ORDER : 1. This appeal is before us to examine correctness of judgment dated 29.8.2017 passed by learned Single Bench in S.B Civil Writ Petition No. 10430/2017. By the judgment aforesaid, the learned Single Bench dismissed the petition for writ by arriving at the conclusion that a candidate must possess the certificate pertaining to academic eligibility on the cut off date i.e the date of first document verification. 2. In brief, facts of the case are that the respondents invited applications from eligible candidates for admission to Patwar Training Centre as per the provisions of Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Record) Rules, 1957. The last date for submitting application was 10.12.2015 The petitioner submitted an application to be considered for admission to Patwar Training on 4.12.2015 but at that time he was not possessing requisite qualification i.e of RS-CIT. He obtained the qualification aforesaid in the month of April, 2016 and then only submitted the necessary certificate. His candidature was not accepted by the respondents on the count that he was not fulfilling the requisite qualification. Being aggrieved by the same, he preferred a petition for writ by relying upon the Divisions Bench judgment of this Court in Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer v. Smt. Manju Chhaba [D.B Civil Special Appeal Writ No. 127/2016, decided on 04.4.2016] contending that the eligibility was required to be examined on the date the examination was conducted and not the date on which the applications were to be submitted. 3. The learned Single Bench by the judgment impugned dismissed the writ petition by relying upon a Single Bench judgment of this Court in Sangeeta Sen v. State of Rajasthan (S.B Civil Writ petition No. 5851/2017, decided on 24.8.2017). 4. In appeal, as per learned counsel the Single Bench did not consider the law laid down by Division Bench in the case of Smt. Manju Chhaba, thus, failed to appreciate the submissions advanced on behalf or the appellant-petitioner. 5. We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. 6. So far as the case of Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer v. Smt. Manju Chhaba (supra) concerned, that is based on absolutely different set of Rules. In the case aforesaid, the issue was with regard to recruitment to the post of Senior Teacher through a competitive examination as per provisions of the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971. 6. So far as the case of Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer v. Smt. Manju Chhaba (supra) concerned, that is based on absolutely different set of Rules. In the case aforesaid, the issue was with regard to recruitment to the post of Senior Teacher through a competitive examination as per provisions of the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971. Proviso 3 to Rule 11 of the Rules of 1971 provides that a candidate is required to satisfy the eligibility before appearing in written examination or interview where selection is made through only written examination or only interview, as the case may be. In the case in hand, the process of selection has taken place as per provisions of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Record) Rules, 1957, wherein no provision as exist in the Rules of 1971 is available. In view of it, the law laid down in the case of Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer v. Smt. Manju Chhaba (supra) is having no application in the instant matter. As per the notification issued by the respondents inviting application to be considered for admission to Patwar Training Centre and further for recruitment to the post of Patwari, the last date for submitting applications with complete eligibility was 10.12.2015 and on that day admittedly the appellant was not fulfilling the requisite eligibility, as such, his candidature was rightly rejected by the respondents. 7. The appeal being bereft of merit is dismissed.