As per case facts, the Petitioner was appointed as Lady Assistant Teacher (Science) in 2003. Her appointment was subsequently rejected in 2016 because she did not possess the mandatory B.Ed. ... qualification at the time of appointment, though she acquired it in 2005 and served for 13 years. The Petitioner challenged this rejection, citing her subsequent qualification and prior judgments. The Respondent-State argued that B.Ed. was an essential qualification as per statute and advertisement, and executive instructions cannot override statutory rules. The question arose whether the rejection of the Petitioner's appointment for lacking initial B.Ed. qualification was justified. Finally, the Court ruled that possessing the requisite educational qualification, including B.Ed., at the time of appointment is essential and statutory rules cannot be overridden by executive instructions or subsequent qualification. The Writ Petition was dismissed.