JUDGMENT : HEMANT GUPTA, CJ. Challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the learned Single Bench on 19-6-2017 in W.P. No. 21828/2015, Hirendra Kumar Sahu v. State of M.P. whereby the select list for appointment to the post of Ayurved Medical Officer was set aside for the reason that the eligibility conditions in the advertisement have subsequently been changed, therefore, the select list prepared on the basis of changed criteria cannot be sustained as the rules of game cannot be changed after game has begun. 2. The brief facts leading to the present appeal are that an advertisement (Annexure P-2) was published by M.P. Public Service Commission (for short “the Commission”) for filling up of 722 posts of Ayurved Medical Officer. Last date for submission of on-line application forms was 26-10-2013 whereas the date of written examination was notified as 16-3-2014. The relevant conditions of the advertisement, when translated in English, read as under: “(E) Duties : Treatment, health care and other assigned duties, Name of the Post: Ayurved Medical Officer Eligibility : Essential Educational: Qualification (a) xxxxxx (b) xxxxxx (c) The applicant, who entered in the last year examination, can also apply but he should submit the minimum qualification certificate including the internship certificate at the time of interview. Note: (1) A candidate has to produce, before appearing in the interview, attestation form, other essential documents along with the documents in support of essential educational degree/qualification (including internship certificate) and proof of registration with the Ayurved/Unani Council established by law. In absence of such documents, the candidate will not be called for the interview. (2) It is clarified in relation to Clause (C) above that only those candidates will be considered to be eligible, who have submitted on-line application before the last date and have appeared in the last examination before the said date. (I) The applicant must possess the aforesaid qualification till the last date for submitting online application. After the last date of submission of the online application, the candidates acquiring the aforesaid qualification shall not be eligible to be considered for the advertised posts.” 3. The learned Single Bench held that the candidates, who have qualified the final examination before the advertisement, are not eligible to be called for interview, as such was not the condition in the advertisement. The learned Single Bench held that the candidates, who have qualified the final examination before the advertisement, are not eligible to be called for interview, as such was not the condition in the advertisement. Therefore, select list prepared by treating such candidates as eligible for appointment, was set aside. The relevant findings of the learned Single Bench reads as under:— “Thus, it is trite law that the rules of a game cannot be changed after it has begun. In the considered opinion of this Court, by introducing a new date for filing the documents, the respondent No. 2 has certainly extended the scope of advertisement which has resulted in injustice to many prospective candidates. It is rather perplexing to note as to why the cut-off date has been changed from 26-10-2013 to 29-6-2015 because once if it was already advertised that the applications with all the documents and details shall be accepted till 26-10-2013 only, then why any person who is not eligible shall even apply for the same. The action of the respondent No. 2 in extending the date of submitting the documents will surely allow those persons to be appointed who were not even eligible as on 26-10-2013 for the appointment on the said post. This arbitrary change of date has deprived many prospective candidates from applying for the said post in the year 2013 itself and cannot be allowed to sustain. It is beyond comprehension as to why a person who is otherwise ineligible on the date of initial advertisement shall submit his form for the post. It is pertinent to mention here that this Court on 19-2-2016 had observed that any appointment made to the post in question shall be subject to the result of the writ petition.” 4. The appointment of Ayurved Medical Officer is governed by Madhya Pradesh Ayush Department (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2013 (for short “the Rules”) published in the State Government Gazette on 19-8-2013 framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The Rules itself contemplates that in order to be selected or to appear in the examination, the candidate must satisfy the conditions of age as mentioned in Rule 8 and educational qualification as mentioned in Clause 8(ii) of the Rules. The qualification, as prescribed, is shown in Schedule III. The Rules itself contemplates that in order to be selected or to appear in the examination, the candidate must satisfy the conditions of age as mentioned in Rule 8 and educational qualification as mentioned in Clause 8(ii) of the Rules. The qualification, as prescribed, is shown in Schedule III. The relevant clause, reads as under:— “(ii) Educational Qualification:— He must possess the educational qualification prescribed for the service as shown in the Schedule III. Provided that:— (a) in exceptional cases the commission may on the recommendation of the Government, treat candidate as qualified who though not possessing any of the qualification prescribed in this clause has passed examinations conducted by other