The present advertisement was issued on 26.02.2013. The educational qualification prescribed for Nurse Grade II was senior secondary pass or equivalent along with training in general nursing course from a Government recognised institution and registration with the Rajasthan Nursing Council. The latter aspect is not relevant. 8. Madan Singh (supra) was filed alleging wholesome illegalities and irregularities in the selection process. Directions were given to represent. The Department of Health & Medical Services constituted an expert committee which made its recommendations leading to the guidelines dated 28.10.2015 providing that in calculating the marks to be awarded for secondary education qualification, the minimum marks obtained in the supplementary examination would be taken into consideration. 9. Directions were given to represent. The Department of Health & Medical Services constituted an expert committee which made its recommendations leading to the guidelines dated 28.10.2015 providing that in calculating the marks to be awarded for secondary education qualification, the minimum marks obtained in the supplementary examination would be taken into consideration. 9. It is relevant to notice that in the meantime the Regulations themselves had been amended by the Board on 27.04.2013 providing that the actual marks obtained in the supplementary examination would be added to the marks in the main examination for determining the passing of the candidate both for practical and theory papers. 10. The guidelines dated 28.10.2015 do not reflect any consideration of the Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. 11. The only question for our consideration is that if the Regulations have been framed by the Board under the Act and which provides that the actual marks obtained in the supplementary examination will be added to the marks in the main examination, can the Department of Health come out with guidelines or directions contrary to the Regulations by executive instructions. The answer definitely has to be in the negative as there can be no amendment of statutory Regulations by executive instructions. Additionally, the Additional Director of the Health Department has no jurisdiction to override the provisions of the Act and the Regulations. 12. We therefore find no reason to interfere with the order under appeal. 13. Delay of 40 days in filing the appeals is condoned. Both the appeals are dismissed. Appeals dismissed.