ORDER

1. The present petition is filed challenging the order/notification dated 16.4.2024 issued by the respondent No.1/MPPSC and also the merit list dated 1.8.2024 for the post of Lecturer in "Rachna Sharir" in the department of Ayush/ respondent No.2 on the ground that by the said order/notification, the respondent No.1 has changed the criteria of selection for shortlisting the candidates, which was contrary to the main notification issued by the respondent No.1.

2. Facts in brevity is that the petitioner who is a qualified Doctor is Post Graduate in MD Ayurveda in Rachna Sharir. He has secured 78% marks in MD Examination. Respondent No.1 has issued an advertisement/notification dated 10.7.2023 for filling up of post of Lecturer in Rachana Sharir in the department of respondent No.2. It is pertinent to mention that in the notification dated 10.7.2023 the criteria for shortlisting of candidates for selection of Lecturer in “Rachana Sharir” was prescribed in clause 9 of schedule-I of advertisement dated 10.7.2023 according to which the candidates have to be shortlisted on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying exam. The petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer in Rachana Sharirin the department of respondent No. 2.

3. It is stated that respondent No.1 vide notification dated 16.4.2024 modified the criteria for selection of Lecturer in Rachana Sharir modifying the criteria marks of graduation examination i.e. marks scored by the candidates in BAMS examination were made the eligibility criteria for shortlisting of candidates instead of qualifying marks on the basis of post-graduation i.e. MD Rachana Sharir or MSC Anatomy.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid modified criteria for selection, the impugned select list/merit list has been published on 1.8.2024. It is argued that the aforesaid modification of criteria after issuance of the advertisement is a change of Rule of Game and therefore, the impugned merit list Annexure P/5 is liable to be set aside and respondent no.1 be directed to prepare a fresh merit list on the basis of the unmodified criteria taking into consideration the qualified examination of MD Rachana Sharir or MSC Anatomy for the post of Lecturer in Rachana Sharir. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgments passed by the apex Court in the case of Bedanga Talukdar v. Saifudaullah Khan and Ors reported in (2011) 12 SCC 85 and also the judgment passed in the case of Manoj Kumar v. Union of India reported in 2024 (3) MPLJ (SC) 50.

5. The respondents No.1 and 2 filed their reply and submitted that the aforesaid impugned modification does not amount to change of criteria of eligibility for selection and therefore, there is no change of Rule of Game. It is argued that as per clause 09 of the advertisement, if the candidates are less than 500 then in that event, the interview will be taken place on the basis of the marks secured in the eligibility examination. As per clause 3 of the advertisement under Essential Educational Qualification both MD Rachana Sharir and MSC Anatomy degree-holding candidates can apply for the said post. However, due to the fact that there is a difference in making a graduate degree, as in some universities, only grading is awarded instead of marks as such. To avoid such difficulties, it was decided by the department that the shortlisting of the candidates will be done on the basis of undergraduate (UG) marks.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court by order dated 28.1.2025, directed counsel for the state to show under what authority of law the state government has issued the notification dated 16.4.2024 on the basis of which the criteria for shortlisting of UG qualifying marks were taken into consideration.

7. The respondent No.2/State Government filed an additional reply to justify the same. It is submitted that the petitioner has participated in the examination of lecturer Rachana Sharir, which was advertised in 2023 by MP