The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to interpret rules to save their vires and the principle of attempting to save the vires of provisions by reading down or interpreting them appropriately.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State in respect of both the writ petitions which have been heard together on account of both being identical in respect of relevant facts as well as the reliefs claimed.

2. The rules in question in these writ petitions are titled"Bihar Nagar Nikay Madhyamik awam Uchhttar Madhyamik Shiksha (Niyojan awam Seva Sharten) Niyamawali, 2006 and Bihar Zila Parishad Madhyamik awam Uchhttar Madhyamik Shiksha (Niyojan awam Seva Sharten) Niyamawali, 2006" (herein after referred to as "the Recruitment Rules of 2006"). In the writ petitions a challenge has been made to those provisions in Rule 4 of the Recruitment Rules which prescribe minimum eligibility for appointment on the post of teacher as well as on the post of Librarian in the concerned Schools but since the petitioners have applied only for the post of Librarian, hence this Court is confining the issue of validity of only those provisions of the Rules which lay down eligibility criteria for the post of Librarian.

3. Before dealing with the issue of vires the relevant rules and the specific submissions advanced by the parties, the relevant facts may be noticed in brief. The petitioners claim that they have obtained degree of Sahityalankar from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar, which is recognized by the State of Bihar, to be a degree equivalent to graduation for the purposes of admission to higher courses in the various Universities of Bihar as well as for the purposes of recruitment to various services under the State of Bihar. The details of academic records of the petitioners are available and are not disputed. Petitioner of CWJC No. 5129 of 2009 has claimed that after obtaining degree of Sahityalankar he took admission in the course of Master of Arts (History) and passed the same from Nalanda Open University. Thereafter he took admission for the course of Bachelor of Library and Information Science in the same University and passed in the year 2007 in 2nd Division. Thereafter he passed Master of Librarian in Information Science in the year 2008 from the same University. Petitioner in other case also claims to have the requisite qualification of Library Science. An advertisement, bearing Notification No. 1337 dated 25.8.2008, was published in the Newspapers for appointment to the post of Pustakalayadhyaksha (Librarian) and Shikshak (teacher) in different schools under Zila Parishad and Nagar Nikay in the State of Bihar. For easy reference relevant annexures, for the purposes of this judgment, are from CWJC No. 5129 of 2009. The advertisement and the receipts showing applications received by the petitioners are Annexure-3 series.

4. In the advertisement the minimum qualification/eligible criteria has not been specifically mentioned but a clear reference has been made to the Recruitment Rules, 2006. According to the writ petitioners, on subsequent query they came to know that the rules contain two conditions for the post of Librarian. As per Rule 4(ka)(vii)the candidate must have passed graduation examination with minimum 45% marks from my recognized University, and (ii) he must have Bachelor degree in Library Science from a University recognized by Education Department of State Government. Petitioners have the second qualification, i.e., the graduation degree in Library Science but so far as the first eligibility criteria graduation is concerned, they have a graduation degree from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar which is not a recognized "University" although the degree itself is recognized by the State of Bihar for different purposes as equivalent to a degree of graduation. Because the relevant Rules prescribe that the graduation degree must be from a recognized University without adding that it may also be an equivalent degree recognized by the State of Bihar, the petitioners feel compelled to challenge the relevant provisions of the Recruitment Rules.

5. On behalf of petitioners the first submission advanced