IRSHAD AHMAD BHAT vs SERVICE SELECTION BOARD

ITEM 11 1 OA 290 OF 2025

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SRINAGAR BENCH, SRINAGAR

O.A. 290/2025
Heard and Reserved on: 01-10-2026
Pronouncement of Order on: 28.10.2026
C O R A M
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER(JUDL.)
HON’BLE MR. PRASANT KUMAR, MEMBER(Admn.)
Irshad Ahmad Bhat Aged:
S/o Mohammad Ashraf Bhat
R/o Choon, Budgam, Kashmir, 191111.
… Applicant/Petitioner
By Advocate : Mr. S M Saleem
VERSUS

1. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir Through
Chairman, Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection
Recruitment Board (JKSSRB) Office at Rambagh,
Srinagar, 190009
2. The Secretary to Government, Department of
Parliament, Law and Justice at Srinagar/Jammu.
3 .Controller of Examinations, Jammu and Kashmir
Services Selection Recruitment Board (JKSSRB)
Office at Rambagh, Srinagar, 190006.
..…. Respondents

By Advocate :- Mr. Syed Musaib, DAG
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 2 OA 290 OF 2025

O R D E R (FINAL)


HON’BLE MR. PRASANT KUMAR, MEMBER (Admn.)

01. The applicant has filed the present Original Application
No. 290 of 2025 under Section 19 of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, assailing the order
dated 12.03.2025 issued by the Jammu and Kashmir
Services Selection Board (JKSSB), whereby his
representation, submitted pursuant to the order dated
27.01.2025 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No.
40/2025, came to be rejected.
02. Through the medium of the present Original
Application, the applicant has sought the following
reliefs:–
a) To quash and set aside the impugned order dated:
12/03/2025 issued by the respondents i.e. JKSSB.
b) To direct the respondents to conduct the skill test for
the post of Urdu Stenographer item No; 157
advertisement No: 05 of 2020 on Inpage Urdu
Software as it is the standard software for assessing
the Urdu proficiency / accuracy.
c) Directing the respondents to appoint as independent
expert committee to review the conduct of previous
skill test and ascertain whether the methodology was
adopted arbitrary and non-transparent.
d) Direct the respondents to conduct a fresh skill test by
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 3 OA 290 OF 2025

duly notifying the criteria in a fair transparent
manner in lying with eligibility conditions as
advertised.
e) To pass any other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal
may deem just and proper in the circumstances of
the case .


03. Apart from the aforesaid reliefs, the applicant has also
sought the following interim reliefs:–
a. Pending the final disposal of this application, the
applicant prays for an interim direction to the
respondents to hold the re-examination for the post
of Urdu Stenographer and not to fill the said post
until the reexamination is conducted..
b. To pass any other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal
may deem just and proper in the circumstances of
the case.


04. The controversy has its genesis in Advertisement
Notification No. 05 of 2020 dated 24.12.2020 issued by
the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board for
various posts, including the post of Urdu Stenographer
bearing Item No. 157. The applicant, being eligible for
the said post, participated in the selection process. The
respondents conducted the typing and shorthand test
for the said post on 07.08.2024 at National Institute of
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 4 OA 290 OF 2025

Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT),
Jammu / Srinagar.
05. The grievance of the applicant is principally with
regard to the manner in which the typing test for the
post of Urdu Stenographer was conducted. According
to the applicant, the typing test ought to have been
conducted on “InPage Urdu” software, which,
according to him, is the appropriate software for Urdu
typing and is specifically designed for Urdu language
typing and formatting. It is his contention that, instead,
the respondents conducted the test using MS Word,
which, according to him, was contrary to the procedure
contemplated by the advertisement and adversely
affected the candidates.
06.
The applicant further contends that none of the
candidates qualified the typing test and that such
complete failure of the candidates itself demonstrates
that there was an error in the methodology adopted for
conducting the test. According to him, had the test been
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 5 OA 290 OF 2025

conducted on the appropriate Urdu software,
particularly “InPage Urdu”, the candidates would have
had a fair opportunity to demonstrate their Urdu typing
proficiency.
07.
The applicant had earlier approached this Tribunal by
filing O.A. No. 40/2025. The said Original Application
was disposed of vide order dated 27.01.2025, whereby
the respondents were directed to consider and dispose
of the representation submitted by the applicant on
24.10.2024 in accordance with his entitlement, the
rules governing the subject and the law referred to
therein. The applicant was also permitted to provide a
copy of the Original Application to the respondents.
08. Pursuant thereto, the respondents considered the
applicant’s grievance and passed the impugned order
dated 12.03.2025. In the said order, the respondents
recorded that the Board had received an indent from
the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary
Affairs for the post of Urdu Stenographer under
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 6 OA 290 OF 2025

