JUDGMENT : P.B. Bajanthri, J. Petitioner was candidate for the post of Assistant Professor (Sanskrit) pursuant to the advertisement dated 16.02.2016 (Annexure P2). Prescribed essential qualification reads as under: “5. Essential Qualifications:- (I) ASSISTANT PROFESSORS (all subjects except Fine Arts and Mass Communication) (a) Good academic record with at least 55% of the marks or an equivalent grade of B in the 7 point scale with letter grades O, A, B, C, D, E and F at the Master's Degree level in the relevant subject from an Indian University or an equivalent degree from a Foreign University. (b) Knowledge of Hindi/Sanskrit upto Matric standard. (c) “National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the University Grant Commission, Counsel of Scientific and Industrial Research or similar test accredited by the University Grant Commission like SLET/SET shall remain the minimum eligibility condition for recruitment and appointment as Assistant Professor in Colleges: Provided that the candidates, who are, or have been awarded a Ph.D.Degree in accordance with the university Grant Commission (minimum standards and procedure for award of Ph.D. Degree) regulation, 2009 shall be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent position in colleges. Provided further that NTE/SLET/SET shall not be required for such Master's Programmes in disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET is not conducted.” 2. Petitioner's candidature has been rejected on the score that she do not possess Master Degree level in the relevant subject i.e. Sanskrit. She had the qualification of Master Degree Acharya in Sanskrit. Selecting authority has rejected petitioner's candidature on the ground that petitioner do not possess Master Degree in the relevant subject up to 10.05.2016 as per the advertisement. Since the essential qualification stipulates Master Degree level in the relevant subject from Indian University or equivalent degree from foreign university. The present case is relating to selection and appointment to the post of Assistant Professor Sanskrit and not Assistant Professor Acharya in Sanskrit. Therefore, the selecting authority has rightly rejected petitioner's candidature. No interference is called for in respect of Annexure P-7. 3. Accordingly, CWP stands dismissed. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Supreme Court has held that Acharya is equivalent to Masters degree in Sanskrit. Therefore, the selecting authority has rightly rejected petitioner's candidature. No interference is called for in respect of Annexure P-7. 3. Accordingly, CWP stands dismissed. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Supreme Court has held that Acharya is equivalent to Masters degree in Sanskrit. Unless and until State government modifies the relevant rules of recruitment in respect of Assistant Professor (Sanskrit) prescribing alternative qualification to the Master Degree in Sanskrit read with Master Degree in Acharya (Sanskrit) the petitioner's contention is hereby rejected. Further it was contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the rules of recruitment stipulates Master Degree in the relevant subject and equivalent subject. Perusal of advertisement with reference to essential qualification there is no prescription of equivalent qualification. Therefore, said contention is hereby rejected. Moreover, it is to be noted that if petitioner's candidature is entertained and similarly qualified candidates were not made know about notification and they would be denied opportunity to participate in the process of selection to the post of Assistant Professor Sanskrit with Master qualification of Acharya. Thus this would be in violation of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution.