Eligibility criteria must be fulfilled by the last date for receipt of applications specified in the advertisement, and adherence to the terms and conditions of the advertisement and rules is crucial.

JUDGMENT :

1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applied for recruitment to the post of Pre Primary Education Teacher pursuant to the advertisement dated 21.08.2018. He further submits that the petitioner is having higher marks than the candidates having been selected and appointed under the divorcee women category and the petitioner being divorce category candidate is entitled for selection and appointment on the post of Pre Primary Education Teacher. Non appointment of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and unconstitutional.

2. Considered the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the petitioner and also perused the record made available with the petition.

3. The facts borne out from the pleadings are that the respondents issued an advertisement dated 21.8.2018 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for recruitment to the post of Pre Primary Education Teacher. The last date for submitting the application forms is 28.10.2018 and the petitioner has obtained a divorce decree on 18.2.2022.

4. As per sub-clause 4 of clause 16 of the advertisement, the eligibility of a candidate as regards the age, qualification, category etc. shall be determined and considered on the basis of information given in the application form. It has also been specifically mentioned therein that after passing of the date for making corrections in the application form no any change or amendment or correction shall be allowed in the entries of the application form.

The petitioner submitted her application form under the OBC Non Creamy Layer Category and has also mentioned her marital status as married. The petitioner on the date of filling up of the application form was not a divorcee woman as divorce decree in regard to dissolution of her marriage was passed on 18.2.2022 by the concerned court.

5. In the case of Mamta Yogi Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11295/2020) decided on 4.12.2022, this Court has observed as under:-

“7. This Court in the case of Rekha Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (SB Civil Writ Petition No. 18802/2023) decided on 28.11.2023 has observed as under:-

“8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of J&K Public Service Commission vs. Israr Ahmad, reported in (2005) 12 SCC 498, in para 5 has observed as under:-

“5. We have considered the rival contentions advanced by both the parties. The contention of the first Respondent cannot be accepted as he has not applied for the selection as a candidate entitled to get reservation. He did not produce any certificate along with his application. The fact that he has not availed the benefit for the preliminary examination itself is sufficient to treat him as a candidate not entitled to get reservation. He passed the preliminary examination as a general candidate and at the subsequent stage of the main examination he cannot avail the reservation on the ground that he was successful in getting the required certificate only at a later stage. The nature and status of the candidate who was applying for the selection could only be treated alike and once a candidate has chosen to opt for the category to which he is entitled, he cannot later change the status and make fresh claim. The Division Bench was not correct in holding that as a candidate he had also had the qualification and the production of the certificate at a later stage would make him entitled to seek reservation. Therefore, we set aside the judgment of the Division Bench and allow the appeal. No costs.”

9. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ankita Thakur & Ors. Vs. The H.P. Staff Selection Commission & Ors., decided on November 9, 2023 (Civil Appeal No.7602 of 2023 with four other connected matters) apart from other issues framed an issue No.(i) ‘Whether relaxation in the essential eligibility qualifications could be made post the last date fixed for receipt of application from the candidates?’. The Hon’ble Apex Court decided the aforesaid issue No.(i) as under:-

“Iss