Candidates must be considered under reserved categories if their certificates were submitted by the extended deadline.

The petitioners applied for Staff Nurse posts under BTSC Advertisement No. 23 of 2025. Although the original application deadline was 23 May 2025, a court order concerning the recruitment process led BTSC to extend the application deadline to 13 June 2025.

The notice extending the deadline amended specified advertisement conditions but stated that the other clauses would remain unchanged.

The advertisement required certificates submitted by candidates to have been issued by 23 May 2025.

At document verification, the petitioners were not considered under their respective reserved categories because their NCLC or EWS certificates had been issued after that date.

The Health Department subsequently asked BTSC to accept certificates submitted up to 13 June 2025, referring to representations from affected candidates and an opinion from the Law Department. The Commission did not deny the letter’s contents.

1. Whether extending the application deadline to 13 June 2025 also permitted candidates to submit their reservation certificates by that date, notwithstanding the advertisement’s 23 May 2025 certificate-issuance cutoff.

2. Whether the petitioners were entitled to consideration under their respective reserved categories if they submitted the requisite certificates by 13 June 2025.

Advertisement No. 23 of 2025, Clause 6(ix), required certificates submitted by candidates to have been issued on or before 23 May 2025.

BTSC’s notice dated 6 June 2025 extended the application deadline to 13 June 2025 but otherwise left the advertisement’s clauses unchanged.

The Court also considered the Health Department’s request that certificates submitted by the extended deadline be accepted, a request supported by the Department’s account of affected candidates and its reference to the Law Department’s opinion.

The judgment does not identify a separate statutory provision or precedent as the basis for its decision.

The Court acknowledged that the notice, read with Clause 6(ix), did not expressly extend the certificate cutoff; the Commission relied on that unchanged clause to oppose the petition.

However, the Health Department—the employer and authority responsible for the ultimate eligibility conditions—had asked BTSC to accept certificates submitted up to 13 June 2025, and the Commission had not denied the letter’s contents.

In light of that request and the circumstances recorded in the letter, the Court found that the petitioners had made out a case for relief.

It directed that each petitioner be considered under the relevant reserved category—BC, EBC, or EWS—if the requisite certificate had been submitted on or before 13 June 2025, and directed the Commission to publish the result accordingly.