institutions by such a standard due to which the opinion of the commission considers the candidate as eligible for selection, xxxxxxxxx Schedule III (See Rule-8) S.N. Name of the post Name of the service Minimum age limit Maximum age limit Educational qualification and experience Remark 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 6 Asst. Director Ayurved/Ayurvedic Medical Officer/(RMO.) Ayurved/Female Ayurveda Medical Officer/AYUSH Doctor Ayurved Govt., of M.P. AYUSH Department Class-H Service 22 40 (a)…Graduate degree in Ayurved recognised by C.C.I.M. from an university established by law. (b)…Registered in MP State Ayurved board established by law. (c)…The applicant who entered in last year of examination can put his/her application but he/she should submit the minimum qualification certificates including internship certificate must at the time of interview XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 5. The argument of the learned senior counsel for the appellant is that the finding of the learned Single Judge that Rules of games have been changed after the applications were invited is not tenable as the statutory Rule itself makes a candidate appearing in the final examination, eligible for appointment. The only condition is that he must have a registration from the Ayurved Council established by law before the date of interview. The date of interview were fixed from 21st September, 2015 to 24th November, 2015 vide Annexure P-8 dated 28.5.2015. Thereafter, vide circular dated 7-9-2015, the necessary documents were required to be uploaded on the website of the Commission. A perusal of the interview letter issued to the writ petitioner shows that 29-6-2015 was a date before which a candidate was required to be registered with a legally established Ayurved or Unani Council. Thereafter, vide circular dated 7-9-2015, the necessary documents were required to be uploaded on the website of the Commission. A perusal of the interview letter issued to the writ petitioner shows that 29-6-2015 was a date before which a candidate was required to be registered with a legally established Ayurved or Unani Council. On the basis of the said documents it is argued that there was a class of candidates who qualified the final examination before the advertisement but have not obtained registration from the Ayurved or Unani Council established by law before the last date of submission of the application. It is, thus, contended that if the candidates, who are students of the final year examination, are eligible to apply then the candidates, who have qualified the written examination could not be disqualified from being eligible for appointment to the post of Ayurved Medical Officer. Since there was ambiguity in the advertisement, a decision was taken by the Commission to treat all those candidates, who have qualified the eligibility examination before the date of advertisement but have not obtained registration certificate before the last date of interview are also eligible for consideration for the post of Ayurved Medical Officer. It was an ambiguity which was sought to be removed, rather than the change of rules of the game after the selection process was set in motion. It is contended that as per the conditions contained in the advertisement such candidates were also eligible to apply as the condition was that he should submit the minimum qualification certificate including the internship certificate at the time of interview. 6. Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned senior counsel raised an argument that date of eligibility has been changed when the interview dates of the candidates were fixed from 21st September, 2015 to 24th November, 2015. He also relies upon an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court reported as 2013 (3) M.P.L.J. 391 , Shailesh Kumar Patel v. State of M.P.. 7. We find merit in the argument raised by the learned senior counsel for the appellant. Generally speaking; in absence of the Rules, the eligibility of candidate has to be seen in terms of the notice published inviting applications which could be the date of eligibility as specified in the advertisement and if no date of eligibility is specified, the date of submission of the application. 8. Generally speaking; in absence of the Rules, the eligibility of candidate has to be seen in terms of the notice published inviting applications which could be the date of eligibility as specified in the advertisement and if no date of eligibility is specified, the date of submission of the application. 8. The advertisement specified two categories of candidates, who were unequivocally eligible i.e. (1) candidates, who have obtained eligibility qualification before the last date of submission of on-line application forms and also registered with the concerned Ayurved or Unani Council and (2) the students, who are appearing in the final year examination but such candidates were required to produce the registration from the concerned Ayurved or Unani Council before the date of interview. 