JUDGMENT : 1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applied for recruitment to the post of Pre Primary Education Teacher pursuant to the advertisement dated 21.08.2018. He further submits that the petitioner is having higher marks than the candidates having been selected and appointed under the divorcee women category and the petitioner being divorce category candidate is entitled for selection and appointment on the post of Pre Primary Education Teacher. Non appointment of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and unconstitutional. 2. Considered the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the petitioner and also perused the record made available with the petition. 3. The facts borne out from the pleadings are that the respondents issued an advertisement dated 21.8.2018 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for recruitment to the post of Pre Primary Education Teacher. The last date for submitting the application forms is 28.10.2018 and the petitioner has obtained a divorce decree on 18.2.2022. 4. As per sub-clause 4 of clause 16 of the advertisement, the eligibility of a candidate as regards the age, qualification, category etc. shall be determined and considered on the basis of information given in the application form. It has also been specifically mentioned therein that after passing of the date for making corrections in the application form no any change or amendment or correction shall be allowed in the entries of the application form. The petitioner submitted her application form under the OBC Non Creamy Layer Category and has also mentioned her marital status as married. The petitioner on the date of filling up of the application form was not a divorcee woman as divorce decree in regard to dissolution of her marriage was passed on 18.2.2022 by the concerned court. 5. In the case of Mamta Yogi Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11295/2020) decided on 4.12.2022, this Court has observed as under:- “7. This Court in the case of Rekha Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (SB Civil Writ Petition No. 18802/2023) decided on 28.11.2023 has observed as under:- “8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of J&K Public Service Commission vs. Israr Ahmad, reported in (2005) 12 SCC 498 , in para 5 has observed as under:- “5. We have considered the rival contentions advanced by both the parties. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (SB Civil Writ Petition No. 18802/2023) decided on 28.11.2023 has observed as under:- “8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of J&K Public Service Commission vs. Israr Ahmad, reported in (2005) 12 SCC 498 , in para 5 has observed as under:- “5. We have considered the rival contentions advanced by both the parties. The contention of the first Respondent cannot be accepted as he has not applied for the selection as a candidate entitled to get reservation. He did not produce any certificate along with his application. The fact that he has not availed the benefit for the preliminary examination itself is sufficient to treat him as a candidate not entitled to get reservation. He passed the preliminary examination as a general candidate and at the subsequent stage of the main examination he cannot avail the reservation on the ground that he was successful in getting the required certificate only at a later stage. The nature and status of the candidate who was applying for the selection could only be treated alike and once a candidate has chosen to opt for the category to which he is entitled, he cannot later change the status and make fresh claim. The Division Bench was not correct in holding that as a candidate he had also had the qualification and the production of the certificate at a later stage would make him entitled to seek reservation. Therefore, we set aside the judgment of the Division Bench and allow the appeal. No costs.” 9. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ankita Thakur & Ors. Vs. The H.P. Staff Selection Commission & Ors., decided on November 9, 2023 (Civil Appeal No.7602 of 2023 with four other connected matters) apart from other issues framed an issue No.(i) ‘Whether relaxation in the essential eligibility qualifications could be made post the last date fixed for receipt of application from the candidates?’. The Hon’ble Apex Court decided the aforesaid issue No.(i) as under:- “Issue No.(i) 24. It is well settled that eligibility criteria/conditions, unless provided otherwise in the extant rules or the advertisement, must be fulfilled by the candidate by the last date for receipt of applications specified in the advertisement [See: Rakesh Kumar Sharma (supra)]. 25. In Bedanga Talukdar (supra), this Court observed: “29. It is well settled that eligibility criteria/conditions, unless provided otherwise in the extant rules or the advertisement, must be fulfilled by the candidate by the last date for receipt of applications specified in the advertisement [See: Rakesh Kumar Sharma (supra)]. 25. In Bedanga Talukdar (supra), this Court observed: “29. …………… In our opinion, it is too well settled to need any further reiteration that all appointments to public office have to be made in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In other words, there must be no arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour being shown to any candidate. Therefore, the selection process has to be conducted strictly in accordance with the stipulated selection procedure. Consequently, when a particular schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the same has to be scrupulously maintained. There cannot be any relaxation in the terms and conditions of the advertisement unless such a power is specifically reserved. Such a power could be reserved in the relevant statutory rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in the rules, it must still be mentioned in the advertisement. In the absence of such power in the rules, it could still be