IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19243 of 2009 Date of Decision: September 08, 2010 Vijay Bhaskar & Others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Amit Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This 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 the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Physical Training Instructors (PTI). 2. In brief, the case of the petitioners is that they being eligible and suitable, applied for the post of Physical Training Instructors under Advertisement dated 14.4.2008 (Annexure P-3). The names of the petitioners, after selection process was concluded, were mentioned in the tentative seniority list of the selected candidates. Appointment letters however have not been issued. CWP No.19243 of 2009 [2] 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has pointed out that authenticity of the certificates on which reliance was placed by the candidates, was verified. The Directorate, Sports and Youth Services, Pune, State of Maharashtra, in the verification process has indicated that out of 19 certificates sent for verification, certificates relating to the petitioners had not been issued by the said Institute and therefore, were not authenticated. The document sourced by the Directorate, Sports and Youth, Pune, State of Maharashtra, has been placed on record as Annexure R-1. The petitioners are among the persons who have relied on forged/fake certificate(s) and therefore, appointment letters have not been issued, rather criminal proceedings are being initiated. 4. Considering the stand of the respondents, I am of the considered opinion that no relief in extraordinary writ jurisdiction can be given to the petitioners so as to direct the respondents to issue letters of appointment. The respondents have conducted verification of the certificates relied upon by the petitioners and have concluded that certificates on which reliance was placed by the petitioners, were forged/ fake. Since the decision taken by the respondents is on the basis of relevant material, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. 5. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) September 08, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?