IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No.10 of 2003 State of Uttaranchal through Secretary, Eduction Dehradun & others … Appellants Versus Akhilesh Chandra S/o Sri Haridutt Chandra R/o Near Prathmik School Sitapur Devi Road, Kotdwar District Pauri Garhwal & others …Respondents Sri K.P. Upadhyay, learned standing counsel for the appellants. Sri V.B.S. Negi, learned counsel for the respondents Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble B.C.Kandpal,J. This special appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 7th July, 2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 1484 of 2002 (S/B), whereby the learned Single Judge of this Court has directed the respondent/appellant to consider the candidature of the petitioners/respondents for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade. It has further directed that in case any person having less quality marks than the petitioners, has been provided appointment, the petitioners/respondents shall also be given appointment. 2. The aforesaid direction was given by the learned Single Judge on the basis of the facts in the writ petition that the applications were invited for the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade by advertisement-dated 24.06.2002. In the said advertisement, there was a clause that in case any candidate has appeared in the examination prior to the date of advertisement and the result of the said examination is declared after last date fixed for submission of application, the candidate may submit the marks-sheet within three days from the date of declaration of result. The respondents/petitioners had appeared in the B.Ed Examination conducted by H.N.B.Garhwal University, Srinagar. 3. On the basis of the submission of the petitioners/respondents, the learned Single Judge found that the B.Ed. examination was held prior to the advertisement, however the result was not declared till the last date of the submission of the applications and as such they were entitled to be considered for appointment as Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade, as per condition mentioned in the advertisement itself. 4. It the counter affidavit, it was stated that the examination of the B.Ed. was over on 17.08.2002 and the petitioners were not entitled to get any benefit of any condition mentioned in the advertisement dated 24.06.2002. It was also stated that the respondents had filed a letter of University that the examinations of B.Ed. were over on 17.8.2002, whereas the last date for submission of applications was 15.07.2002. 5. While admitting the appeal, a Division Bench of this Court admitted the appeal mentioning therein that the petitioners had appeared for B.Ed. examination, 2002, however, that examination was not completed on the date of advertisement and it was going on even after 15.07.2002, which was the last date of filing of the application. According to the State, there was practical examination and theory examination were yet to be conducted by Garhwal University, Srinagar. That, the examination got over only on 17.08.2002 and therefore, the petitioners were not eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade. 6. The condition as noticed in the judgment of learned single judge and which falls for our consideration is that in case if any candidate has appeared in the examination prior to the date of advertisement and the result of the said examination is declared after last date fixed for submission of the application, then the candidate shall submit the marks-sheet within three days form the date of declaration of the result. The word indicates that the candidate has appeared and admitted in the examination and that he is continuing on such date, but he was entitled according to the English version of the advertisement, however the Hindi version of the advertisement is also on record which stipulates that those candidates shall be entitled to apply whose examination are over by the date prior to the submission of the applications and their result is awaited. The English version of the advertisement is not on record, therefore, we are left with no option but to accept the advertisement of Hindi version. 7. Since the petitioner/respondents examination was not over by 15.07.2002 rather it continues upto 17.08.2002, therefore, the petitioner/respondents were not entitled to apply for the appointment on the said post. Thus, the petitioner/respondents could not have been given an order directing them to appear in examination as they were not entitled to apply. 8. Thus the impugned judgment and order dated 07.07.2003 passed by learned Single Judge is set aside. The special appeal is allowed and the writ petition is dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.) 21.02.2006 Rajeev Dang