IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.22359 of 2010 Date of Decision: December 16, 2010 Parmal Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Punjab Public Service Commission & another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Ram Niwas Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) CWP No.22359 of 2010 [2] 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent – Punjab Public Service Commission, Patiala, to issue Admit Card to the petitioner and roll number to enable him to take preliminary examination for entry to Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch), to be held on 19.12.2010. 2. In brief, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a Government employee in Haryana. Being eligible to compete for Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch), the petitioner filed an application. As per the provisions for considering candidature, relaxation in age has been given to all Government employees including employees of State of Haryana. If relaxation in age is given, the petitioner would be eligible to take the examination and compete for the post. 3. Learned counsel contends that candidature of the petitioner has been rejected and the petitioner has been considered as ineligible saying that Column No.9 in the OMR Sheet has not been filled in. While drawing attention of the Court towards Annexure P-3, learned counsel states that the petitioner does not fall in any of the categories indicated in CWP No.22359 of 2010 [3] Column No.9. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent- State contends that indeed the petitioner has claimed relaxation in age in Column No.8 of OMR Sheet. In Column No.9, for age relaxation, only ‘Government Servants Punjab’ has been indicated. It is only by way of corrigendum that all the Government servants were made entitled to age relaxation. Surely, the petitioner falls in that category. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent- State, after taking instructions from Punjab Public Service Commission, states that claim of the petitioner has been accepted and roll number would be issued to the petitioner. 6. This petition is accordingly disposed of. In view of paucity of time, the petitioner is required to approach the Punjab Public Service Commission at Patiala and collect the roll number, tomorrow. 7. Copy of this order be given under signatures of Reader of the Bench. (AJAI LAMBA) December 16, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?