M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. These two writ petitions involving common question of facts and law have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Petitioners seek issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to consider their cases for appointment to the post of primary teachers in the primary school situated within their respective districts in accordance with the advertisement issued on 24.10.2002 and further for a direction to the respondents not to restrict their candidatures for being appointed to the post of primary teachers only against the vacant posts of physical trained teachers which are available in the four districts.

3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.

4. The respondent-Jharkhand Public Service Commission (shortly the "Commission") Issued advertisement dated 24.10.2002 for appointment of primary teachers in all the 22 districts of the State of Jharkhand. In the said advertisement the eligibility conditions were prescribed and the candidates possessing qualifications, as mentioned in the advertisement, were eligible to apply for the said post. Subsequently on 28.10.2002 by way of corrigendum the commission clarified the definition on the words trained teachers as defined under Rule 2 of the Jharkhand Primary Teachers Appointments Rules, 2000 (the Rule), in pursuance of the said advertisement and corrigendum the petitioners applied for the said post.

5. Petitioners case is that after being found fit they were issued admit cards for appearing in the examination to be held on 25.5.2003. All the petitioners appeared in the examination and did well. They are said to have secured high marks in the said examination. The petitioners thereafter came to know that their cases for appointment as Primary Teachers has been restricted only against the post of Physical Trained Teachers and they shall not be considered for appointment in the general post of Primary Teachers at par with the candidates having the qualification of matric trained teachers.

6. The respondents, in their counter affidavit, have stated that till the result of the physical trained teachers has not been published and as such the writ application is premature. It is stated that the petitioners qualification is of physical trained teachers against the vacant post of physical trained teachers. Further case of the respondent is that Rule 2 (b) of the Rule, 2000 has already been amended vide notification dated 6.3.2003 and as such the petitioners are entitled to be considered for appointment on the post of Physical Trained Teaches against the vacant post, if any, in their district.

7. Mr. Mahesh Tiwary, learned coun-sel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the petitioners are trained teachers as defined under Rule 2 (b) (iii) of the Rule, 2000 and, therefore, they are entitled to appointment against the general seats of Primary Teachers Learned counsel, drawing my attention to a Division Bench Judgment of this Court rendered in W.P. (PIL) No. 2769 of 2003 and submitted that the Commission has no power to restrict for being appointed against the general seats of Primary Teachers. Learned counsel submitted that the notification dated 6.3.2003 making amendment in Rule 2 of Rule, 2000, does not apply in the case of the petitioners.

8. Mr. R.N. Sahay, learned Sr. Standing Counsel No. II on the other hand, submitted that as per the amended Rule the petitioners do not possess the requisite qualification for being appointed as Primary Teaches. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners have not challenged the notification dated 6.3.2003 and therefore they cannot be allowed to claim appointment on the general seats of Primary Teachers in violation of the Rules.

9. From perusal of the advertisement dated 24.10.2002, it appears that the requisite qualification prescribed for appointment on the post of Primary Teachers are as follows :

"(A) Matric or equivalent examination passed.

(B) Two years teach