provided in the advertisement. However, the power of relaxation, if exercised, has to be given due publicity. This would be necessary to ensure that those candidates who become eligible due to the relaxation, are afforded an equal opportunity to apply and compete. Relaxation of any condition in advertisement without due publication would be contrary to the mandate of equality contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 30. A perusal of the advertisement in this case will clearly show that there was no power of relaxation. In our opinion, the High Court committed an error in directing that the condition with regard to the submission of the disability certificate either along with the application form or before appearing in the preliminary examination could be relaxed in the case of Respondent 1. Such a course would not be permissible as it would violate the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 32. ………. It is settled law that there can be no relaxation in the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement unless the power of relaxation is duly reserved in the relevant rules and/or in the advertisement. Such a course would not be permissible as it would violate the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 32. ………. It is settled law that there can be no relaxation in the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement unless the power of relaxation is duly reserved in the relevant rules and/or in the advertisement. Even if there is a power of relaxation in the rules, the same would still have to be specifically indicated in the advertisement. …………..” 26. The above decision has been followed in Sanjay K. Dixit (supra). Thus, the law is settled that if the extant Rules provide for the power to relax the eligibility criteria, the same could be exercised only if such power is reserved in the advertisement. And when this power is exercised, there must be wide publicity of its exercise so that persons who are likely to benefit by exercise of such power may get opportunity to apply and compete. 27. In the instant case, it is not shown that the advertisement reserved the power to relax the essential eligibility qualifications specified in the advertisement at any later stage. Rather, the advertisement is specific that eligibility criteria must be fulfilled by an aspiring candidate by the last date fixed for receipt of the application. It is not demonstrated that after the decision to relax the eligibility criteria was taken, the same was widely publicised, and the last date to apply under the advertisement was extended to enable persons benefited by such relaxation to apply and compete. In these circumstances, in our view, the power to relax the eligibility criteria, even if it existed, was not exercised in consonance with the settled legal principles and it violated the constitutional mandate enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Issue No.(i) is decided in the terms above. “10. There is a specific condition mentioned in the advertisement itself that a candidate claiming her consideration for recruitment under the DV (divorcee) category is required to have a divorce decree from the Competent Court on the last date of submission of the application form. In the instant case the last date for submission of the application form under the advertisement dated 28.06.2023 is 31.07.2023 and the petitioner got the decree of divorce on 20.10.2023 i.e. much after the last date of submitting the application form. 11. In the instant case the last date for submission of the application form under the advertisement dated 28.06.2023 is 31.07.2023 and the petitioner got the decree of divorce on 20.10.2023 i.e. much after the last date of submitting the application form. 11. In view of the proposition in the above judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, no relaxation is permissible for diverting from the terms and conditions of the advertisement.” 8. This Court also in the case of Sonika Singh Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21997/2018) decided on 01.12.2023 has observed in para 9 as under:- “9. If the relaxation as prayed for by the petitioner is allowed then there may be several other candidates who may claim on similar facts the same benefit. So also if any candidate gets a divorce decree even during the recruitment process till the interview or declaration of final result, he/she may also claim the same benefit for consideration of his/her candidature under the divorce decree which will create hindrance in the smooth recruitment process and may change the merit of the candidates at each stage/level of the recruitment process. The Courts are to ensure the completion of the recruitment process smoothly and earliest as per the schedule of the recruitment and if any kind of relaxation is allowed beyond the permissible limits then the whole recruitment process will derail which can never be the intention of the Court. The completion of recruitment process smoothly is the demand of the Society because of much unemployment in the youths. A candidate who is aspirant of participating in the recruitment process is required to go through the terms and conditions of the advertisement and the rules and has to apply according to his/her qualification as required under the law and under the category for which he/she is eligible. The terms and conditions given in the advertisement on the basis of the relevant recruitment rules are the sole basis for proceeding with the recruitment process. Until and unless there is a gross violation of any condition or there is a claim of a candidate within the parameters of the fundamental rights given under the Constitution of India, no interference is required from the Court.” 6. In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. 7. In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. 7. Since the main petition has been dismissed, the stay application and pending application/s, if any also stand dismissed.