Advertisement Notification No. 05 of 2020 dated
24.12.2020. It was further notified that the qualification
prescribed for the post included graduation from a
recognized University, speed of 60 words per minute in
Urdu shorthand and 30 words per minute in typing on a
computer keyboard and Urdu Software.
09. The respondents have stated that the type test was
conducted at NIELIT, Jammu/Srinagar under the
supervision of Subject Matter Experts in the relevant
field, who had been formally engaged by the Services
Selection Board. According to the respondents, the
mechanism for conducting the test was also decided by
the Subject Matter Experts. The respondents have
further submitted that none of the candidates qualified
the skill test for the posts of Urdu Stenographer and
Urdu Shorthand Instructor.
10. The specific stand of the respondents is that neither the
indenting department nor the advertisement notification
prescribed or required the use of any particular
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 7 OA 290 OF 2025

software, including “InPage Urdu”, for conducting the
typing test. According to the respondents, the
expression “Urdu Software” occurring in the
qualification did not restrict the Board to any particular
software application. It is, therefore, contended that the
applicant cannot insist upon the use of a particular
software which was never specified in the
advertisement.
11. Learned counsel for the respondents further submit that
the examination was conducted by the competent
examining agency, namely, National Institute of
Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT),
under the supervision of Subject Matter Experts in the
relevant field. It is contended that the methodology
adopted for conducting the test was decided by the
experts and that there is no material on record to
demonstrate that the methodology adopted was
arbitrary, discriminatory or contrary to the terms of the
advertisement.
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 8 OA 290 OF 2025

12. The respondents have also placed reliance upon the
fact that all the candidates appearing for the relevant
skill test failed to qualify. According to the
respondents, this circumstance by itself cannot lead to
the conclusion that the test was improperly conducted,
particularly when the test was conducted under the
supervision of Subject Matter Experts and no specific
requirement of using “InPage Urdu” had been notified
to the candidates.
13.
Learned counsel for the applicant, on the other hand,
has reiterated that “InPage Urdu” is the appropriate
software for Urdu typing and that conducting the test
on MS Word materially altered the nature of the test. It
is submitted that the candidates had prepared
themselves on the basis of the prescribed requirements
and that the respondents could not, after
commencement of the selection process, adopt a
different methodology. It is further submitted that the
failure of all candidates to qualify the typing test is a
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 9 OA 290 OF 2025

strong circumstance indicating that the methodology
adopted by the respondents was defective.
14. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the
judgments in Rajesh Kumar & Ors. v. State of Bihar
& Ors., (2013) 4 SCC 690; Union Public Service
Commission v. Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela, (2006) 2
SCC 482; and K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra
Pradesh & Anr., (2008) 3 SCC 512 , to contend that
the procedure adopted in an examination must conform
to the notified criteria and that a departure from the
prescribed procedure cannot be permitted to the
prejudice of candidates. Reliance has also been placed
upon State of U.P. v. Karunesh Kumar & Ors ., 2022
SCC OnLine SC 1706 , and other judgments
concerning the sanctity and fairness of recruitment
examinations.
15. We have considered the rival submissions and perused
the material available on record, including the
advertisement notification, the earlier order dated
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 10 OA 290 OF 2025

27.01.2025 passed in OA No. 40 of 2025 by this
Tribunal, the representation of the applicant, the
impugned order dated 12.03.2025 and the objections
filed by the respondents.
16.
The principal question for consideration is whether the
applicant had a vested or enforceable right to insist that
the Urdu typing test should necessarily have been
conducted using “InPage Urdu” software and whether
the respondents, in conducting the test through NIELIT
under the supervision of Subject Matter Experts, acted
contrary to the terms of the advertisement.
17. At the outset, it is necessary to notice the precise
language of the qualification prescribed for the post of
Urdu Stenographer. The relevant requirement, as
reproduced in the material placed on record by the
respondents, prescribed “ Graduation from a
recognized University with speed of 60 words per
minute in Urdu shorthand and 30 words per minute in
typing on a computer keyboard and Urdu Software .”
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 11 OA 290 OF 2025

Clearly, the advertisement does not name “InPage
Urdu” or any other Urdu software as the software to be
used for the typing test.
18. The applicant’s grievance proceeds on the assumption
that the reference to “Urdu Software” in the
qualification necessarily means “InPage Urdu”.
However, the advertisement itself does not contain
such stipulation. In the absence of any express
prescription in the advertisement identifying a
particular software application, it would not be
appropriate for this Tribunal to read into the
advertisement a condition which the recruiting
authority itself had not notified.
19. The respondents have submitted that the type test was
conducted at NIELIT, Jammu/Srinagar, in a fair and
transparent manner under the supervision of Subject
Matter Experts formally engaged by the Services
Selection Board and that the mechanism for conducting
the test was decided by such experts. The applicant has
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 12 OA 290 OF 2025

not placed on record any material of sufficient
probative value demonstrating that the experts lacked
competence, that the methodology adopted was
technically incapable of testing Urdu typing
proficiency, or that the use of the software adopted
during the test rendered the test incapable of assessing
the skill prescribed for the post.
20. The mere fact that the respondents adopted a particular
software for conducting the typing test, in the absence
of a specific stipulation in the advertisement requiring
“InPage Urdu”, cannot, by itself, be treated as a
deviation from the notified conditions of recruitment.
The power to conduct a recruitment examination
necessarily includes a degree of procedural and
technical discretion in selecting the appropriate
mechanism for assessing the skill prescribed by the
recruitment authority, subject, of course, to the
requirements of fairness, non-arbitrariness and
conformity with the notified criteria.
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 13 OA 290 OF 2025

21. The applicant has sought to draw considerable
significance from the fact that none of the candidates
qualified the skill test. We are unable to accept this
contention of the applicant that non-qualification of
any of the candidates, by itself, establishes that the test
was defective. Failure of all candidates may certainly
be a circumstance requiring examination but only when
other cogent material is available indicating an
erroneous or arbitrary examination methodology.
However, in the present case, no material has been
produced before us establishing that the result of the
said skill test was attributable to the use of MS Word or
that the methodology adopted by the Subject Matter
Experts was technically incapable of assessing the skill
prescribed for the post.
22. The contention that “InPage Urdu” is the standard or
appropriate software for Urdu typing, at the best, may
establish that it is one software application capable of
facilitating Urdu typing. It does not establish a legal
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 14 OA 290 OF 2025

requirement that every Urdu typing examination must
necessarily be conducted only on that particular
software. Such a requirement would have to flow either
from the applicable recruitment rules, the indent, the
advertisement notification, or some other binding
instruction governing the examination. No such
provision has been placed before us.
23. We also find substance in the respondents’ submission
that the examination was entrusted to National Institute
of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT)
and conducted under the supervision of Subject Matter
Experts. In matters involving assessment of technical
or specialised skills, the Courts / Tribunals ordinarily
exercise restraint and do not substitute its own
assessment of the appropriate examination
methodology for that of the competent examining body
or technical experts, unless the methodology adopted is
shown to be manifestly arbitrary, irrational,
discriminatory or contrary to the governing recruitment
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 15 OA 290 OF 2025

conditions.
24. The instant case is also a case where the applicant, after
participating in the selection process, after being
declared unsuccessful, has turned around and
challenged the selection process. There is catena of
judgments on the matter –
a. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of U.P. v.
Karunesh Kumar & Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine
SC 1706 held that after participation in a
selection process a candidate cannot turn around
and challenge the process and this principle is
founded upon the settled rule against approbation
and reprobation and is intended to prevent an
unsuccessful candidate from questioning the
selection process only after its outcome has gone
against him.
b. The same principle has also been reiterated in
subsequent decisions. In Suraj Deepak Mane &
Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., W.P. No.
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 16 OA 290 OF 2025

7604/2026, decided on 25.06.2026, the Division
Bench of the Bombay High Court considered a
challenge to a recruitment process by candidates
who had participated therein and thereafter
questioned the process upon being unsuccessful.
The Court declined interference in the absence of
established arbitrariness, illegality or prejudice
and recognised the relevance of waiver and
acquiescence in such circumstances.
c. In Chimnaji Narayan Sarode v. The Union of
India & Ors., CWJC No. 10509 of 2020,
decided on 25.06.2026, the Hon’ble Patna High
Court reiterated that a candidate who participates
in a selection process without raising objection at
the appropriate stage cannot ordinarily challenge
the process after being unsuccessful.
d. The Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High
Court in Saroj Kshemanidhi v. Chhattisgarh
Public Service Commission, Raipur, W.A. No.
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 17 OA 290 OF 2025

