for certificate verification, it is seen that it was signed by a Junior Assistant, Superintendent and Verifying officer namely the Personal Assistant to the Officer. As against the column relating to production of NCC Certificate, initially, shadowing was done in the option 'Yes' and thereafter, it was scored out and the option 'No' was shaded. As against the same, initial of a person is made available, but that initial did not tally with the three persons, who verified the certificate of the candidates thereby the conduct of the respondents draw suspicion. The columns provide only for 'Yes' or 'No' and in the present case, both the columns were shadowed and as against the option 'Yes' it was scored out with an initial. Such a procedure adopted by the respondents cannot be countenanced. Further, para-5 of the affidavit of the petitioner filed in support of the writ petition remains uncontroverted. It is also seen from the files that the petitioner went through the selection process and successfully completed it. The petitioner belonged to Schedule Caste community and his parents are coolie workers. So far as the allegation that the petitioner has secured 66 marks in the written test and physical efficiency test is concerned, there is no dispute. Only controversy relate to award of special mark for having enclosed the 'C' Certificate in NCC. If it is found that the petitioner had in fact produced the said certificate along with the application or subsequently produced it before the respondents at the time of certificate verification, he is entitled to award of two more marks in which case, the total marks secured by the petitioner will go up to 68 marks.
