ORDER : Arun Bhansali, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the category of the petitioner as Ex-serviceman and declare him qualified for main examination in the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Service Combined Exam, 2018. 2. The petitioner, who was serving with the Indian Army, was issued discharge order dated 05.08.2017 with his date of superannuation as 31.10.2018 (Annexure-1). Pursuant to the advertisement dated 02.04.2018 issued by RPSC, the petitioner applied online on 18.04.2018. It is claimed that when the petitioner tried to apply as Ex-serviceman, he was required to fill in his PPO number and as the petitioner's date of superannuation was 31.10.2018, the PPO number was not available and, therefore, the petitioner had to indicate 'No' in the application form in the column relating to Ex-serviceman, however, in the additional category he indicated his status as 'Reservist (Army Personnel)'. 3. The respondents issued the admit card to the petitioner (Annexure-7) indicating his status as general and not as Ex-serviceman. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondents seeking change in category vide Annexure-9 on 01.10.2018 claiming that he had sought change of category pursuant to advertisement dated 30.07.2018 (Annexure-8), however, could not deposit fee due to some system glitch, however his prayer was refused on 18.10.2018. 4. On 23.10.2018 the result of preliminary exam was declared, wherein, the cutoff for Ex-serviceman was 38.48%; though the petitioner obtained 53.24% marks, his roll number did not appear in the list of candidates, who had qualified for the main examination. 5. It is submitted that in terms of the Notification dated 17.04.2018 (Annexure-5) issued by the State providing for amendment in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-serviceman) Rules, 1988 ('Rules of 1988') the petitioner was eligible for applying as Ex-serviceman, however, as the online form did not provide for the eventuality in terms of the amended provision, the petitioner approached the respondents for change of category before the result was declared. However, the same was wrongly declined by the respondents. 6. However, the same was wrongly declined by the respondents. 6. Submissions have been made that though the respondents have sought to dispute the fact that petitioner had approached the respondents for change of category, from the material produced as Annexures-20 & 21 alongwith the additional affidavit, it is apparent that the petitioner had indeed approached the respondents for change of category, inasmuch as, the complaint was registered by RPSC and rejection was communicated to the petitioner on 18.10.2018 through SMS and, as such, it cannot be said that the petitioner did not approach the respondents before the declaration of the result and, as such, the action of the respondents deserves to be set aside and petitioner be permitted to appear in the main exams as Ex-serviceman. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the RPSC contested the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. It was submitted that pursuant to the amendment dated 17.04.2018 in the Rules of 1988, the respondents had issued a corrigendum dated 04.05.2018 (Annexure-R/1) taking into consideration the Amendment dated 17.04.2018 and had provided a window for those who had already applied to make online corrections and as the petitioner did not make requisite corrections, he is not entitled for any relief. 8. Reliance has been placed on the order passed by this court in Todar Mal v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.C.W.P. No. 17031/2018, decided on 18.12.2018. 9. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 10. It is not in dispute that on 18.04.2018 when petitioner had applied online (Annexure-4) the respondent-RPSC had not provided for a consideration where a candidate, who was eligible pursuant to the Amendment dated 17.04.2018 could apply in absence of a PPO and, as such, the petitioner though an Ex-serviceman in terms of Amendment dated 17.04.2018 could only indicate his status as Reservist (Army Personnel). 11. Subsequent thereto, the respondents issued corrigendum dated 04.05.2018 (Annexure-R/1) providing for the effect of Amendment dated 17.04.2018 wherein even those candidates who did not have requisite PPO also could apply as Ex-serviceman. However, as the petitioner had already applied on 18.04.2018 and was apparently unaware of the corrigendum, could not take steps in this regard. 12. 11. Subsequent thereto, the respondents issued corrigendum dated 04.05.2018 (Annexure-R/1) providing for the effect of Amendment dated 17.04.2018 wherein even those candidates who did not have requisite PPO also could apply as Ex-serviceman. However, as the petitioner had already applied on 18.04.2018 and was apparently unaware of the corrigendum, could not take steps in this regard. 12. After the petitioner appeared in the preliminary examination and became aware of the status of his application and the fact that his plea for change in category had not been accepted by the respondents, on 01.10.2018 the petitioner approached the respondents vide Annexure-9 for change of category before declaration of the result. However, the said prayer seeking change in the category was rejected and communication in this regard was sent to the petitioner by SMS dated 18.10.2018 (Annexure-21) indicating that his correction in online form was not considered. 13. From the above facts it is apparent that the petitioner was entitled to apply as Ex-serviceman and on account of online form which did not accept his status as Ex-serviceman in absence of PPO, he could not apply as Ex-serviceman and had approached the respondent-RPSC for change in the category even before the result was declared, which prayer was declined on 18.10.2018 and in the result declared on 23.10.2018 though the petitioner obtained higher marks than the cut off meant for Ex-serviceman, the denial of change of category to the petitioner and deprive him from appearing in the main examination does not appear to be justified. 14. The plea raised by the RPSC regarding providing for window vide corrigendum dated 04.05.2018 (Annexure-R/1) for corrections in the online application form by itself cannot deprive the petitioner of getting his category corrected at least before declaration of the result, when it is actually established that petitioner had indeed approached the respondents before the result was declared by the respondents. 15. 15. So far as the judgment in the case of Todar Mal (supra) relied on by learned counsel for the respondent-RPSC is considered, in the said case the candidate had applied after the corrigendum dated 04.05.2018 was issued and by then the RPSC had provided for provision in online forms, wherein, candidates even without PPO could have applied and in the present case as the petitioner had applied well before issuance of the corrigendum dated 04.05.2018 (Annexure-R/1) and in the online application form there was no provision for applying as Ex-serviceman, the judgment has no application. 16. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The respondent-RPSC is directed to change the category of petitioner to Ex-serviceman and permit him to appear in main examination as admittedly the petitioner has obtained higher marks than the cut off declared for the category of Ex-serviceman by result dated 23.10.2018.