IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 CWP-18835-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.07.2025 Jyoti Kaur ...Petitioner VERSUS Union of India and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Arvind Rajotia, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate and Ms. Kanchan Kumari, Advocate for the respondent(s). ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 1. Seeking directions to the respondents to open the online submission window or provide alternative mode for filing DAF (Detailed Application Form) for Civil Services (Mains) Examination, 2025 and to quash the rejection reply dated 30.06.2025, the instant writ petition has been filed. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner, being a serious aspirant for the UPSC Civil Services Examination, had applied pursuant to the examination notice issued by the UPSC bearing No.05/2025-CSP on 22.01.2025. The result of the preliminary examination was declared and the petitioner qualified the same under Roll No.7002790. The petitioner having qualified, was required to submit a detailed application form for the Mains examination and a window of 10 days had been provided for submission of the same. However, the MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.28 17:01 I am the author of this document 2 109 CWP-18835-2025 (O&M) father-in-law of the petitioner was admitted to Government Rajindra Hospital, Patiala in a terminal condition and he eventually passed away on 24.06.2025. Consequently, the petitioner could not submit her detailed application form within the prescribed time line of 10 days on account of matrimonial obligation and to discharge solemn duties, last rites and religious rituals etc. She thereafter submitted multiple representations from 25.06.2025 to 30.06.2025 for being granted an extension of time under the given circumstances to submit the detailed application form, however, vide reply dated 30.06.2025, the respondents have informed that no application shall be accepted after closing date under any circumstance. 3. Aggrieved thereof, the instant writ petition has been filed. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues with vehemence that the circumstances of the petitioner prevented her from submission of the detailed application form and the same being germane, the extension in submission of the application form ought to have been granted. 5. Counsel for the respondents however makes a reference to the judgment of a Division Bench of Delhi High Court passed in the matter of ‘Pankaj Chaudhary Vs. Union Public Service Commission’ Law Finder Doc. ID #2043856 to contend that the prescribed timelines are sacrosanct and have to be strictly adhered to for timely completion of the selection process. Sufficient time had been provided for submission of detailed application form and such a lassitude in examining on each case is likely to disrupt the entire schedule of the selection process which is undertaken by the UPSC on yearly basis. She contends that it is trite law that a cutoff date MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.28 17:01 I am the author of this document 3 109 CWP-18835-2025 (O&M) is sacrosanct and cannot be altered. Every examinee/aspirant is required to be vigilant and give enough priority to the submission of the forms within time. 6. Counsel for the petitioner is not in a situation to refute the position of law as settled through catena of judgments to the effect that the cutoff date is sacrosanct and in the event such cutoff date is not adhered to, the candidate cannot be granted further time to submit the application form. Extension of timelines on such issues may lead to an unending process and the selection process may never get finalized. 7. The present writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 22.07.2025 JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.28 17:01 I am the author of this document