IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 18.02.2026 ANJU …Petitioner(s)

Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER …Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- Mr. Gaurav Arya, Advocate (Through Video Conferencing)

for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Sahni, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Mr. Gurnoor S. Sandhu, Advocate for respondent no.2/HPSC.

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (Oral)

The petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the announcement dated 28.01.2026, as well as the consequential communication dated 29.01.2026, Annexures P-13 and P-14, respectively, whereby the petitioner’s candidature for the post of Assistant Professor (College cadre) in the subject of Geography against advertisement 51/2024, dated 02.08.2024, has been rejected on the ground that the certificate of Dependents of Ex-serviceman (DESM) category submitted by her was not valid in terms of the stipulation contained in the advertisement. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to consider her candidature under DESM category and allow her to appear for interview scheduled from 16.02.2026 to 26.02.2026.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had uploaded a valid DESM certificate issued by the Zila Sainik Board, Sonepat, dated 29.07.2020, Annexure P-2, along with the application form which is in terms of the requirement of clause 12(a) of the advertisement. But her candidature has been rejected by referring to another DESM category certificate dated 17.12.2025, which she submitted at the time of documents verification. She is eligible on the basis of her earlier certificate dated 29.07.2020, which was annexed to her application form. Therefore, her candidature could not have been rejected. Further, he has placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP-1808-2022 titled Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana and others, decided on 01.05.2024, wherein a candidate belonging to ESM category, who had not uploaded a valid Dependent of Freedom Fighter (DFF) certificate along with application form, and submitted the same at the time of scrutiny of documents after the cut-off date, was allowed to participate in the selection process by referring to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, JEE and others, 2005 (9) SCC 779.

3. Learned counsel for respondent no.2/Commission, however, pointed out that the ESM category certificate dated 29.07.2020, as uploaded by the petitioner along with application form, could not have been considered valid since the certificate itself clearly mentioned that it was not for job/service purposes. Accordingly, stipulation contained in clause 12(a) of the advertisement cannot be said to have been complied with and thus, her candidature has been rightly rejected. He further contended that after the issuance of advertisement the Commission, vide corrigendum dated 24.02.2025, asked the candidates who had wrongly mentioned their category or uploaded wrong documents along with application form, to make necessary corrections and apply afresh. A copy of this corrigendum produced by learned counsel is taken on record as Annexure ‘A’.

He also submits that the issue has already been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA-1397-2025 titled Haryana Public Service Commission v. Pardeep Kumar and others, holding that any document uploaded after the closing date is not to be considered in support of the candidature.

4. Heard.

5. Considering the submissions, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petition for the reason the DESM certificate, dated 29.07.2020 is not in terms of stipulations contained in clause 12(a and b) of the advertisement which read as under:

12. Definition of Ex-serviceman xxx xxx xxx a) ESM candidates of Haryana claiming benefit under this category must have valid Ex-serviceman Certificate issued by Zila Sainik Board showing the date of entry into military and date of release,