JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. G. Pegu, learned counsel representing respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3. Although service of notice on respondent no. 4 is complete, none has appeared on his behalf. 2. The petitioner had responded to the Notification dated 09.04.2014 for engagement to the post of Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Post Master at Baruaholla EDBO, issued from the Office of the Superintendent of Post Offices, Department of Posts, Tinsukia Division. The minimum educational qualification for the said post was shown to be HSLC or equivalent examination passed. Being eligible, the petitioner vied for the said post. As regards his educational qualification, petitioner submits that he has passed Pravesika Examination from the Assam Sanskrit Association, which examination is equivalent to HSLC. Petitioner refers to the Annexure-3 document which is a Certificate issued from Balijan Pali Vidyalaya showing that Pravesika is equivalent to HSLC. Reliance is also placed in the Notification dated 16.10.1989, issued from the Office of the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, Guwahati wherein a similar view has been expressed to the effect that Pravesika Examination of the Assam Sanskrit Association is recognised for HSLC. 3. According to the petitioner his name had been sponsored by the Employment Exchange and to that end a letter was issued to him on 12.05.2014 from the Office of the Superintendent of Post Office asking him to submit his application. Thereafter he was asked to be present for verification of the original documents in the Office of the Superintendent of Post Office on 05.06.2014. Meantime, the petitioner was also allowed to work as Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Post Master at Baruaholla for a period of 60 (sixty) days w.e.f. 12.04.2014, primarily as a stop-gap arrangement pending regular appointment to the said post. 4. Petitioner is aggrieved of the communication dated 30.01.2015 issued by the Superintendent of Post Office, Tinsukia Division whereby he was informed that his candidature cannot be considered for recruitment to the advertised post. Ground assigned is that the Pravesika Examination Pass Certificate furnished by the petitioner can only stand acceptance for the purpose of admission to Higher Secondary courses of the Assam Higher Secondary Council and that the same has been highlighted in the letter dated 16.10.1989 issued by the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council (Annexure-4) and the Circular of the Assam Sanskrit Association dated 30.10.1989 (Annexure-2). 5. 5. Petitioner submits that until this date no regular appointment has been made to the advertised post. The appointment made to the respondent no. 4 on 05.02.2015 (Annexure-14) is again by way of a stop-gap arrangement, which would be clear from another order passed on the same day under the hand of the Sub-Divisional Inspector of Post Offices, Tinsukia Sub Division, Tinsukia. By the said order, the respondent authorities having expressed that it was not possible to make regular engagement to the advertised post immediately, a decision had been made to make stop-gap arrangement for a period of 84(eighty-four) days w.e.f. 06.02.2015 to 30.04.2015 or till regular appointment is made. 6. Upon institution of the present proceedings, this Court by Order dated 09.03.2015, while issuing Notice, passed an interim order to the effect that the provisional appointment of respondent no. 4 as GDS Branch Post Master shall not be made permanent. 7. Mr. G. Pegu, on the other hand submits that the stand of the respondent authorities have been highlighted in the affidavit-in-opposition so filed. Mr. Pegu refers to paragraph 5 of the said affidavit to say that although initially the petitioner’s candidature was rejected on the ground that Pravesika Exam conducted by the Assam Sanskrit Association is not equivalent to HSLC, but later on and after proper verification it had also been found that there is a discrepancy in the date of birth of the petitioner between the HSLC Admit Card and the Pravesika Examination Admit Card. Whereas the date of birth in the HSLC Admit Card is recorded is 07.10.1978, in the Pravesika Examination Admit Card it is recorded as 07.10.1986. Mr. Pegu submits that the petitioner’s candidature was rejected by questioning his integrity. On a pointed query of this Court as to whether any order had been passed by the State respondents with regard to the second ground of rejection, Mr. Pegu submits that no such order is on record, save and except, the order holding that Pravesika Exam is not equivalent to HSLC. 8. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. It is well settled that a public order, publicly made cannot be construed in the light of explanations subsequently given. The statement at paragraph 5 of the affidavit-in-opposition seeks to bring in a new dimension, hitherto not disclosed or recorded in any order passed by the State respondents. 8. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. It is well settled that a public order, publicly made cannot be construed in the light of explanations subsequently given. The statement at paragraph 5 of the affidavit-in-opposition seeks to bring in a new dimension, hitherto not disclosed or recorded in any order passed by the State respondents. As regards the issue as to whether Pravesika Examination under the Assam Sanskrit Association is equivalent to HSLC Examination, the Notification dated 16.10.1989 issued from the Office of the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, Guwahati makes it amply clear that the said examination is also recognised for HSLC. The Circular issued by the Assam Sanskrit Association dated 13.10.1989 also leaves no room for doubt that Pravesika Examination of the Assam Sanskrit Association is recognised by the Board of Secondary Education, Assam as equivalent to High School Leaving Certificate Examination. Turning to the communication dated 30.01.2015 where the State respondents had held that the Certificate of Pravesika Examination can only stand for acceptance for the purpose of admission in Higher Secondary Courses of Assam Higher Secondary Council, the same do not find support either from the Notification dated 16.10.1989 and/or the Circular dated 30.10.1989. The fact that the Notification inviting engagement to the advertised post had laid down the minimum educational qualification as HSLC or equivalent examination passed, the candidature of the petitioner could not have been rejected having regard to the aforesaid Notification dated 16.10.1989 and the Circular dated 30.10.1989. What remains to be decided is as to whether it is open for the State respondents to harp/rely upon an additional ground taken in the affidavit-in-opposition for rejecting the candidature of the petitioner. The ground so taken to the effect that there is discrepancy in the date of birth of the petitioner between the HSLC Admit Card and that of the Pravesika Examination Admit Card, the same cannot find to reason. The explanations subsequently provided in the affidavit-in-opposition do not find mention in any orders/letters issued by the State respondents. The same cannot be a ground for rejecting the candidature of the petitioner. 9. As regards who among the petitioner or the respondent no. 4 is entitled to get the benefit of appointment, the same would stand on their respective merits. The explanations subsequently provided in the affidavit-in-opposition do not find mention in any orders/letters issued by the State respondents. The same cannot be a ground for rejecting the candidature of the petitioner. 9. As regards who among the petitioner or the respondent no. 4 is entitled to get the benefit of appointment, the same would stand on their respective merits. To this end, the State respondents are to take a decision without being influenced in any manner that the petitioner is not qualified to vie for the advertised post. As no regular appointments have yet been made, it would now be incumbent upon the State respondents to make selection and complete the process by bringing it to its logical conclusion. Let the exercise for making final selection and appointment pursuant to the Advertisement dated 09.04.2014 be completed within a period of 3(three) months from today. In view of the above, this writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs.