[2025:RJ-JP:34620] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12526/2025 Sunil Jangid S/o Hari Prasad Jangid, Aged About 30 Years, R/o VPO- Vishvkarma Colony, Malakhera, Tehsil- Malakhera, District- Alwar, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Technical Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Janpath, Jaiprur. 2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Rajaya Krishi Parbandh Sansthan Parisar, Duragapura, Jaipur 302018. 3. Chairman, Staff Selection Board, Rajasthan, Rajaya Krishi Parbandh Sansthan Parisar, Durgapura, Jaipur 302018. 4. Government Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Skill, Employment And Entrepreneurship, Directorate Of Technical Education, W-6, Residency Road, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)- 342001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Saini For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 29/08/2025 1. Petitioner has filed the instant writ petition against letter/communication dated 01.07.2025 by the Officer In-charge of the recruitment, Technical Education Department, Jodhpur, whereby candidature of the petitioner for the post of Junior Instructor (Mechanical Diesel) has been rejected on account of not submitting valid permanent license issued upto the last date of submitting application form. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent- Rajasthan Staff Selection Board issued an [2025:RJ-JP:34620] (2 of 4) [CW-12526/2025] advertisement dated 11.03.2024 for inviting applications from all eligible persons for the post of Junior Instructor (Electronics Mechanic) in different States. The petitioner submitted his application, applying against the post of Junior Instructor (Mechanical Diesel). It reveals from clauses of advertisement, in particular those related to Clause-6 of the advertisement, that the candidates were required to possess valid permanent licence to apply for heavy motor vehicle till the last date of submitting application. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although it has not been mentioned in the pleadings of the writ petition yet, he has indicated from his representation dated 02.07.2025 i.e. date of issuance of licence to the petitioner was 15.04.2025. Learned counsel further submits that although last date for submitting application form was 11.04.2024, yet the advertisement itself provided for making necessary changes in the application form itself, which grants liberty to the respective candidate to make correction in the application form within a period of seven days from the last date of submitting the application form. 4. Thus, as per learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner could have amended his application form till 18.04.2025 and accordingly, within such period, he made correction regarding his duly issued valid permanent licence for applying for a heavy motor vehicle. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that instead of the corrections made by him, and thereby, the requirement of submitting licence which has also been fulfilled by him, in a quite arbitrarily manner, the respondents have rejected [2025:RJ-JP:34620] (3 of 4) [CW-12526/2025] his application form only on the ground that such licence was not submitted by the last date of filling of application form. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly relied upon the Clause-17 of the advertisement in order to submit that since seven days' time was prescribed to make corrections in the application form and accordingly, the petitioner corrected his application form, hence, in such circumstances, it was not a justified action of the respondents to reject his application form. 6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 7. Bare perusal of Clause-17 of the advertisement would reveal that liberty was granted to the candidates to make corrections in education qualification, name, father's name, date of birth and category etc. However, mere granting such liberty to make correction in the application form does not mean that the person who was not eligible on the last date of submitting application form would become eligible by merely making correction in the application form by submitting a licence which was admittedly not issued till the last date of submitting the application form. 8. In order to acquire eligibility for submitting the application form for the post of Junior Instructor in Diesel Mechanical Trade, the candidate was required to possess the valid licence issued upto last date of submitting application form which was admittedly 11.04.2024. In case, there was some error in submitting the valid licence already issued upto last date of submitting an application form, then only in such cases, the corrections could have conferred eligibility upon him, but not in [2025:RJ-JP:34620] (4 of 4) [CW-12526/2025] those cases where the petitioner was not possessing the eligibility document till the last date of submitting application form. 9. It is settled proposition of law that eligibility for the purposes of recruitment has to be determined with reference to the cut off date prescribed in the advertisement, which is last date fixed for submitting the application form in the instant case. The provision enabling the candidate to carry out corrections or modifications in the particulars of the application form at a later stage is intended only to rectify clerical errors or inadvertent mistakes. Such facility cannot be construed as extending or relaxing the cut off date itself for acquiring the requisite eligibility. Consequently, if a candidate secures or obtains the essential qualification, license or certificate only after the last date of submitting the application form, then only because the correction window remains open thereafter, it would not confer upon the candidate any eligibility. Possession of a license or qualification acquired after the prescribed cut off date, even if within the permissible period for making corrections in the form, does not satisfy the eligibility criteria, since the substantive requirement of law is that the candidate must be fully eligible on the last date of submission of the application. 10. In the aforesaid circumstances, there is no scope for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /6