ORDER : 1. Contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that the relied judgment of this Court in Trilok Ram vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.667/2015 decided with analogous matters on 18.8.2017 was distinguishable and cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. 2. This Court interpreted proviso to Rule 266(3) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, which inter-alia stipulated that “the person who has appeared in the B.Ed./B.S.T.C. examination shall be eligible to apply for the post of primary and upper primary school teacher, but he shall have to submit proof of having acquired the said educational qualification to the District Establishment Committee before the declaration of the result of the said examination.” The examination referred to in the aforesaid proviso denotes the competitive examination for recruitment to the post of Primary and Upper Primary Teacher. However, in the present case, the dispute pertains to the recruitment on the post of Lecturer (English), which is governed under the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970. 3. Learned counsel has referred to the Rajasthan Various Service (Amendment) Rules, 1999, whereby an omnibus amendment was made in each of the Service Rules as mentioned in column no.2 of the Scheduled appended to the aforesaid Rules. The proviso inserted thereby stipulated that the person who has appeared or is appearing in the final year examination of the course which is the requisite educational qualification for the post as mentioned in the rules or scheme for direct recruitment, shall be eligible to apply for the post but he/she shall have to submit proof of having acquired the requisite educational qualification to the appropriate selection agency before appearing in the written examination, where selection is made only through written examination. Learned counsel submitted that the last date of receipt of application form as per the advertisement dated 16.10.2015 (Annexure-1 to writ petition) was 23.11.2015 and the date of competitive examination for recruitment was 17th and 21st July, 2016. Appellant even though had appeared in the M.A. Final Examination of the English subject before holding of aforesaid competitive examination, but the result thereof had not been declared prior to the aforesaid date and was belatedly declared on 13.9.2016. Appellant even though had appeared in the M.A. Final Examination of the English subject before holding of aforesaid competitive examination, but the result thereof had not been declared prior to the aforesaid date and was belatedly declared on 13.9.2016. Contention of learned counsel for the appellant therefore is that respondent-writ petitioner as per clause (iii) of the proviso aforesaid introduced vide Rajasthan Various Service Rules, 1999 did not acquire the requisite education qualification of eligibility before declaration of result of competitive examination. It is submitted that since the impugned order was passed without even any notice to the appellant and it was an ex-parte order, the appellant did not come to know thereabout and therefore there is delay of 75 days in filing of the appeal. 4. Issue notice of appeal as well as application u/s. 5 of the Limitation Act. Notices be made returnable by eight weeks. 5. In the meantime, the operation and effect of impugned order dated 07.08.2018 shall remain stayed.