9. However, there was yet another category of candidates; such as the candidates who have passed the qualifying test before the last date of submission of application forms but have not got the registration from the Ayurved or Unani Council. The statutory Rules itself contemplate that the candidates, who are appearing in the final year examination of the required educational qualification are also eligible to apply. The condition is that: they must obtain registration from the concerned Ayurved or Unani Council before the date of interview. Therefore, the candidates who are students on the last date of submission of the application forms were eligible to apply for consideration for appointment. Such class of candidates would, in fact, include the candidates who have qualified the written examination. The obtaining of qualification of passing the written examination does not make a candidate to practise medicine. The registration with statutory body is must. Thereafter, all those candidates who have not been registered with the statutory Authority were eligible to apply for the post even in terms of the Rules and the advertisement published. The Commission has taken a decision to allow such candidates to be eligible for consideration for appointment to clarify the confusion. Such candidates cannot be put to disadvantage or excluded from consideration when even a student, who is yet to appear in the last final year examination, is made eligible. It is such category of candidates, who have been considered for appointment to the post of Ayurved Medical Officer. 10. Such candidates cannot be put to disadvantage or excluded from consideration when even a student, who is yet to appear in the last final year examination, is made eligible. It is such category of candidates, who have been considered for appointment to the post of Ayurved Medical Officer. 10. The decision to make such candidates eligible does not contradict either the statutory Rules or the advertisement, but, supplements the already published conditions of eligibility, which makes even a candidate, who was yet to appear in the final year examination, as eligible to be considered for appointment. Therefore, the candidate, who has qualified the written examination before the date of advertisement, could not be excluded from consideration. We find the decision of the Commission to make such candidates eligible for consideration for appointment to the post of Ayurved Medical Officer is neither arbitrary, irrational or in contravention of the statutory Rules or the advertisement, therefore, the learned Single Bench has committed illegality in setting side the select list for the reason that such category of candidates were not eligible to be considered for appointment. 11. We do not find any merit in the argument that the cut off date of receipt of applications has been changed. The advertisement (Annexure P-2) gives the date of submission of on-line application forms and the date of examination. No date of interview was fixed in the advertisement. The result of the written-examination was declared on 28-5-2015 (Annexure P-7). A perusal thereof shows that 4384 candidates appeared for the written-examination out of 6583 online applications received. 1979 candidates were found eligible for interview. Such communication is to the effect that the candidates have to furnish requisite documents on or before 29-6-2015. It is thereafter, the date of interview was circulated as 7-9-2015. There is no change in the date of interview. The declaration of the result itself required the candidate to upload the requisite forms on-line, therefore, it cannot be said that the dates of interview were altered so as to make some candidates eligible, as was the argument raised. 12. The judgment referred to by Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned senior counsel is again not relevant and binding. The issue under consideration in the said case was appointment of Veterinary Assistant Surgeon in terms of M.P. Veterinary Services (Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 1966. The post was advertised in the year 2012. 12. The judgment referred to by Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned senior counsel is again not relevant and binding. The issue under consideration in the said case was appointment of Veterinary Assistant Surgeon in terms of M.P. Veterinary Services (Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 1966. The post was advertised in the year 2012. Such statutory Rules do not have any condition, which makes a student also eligible to apply for the post of Ayurved Medical Officer; therefore, such judgment is not helpful to the argument raised by learned senior counsel for the writ petitioner. 13. Shri Shrivastava, learned senior counsel has raised another argument that the candidates who have obtained registration after the cut off date i.e. 29-6-2015 have also been appointed. Though the learned senior counsel for the appellant was categorical that no such candidate, who has obtained registration under the Ayurved or Unani Council after the cut off date of 29-6-2015 has been appointed, but, we may clarify that if a candidate has obtained registration from the Ayurved or Unani Council established by law after 29-6-2015, such candidate will not be eligible for appointment, as it violates the statutory Rules as well as conditions of advertisement. 14. Thus, we find that the order of the learned Single Bench is not sustainable. The appeal is allowed. The order passed by the learned Single Bench is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is clarified that if any candidate has not obtained registration from Ayurved or Unani Council established by law before 29-6-2015, such candidates cannot be treated as eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Ayurved Medical Officer under the State. With the said observation, the appeal stands disposed of.