JUDGMENT
1. Heard Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. The petitioner Dharmendra Kumar by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, which shall hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal', dated 12th February, 2001 in Original Application No. 1140 of 1996, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-'9' to the writ petition.
3. The petitioner and one Pankaj Kumar filed the aforesaid O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 (In short 'the Act') questioning the action of the respondents, whereby the candidature of the petitioner along with Pankaj Kumar were excluded on the ground that they have passed their Intermediate examination with vocational subjects for the post of Postal Assistant. The argument advanced on behalf of petitioner Dharmendra Kumar before the Tribunal was that in the advertisement, it was not made clear as to whether the candidates who have passed Intermediate with vocational subjects would not be eligible for the post in question. It is only after the applicant passed written test and also appeared in interview the order was passed cancelling their candidature. The stand taken by the contesting respondent before the Tribunal was that the Department of Posts (Postal Assistants and Sorting Assistants) Recruitment Amendment Rules, 1991, which came into force on 31st January, 1992 excludes the vocational scheme. The advertisement in the present case was published on 17th April, 1995, therefore after the advertisement in question the amended Rule of 1991 would apply. The Rules were framed in exercise of power under Article 309 of the constitution of India by the President of India. In these circumstances, the contention of Learned Counsel for the petitioner that since it was not mentioned in the advertisement, therefore the amended Rule will not apply, cannot be accepted and it is therefore rejected. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that even if it was not specified in the advertisement, the petitioner cannot get any benefit. The advertisement is always subject to the statutory Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The effect of amendment of the Rules has not been disputed by Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. In this view of the matter, to us it appears that the petitioner cannot get any benefit even if it has not been specified in the advertisement that those who have passed their Intermediate examination with vocational subjects would not entitled to the post in question.
4. In this view of the matter, the argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner cannot be accepted and is hereby rejected. No other argument is advanced.
5. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. The interim order, if any, stands vacated. However, there shall be no order as to costs.