JUDGMENT : 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner seeks appointment for the post of Headmaster for having requisite qualification and experience. 2. Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury, learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the applicable rules pertaining to eligibility for the post of Headmaster/Headmistress in 2012 was that the candidate was required to have secured at least 40% marks in Post Graduate Examination and the candidate was required to have at least ten years’ experience as teacher. New Rules were introduced regarding eligibility for the post of Headmaster in March 2015 whereunder the experience of ten years remained unchanged as also the 40% marks remained unchanged. In September 2016, further fresh Rules were introduced whereunder the required teaching experience remained ten years but the requisite marks were enhanced from 40% to 45% in the Post Graduate Examination. Again in March 2017, the Rules were amended and the required marks was enhanced to 50%. 3. Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury contends that the writ petitioner became eligible for the post of Headmaster prior to the amendment of 2017. Had the examination for appointment to the post of Headmaster been held prior to the amendment of 2017, the petitioner would have been entitled to participate in the examination since the requisite marks under the old Rules was 45 per cent. Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury submits that the 2017 amendment is wholly unreasonable and arbitrary and cannot affect the vested right that has accrued in favour of the writ petitioner. He has challenged the vires of the 2017 Amendment. Hence let a copy of the writ petition be served on the office of the learned Advocate General for the State of West Bengal. 4. It is the case of the writ petitioner that he has been allowed to sit in the examination for the post of Headmaster in the present case. Subsequent to the examination process, verification and personality test are carried out by the West Bengal School Service Commission i.e. to take place from December, 2018 onwards. The petitioner is seeking, by way of an interim measure, an order from this Court wherein the West Bengal School Service Commission shall not reject their applications simply on the ground that they had got less than 50% marks in their Post Graduate degree. Mr. The petitioner is seeking, by way of an interim measure, an order from this Court wherein the West Bengal School Service Commission shall not reject their applications simply on the ground that they had got less than 50% marks in their Post Graduate degree. Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury refers to an order passed on August 10, 2017 in the matter of Biman Kr. Das & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. (AST 229 of 2017) wherein a Coordinate Bench had given a similar protection allowing the petitioner therein to apply online for the said examination for appointment of Headmaster/Headmistress. 5. Mr. Ghosh Chowdhdury submits that rejection orders have been notified in the website of the West Bengal School Service Commission and the same should not operate against the writ petitioner and he should be allowed to sit to verification-cum-personality test. 6. Dr. Patra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the West Bengal School Service Commission submits that since earlier order had been passed in writ petition challenging the vires of the above amendment, the West Bengal School Service Commission had allowed the petitioner to sit in the examination. 7. In view of the above, I direct the West Bengal School Service Commission not to reject the application of the writ petitioner simplicitor on the ground of his having obtained less than 50% marks in their Post Graduate course. 8. This order shall not be treated as a precedent and shall not create any equity in favour of the petitioner. 9. The above interim order shall continue till the disposal of this application. 10. It may be noted that the selection of the petitioner shall abide by the result of this writ petition. 11. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within six weeks from date, reply, if any, within two weeks thereafter. Liberty to mention.