586/2025 , decided on 29.08.2025, has also
emphasised the limited scope of judicial
interference in recruitment matters and the
principle that a candidate who participates in the
selection process cannot ordinarily assail the
process after the result has gone against him, in
the absence of established illegality or
arbitrariness.
25. The applicant participated in the skill test conducted on
07.08.2024 and has subsequently questioned the
software / methodology adopted therein. There is no
material on record to establish that the respondents had
represented to the candidates that “InPage Urdu” alone
would be used for conducting the test. The principle of
waiver and acquiescence, therefore, also assumes
relevance in the facts of the present case. However, in
view of our finding on the substantive issue, we need
not rest our conclusion solely on the said principle.
26. At the same time, the aforesaid principle cannot be
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 18 OA 290 OF 2025

understood as conferring validity upon a process which
is otherwise demonstrably illegal, arbitrary or contrary
to the notified conditions. Participation in a selection
process would not preclude judicial scrutiny where a
clear violation of the governing rules or fundamental
procedural safeguards is established. The question,
therefore, remains whether the applicant has been able
to demonstrate any such illegality or arbitrariness in the
present case.
27.
In this context, the reliance placed by learned counsel
for the applicant upon K. Manjusree v. State of
Andhra Pradesh & Anr., (2008) 3 SCC 512 , also
does not advance the applicant’s case. The said
judgment undoubtedly reiterates the principle that the
criteria governing a selection process cannot be altered
to the prejudice of candidates after the selection
process has commenced. In the present case, however,
we do not find that any new eligibility criterion or
selection criterion was introduced after the
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 19 OA 290 OF 2025

advertisement. The advertisement required a prescribed
speed in Urdu typing using a computer keyboard and
Urdu Software; it did not stipulate that the test was
required to be conducted only through “InPage Urdu”.
28.
Similarly, in other case laws referred to by the
applicant, the principles governing fairness and
transparency in examinations, as recognised in Rajesh
Kumar & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors., (2013) 4
SCC 690, and Union Public Service Commission v.
Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela, (2006) 2 SCC 482 ,
cannot be read as conferring upon a candidate an
absolute right to dictate the technical mechanism
through which a skill test is to be conducted, in the
absence of a notified requirement to that effect. Those
principles undoubtedly require the recruiting authority
to act fairly and in accordance with the notified
conditions; however, the applicant has to establish an
actual departure from such conditions or demonstrable
prejudice arising from the methodology adopted.
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 20 OA 290 OF 2025

29. The earlier order of this Tribunal dated 27.01.2025 in
OA No. 40 of 2025, also does not advance the
applicant’s case on merits. The said order merely
directed the respondents to consider and dispose of the
representation submitted by the applicant in accordance
with the rules, his entitlement and the law referred to
therein. Pursuant thereto, the respondents examined the
grievance and passed the impugned order dated
12.03.2025. The impugned order sets out the basis on
which the respondents concluded that the claim
regarding compulsory use of “InPage Urdu” was not
legally tenable.
30. On consideration of the entire matter, we are of the
considered view that the applicant has failed to
establish that the respondents acted in violation of the
advertisement notification, the applicable recruitment
rules or the governing procedure of selection by
conducting the Urdu typing test through the mechanism
adopted at NIELIT under the supervision of Subject
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 21 OA 290 OF 2025

Matter Experts. The applicant has also failed to
establish that the use of software other than “InPage
Urdu” rendered the examination arbitrary or incapable
of assessing the skill prescribed for the post.
31.
The mere assertion that “InPage Urdu” is better suited
for Urdu typing cannot, in the absence of a
corresponding notified requirement or cogent technical
material demonstrating that the methodology adopted
for the type test was incapable of fairly assessing the
prescribed skill, furnish a ground for directing the
recruiting authority to conduct a fresh examination.
Such a direction would, in effect, amount to
introducing into the recruitment process a condition
which was not specified in the advertisement.
32.
In view of the foregoing discussion, we are unable to
find any infirmity, illegality or arbitrariness in the
impugned order dated 12.03.2025 warranting
interference by this Tribunal. The relief sought by the
applicant for setting aside the impugned order and for
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

ITEM 11 22 OA 290 OF 2025

conducting a fresh typing/skill test specifically on
“InPage Urdu” consequently cannot be granted.
33. For the foregoing reasons, the Original Application,
being devoid of merit, is dismissed . All pending
Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
34. The Registry shall consign the record to the Record
Room after due compliance.

(PRASANT KUMAR)
(JUSTICE RITU TAGORE)
Member (Admn.)
Member (Judl.)

28.10.2026
DEVENDRA TRIPATHI





Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, E=devendrat.g062201@
giv.in
Devendra
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.28 15:34:17+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi