JUDGMENT : Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. 1. An application has been moved for directing the respondents to produce the final result of the petitioner. 2. Although, learned counsel appearing for the RPSC has brought the result of the petitioner, he submits that there is no occasion to declare the result of the petitioner as the interim order passed by the Court does not create any right in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the law laid down by this Court in the case of Roop Singh and Ors. vs. RPSC: SBCWP No. 11294/2020, decided on 21.11.2020. 3. Learned counsel further submits that the RPSC had conducted RAS/RTS Direct Recruitment Examination-2016 vide advertisement dated 28.04.2016, wherein applications were invited. The petitioner applied against the said advertisement under the 'DC' 'ME' Category and his result was declared in the BC Category on 01.12.2016. No application was moved at that relevant time to change his category, although opportunity was provided to all the candidates. 4. It is further stated that the entire exercise was completed and the recommendations were made on 17.01.2018. Learned counsel has informed that in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court in State of Rajasthan vs. Vinod Kumar Sharma & Ors.: DBSAW No. 1266/2018, decided on 09.10.2018, a separate special main examination was conducted for 9 posts of DC Category of Excise Department on 17.12.2018 and 18.12.2018. At that stage, the petitioner has moved an application seeking conversion of his category from BC to DC category. 5. In the circumstances, his application for conversion cannot be accepted as he had not originally moved any application for correction during the pendency of the original exam. Merely because the High Court has directed for conducting a separate special examination for the candidates, who had applied under the DC category, additionally, the petitioner could not have been added. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it was an error committed initially while moving an application and all the other candidates, who mentioned the category of OBC along with DC etc., have been allowed to participate in the examination and he, therefore, also should be allowed to be treated as qualified for appearing in the special examination of DC Category of Excise Department. 7. I have considered the submissions. 8. In Roop Singh and Ors. 7. I have considered the submissions. 8. In Roop Singh and Ors. vs. RPSC: SBCWP No. 11294/2020, decided on 21.11.2020, this Court has considered the submissions relating to change of category after having participated in the examination and the contention was not accepted and this Court has passed the following order: "The petitioner cleared the preliminary examination as a candidate under the RG Category for the main examination when the admit card was issued, he was shown as an RG Category candidate and it appears that the petitioner cleared the main written examination and thereafter, he has become wise and moved an application on 1.9.2020 praying that he should be treated in NGE Category. Thus, he has remained silent at that time when he appeared in the main written examination. In Kavita Choudhary (supra), the case related to appointment of LDC and different judgeships where the process of selection is only single tier. Similarly, in the case of Kuldeep Singh Shekhawat (supra), the candidates had approached the Court even before the preliminary examination was conducted. Taking into consideration aforesaid aspect, the Court allowed the candidates to get their category changed as no third party rights have been created at that stage. However, in the present case, this Court notices that marks obtained in the main examination are also counted along with the marks obtained in the interview for assessment of the merit. Thus, a candidate, who has appeared in NGE Category for main examination would expect his marks obtained in main examination to be counted with the interview marks for preparation of his merit under the NGE Quota. The petitioner, on the other hand, had appeared as a RG Category candidate in the main examination and if he is now allowed to get his category changed to NGE Quota, it would definitely affect third party rights of the candidates who have originally appeared in the written examination as NGE Category candidates. In view thereof, the contention of the petitioner that he should be allowed to get his category changed is not liable to be accepted as apparently third party rights would be created. In view thereof, the writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed." 9. In the present case too, third party rights have been created in favour of those candidates, who applied originally for DC category. In view thereof, the writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed." 9. In the present case too, third party rights have been created in favour of those candidates, who applied originally for DC category. Once, the petitioner found that he has failed as BC category candidate, he cannot shift his stand and claim that he should now be treated as DC category candidate. 10. In the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Surender Singh And Others, (2019) 8 SCC 67 , this principle has been examined by the Supreme Court and it has been held that a candidate appearing in the examination cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate. 11. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted and the writ petition is found to be devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. 12. The interim order passed by the Court does not create any right in favour of the petitioner. The result of the petitioner, therefore, does not require to be opened. No costs. All pending applications also stand disposed of.