CWP No.20405 of 2006 -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.20405 of 2006 Date of Decision: 21.5.2008 Anil Kumar Rana ..Petitioner. Vs. Subordinate Services Selection Board, Punjab, chandigarh and another ..Respondents. CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN * * * Present: Mr.Randeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.C.Goyal, Sr.DAG Punjab for respondents No.1 and 2. * * * RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner on the post of Physical Training Master in the category of Ex-Military Men. Vide advertisement No.1/2006 published in newspapers `Ajit' dated 11.6.2006, `The Tribune' dated 12.6.2006 and the 'Punjabi Tribune' dated 13.6.2006, applications for 50 posts of Physical Training Master/Mistress along with other posts were invited from the eligible candidates. The last date for the receipt of the application was 10.7.2006. According to the petitioner, he applied on 20.6.2006 in the category of Ex CWP No.20405 of 2006 -2 - Military men. On 3.11.2006, respondent No.1 informed the candidates that the original certificate shall be checked between 9.30 A.M. to 3.30 P.M. in its office on 16.11.2006 pertaining to the applications submitted for the category of Ex Military men. The petitioner has alleged that he had appeared before respondent No.1 on 16.11.2006 and his form was accordingly checked. Respondent No.1 had declared the result of the successful candidates but the result in respect of Physical Training Master/Mistress in the category of Ex Military Men was not announced in the result sheet which was published in newspaper `The Tribune' on 4.12.2006. The petitioner even had made a representation on 6.12.2006 but to no effect. On notice of motion, both respondents No.1 and 2 filed their separate written statements. In para No.3 of the preliminary objections of the written statement filed by respondent No.1, it was categorically averred that the application of the petitioner was incomplete and was not accompanying with requisite certificate of Ex Service Man. Therefore, his application was rightly rejected. It was also averred that the Ex Service Man certificate obtained by the petitioner is dated 29.11.2006 which is much later than the last date i.e. 10.7.2006 meaning thereby the said certificate was not in existence at the time of submission of the application form or even at the time of scrutiny. It was further averred that even if the petitioner is taken in General Category the cut off merit percentage for the Physical Training Masters Male is 145.22 which is much more than 132.83 marks obtained by the petitioner. Therefore, in this manner also, he can not be considered. The petitioner had filed replication in which it was urged that his certificates were checked on 16.11.2006, therefore, his case can not be CWP No.20405 of 2006 -3 - rejected on the ground that the requisite certificate of Ex Service Man was not accompanying with the application form before the cut off date i.e. 10.7.2006. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the State showed to the Court the Ex Service Man certificate No. DSWO/Cert/06/736 dated 27.11.2006. The Court was also shown the letter written by the petitioner himself in which the aforesaid certificate of Ex Service Man has been described as dated 27.11.2006. Both the documents are taken on record as Mark A and Mark B. From these two documents, there is no room for any doubt that on 16.11.2006 when the documents of the petitioner were scrutinized, the certificate of Ex Service Man was not available with him and had been obtained later on. Therefore, at the stage of submission of application form as well as even at the stage of scrutiny, the application of the petitioner was incomplete as the requisite certificate of Ex Service Man was not available with him, therefore, his candidature has been rightly rejected as the sanctity of the cut off date has to be maintained. In view of the aforesaid reasoning, we do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed in limine, however, there shall be no order as to costs. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) Judge ( Mehtab S.Gill ) 21.5.2008 Judge Meenu